LyrArc Article Gist
Alexis Tsipras of the Syriza Party stresses in his election campaign in September 2015 that even though he has accepted the Third Bailout Program from the EU, only Syriza will act so that the most vulnerable in society are protected. Tsipras openly accepts his mistakes and says he has learnt from his mistake of underestimating the resolve of the EU about its plans for the Greek economy. Syriza has also taken a sympathetic view of refugees and migrants coming to Greece. The Popular Unity Party and finance minister Varoufakis, a breakaway group from Syriza that advocates going back to the drachma, are not expected to do well in the election. New Democracy Party led by Meimarakis stresses in its campaign that Syriza is turning the recovery into an experiment and lacks the experience to implement the Third Bailout Program neogtiated withe the EU. Syriza and New Democracy are the leading parties in the election. It shows how much has changed in 2015, that the only two parties with some credibility are Syriza under Tsipras and New Democracy under Meimarakis, both having made errors but having the candour and courage to tell Greek voters that they have learned from their mistakes....

LyrArc Article Gist
Fred Hiatt of The Washington Post describes U.S. president Obama's mishandling of Syria during his second term as president leading to the situation today.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Washington Post's editorial board offers insights on how the situation in Syria and Iraq deteriorated under the Obama administration's policies.

LyrArc Article Gist
Morello of the WP describes the situation in Afghanistan with about 10,000 U.S. troops remaining in the country and the Taliban refusing to continue negotiations started earlier. About one in five migrants to Europe are from Afghanistan as more educated people leave the country for better lives overseas. The Taliban is tapping into the discontent in the country with the large number of unemployed following the U.S. withdrawal. Morello says the poverty rate has increased to 49% by 2016.

LyrArc Article Gist
Turkey's relations with Turkmen in northern Syria, and opposition to the bombing of this part of Syria by Russian planes is cited as the reason for Turkey shooting down a Russian warplane in November 2015. Prime minister Erdogan stated this by saying: "we strongly condemn attacks focusing on areas inhabited by Bayibucak Turkmen- we have our relatives, our kin there." Following the incident Turkey provided media with footage showing 10 repeated warnings in the space of 5 minutes to the two Russian planes before Turkish F-16's shot down the Russian plane. The area where the plane was shot down is a small part of Turkey that juts into Syria. This part of Turkey is called the Hatay province, with Turkmen in Hatay forming a republic in 1938 breaking away from the French mandate over Syria set up following the first world war. The following year it joined Turkey. Parts of the Turkmen in Hatay are still in Syria and this is the region Russia began bombing 2 months ago, with Turkey opposing the bombing. Russian president Putin's claim that this is part of the bombing of Islamic State positions is refuted by Turkey's prime minister Davotoglu, who says "No one can legitimize attacks on Turkmens in Syria using the pretext of fighting the Islamic State." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Turkish identity is changing as Erdogan pushes through changes in Turkey that replace the secular character established by Kemal Ataturk with his own brand of Ottoman identity. Erdogan appeals to the pious Muslims from the lower classes in Turkey who were ignored earlier, and to people who trust him in the middle class for preserving economic gains. By increasing tension with Kurds and other people in society Erdogan has increased the divisions in Turkish society. It is not clear what will take the place of the secular society and the gains made by it in modernization of Turkey now that the whole region is engulfed by conflict, and Turkey also faces a refugee crisis at its borders with Iraq and Syria.

LyrArc Article Gist
In his foreign policy address following the northeast state primaries Donald Trump outlines a policy with less foreign engagement in trouble spots, and greater reliance on partners in Europe and Asia contributing to joint defense. It also includes building up the military and nuclear arsenal. It criticizes the Bush administration for intervention in Iraq that benefitted Iran, and the Obama administration for policies that led to the rise of Islamic State. Because Trump is not for supporting foreign engagements in trouble spots the difference in Trump's policies is not announcing or signalling in advance what U.S. response would be, instead keeping it unpredictable. It is not clear how much this would work given that any president would inherit the situation before him, and also the complexity of the situation would not change, such as the need to have Iranian cooperation and Saudi cooperation to tackle Islamic State. The Bush administration started with a similiar intention to focus on domestic policy, till the 9/11 surprise attack steered it away towards nationbuilding overseas. The pendulum swung in the latter years of the Bush adminstration to the Iraq intervention, Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, followed by a swing in the other direction to allowing Libya and Syria disntegrate leading to millions of refugees. Complexity, surprises, and swings of popular opinion, are unlikely to go away, even as caution is exercized and military capabilities enhanced....

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ provides details on the groundwork that was laid by the Trump administration as it worked to find a solution to the problems facing Venezuela with refugees and economic crisis, and months of protests. The plans were set in the days before Nicholas Maduro took office for the second term as president. The night before Juan Guaido, head of the National Assembly, declared himself president, U.S. vice president Mike Pence stated that the U.S. would support him if he took the reins of government from Maduro by invoking a clause in the Venezuelan Constitution that makes the head of the National Assembly take the office of president if the existing president is declared illegitimate taking office unlawfully. About 60 nations did not recognize the elections that gave Maduro a second term. On Jan 2 Mr Trump who feels deeply about the collapse of the Venezuelan economy and rising poverty, the suffering of the Venezuelan people, met with presidents of Brazil and Colombia. Colombian president Ivan Duque and Trump hinted at a plan to cooperate to help people fleeing Venezuela and respecting its democratic heritage. Mr Pompeo spoke to allies of the U.S. The National Assembly laid out its plans on Jan 15, for using a constitutional mechanism that allows the head of the Assembly to lead an interim government till new elections are held if the existing president is declared illegitimate. A leading Republican senator of Cuban origin Mr. Rubio supported the move. On the eve of protests in Venezuela Rubio and two other senators from Florida met Mr. Trump and Pence at the White House. Also present were Bolton, Pompeo, Ross and Treasury Secretary Mnuchin. Mr. Trump then decided to do it. He placed a call to Mr. Guiado  to tell him that if the National Assembly invoked Article 233 the U.S. president would back him.  The U.S. believes the rank and file in the military are with the opposition even though its leaders back Maduro. After the U.S. action, the governments of Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Peru, Colombia, backed the move for an interim government. The European Union called for free and credible elections. Russia and Mexico supported Maduro.  The State Department instructed the U.S. Federal Reserve about Guiado government as the sole representative for Venezuelan assets in banks. Sanctions could be placed on Venezuelan oil exports as backup efforts proceed to support the interim government. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Kingsley of the NYT provides this report from Turkey describing the impact of the conflict with the Kurds inside and outside the country.

LyrArc Article Gist
In Germany's consensus based politics the term flip flop does not have the negative meaning it does in other countries. Chancellor Merkel is adept at presenting changes in policy as coming from careful thought and analysis. She has remained Chancellor for the longest period since Chancellor Kohl, doing this by co-opting the positions of other parties including the SPD. On refugees, atomic energy, same sex marraige, and other issues Merkel has adopted positions that reflect the majority of people.  As the magazine editors of Der Spiegel told Merkel in an interview she is the best chancellor the socialist SPD party ever had. Merkel has the unique ability of doing this and still sounding genuine in a way few leaders could. This may be the result of her background and life as the daughter of a pastor in East Germany who professed socialist ideals and yet was part of the opposition to the GDR regime and reflected changes in Germany as the Berlin Wall came down in 1990. Merkel joined the Democratic Awakening just as the German people in the east gave up on the communist regime. Merkel first major change was on the nuclear energy policy after the Fukushima disaster in Japan. Yet looking at it one can see that Merkel could present her change in belief as sincere. Under Merkel Germany has shifted away from nuclear energy and coal in a way no other nation has. It is now considered one of her most positive achievements in Germany. On the refugee crisis she also shifted her views on the need for enhanced security and on putting in place controls in an agreement with Turkey, addressing the causes of migration in home countries. As a result Merkel now has over 60% support in polls before this weeks election in Germany in September 2017. Contrast this with the sharp decline in support for Sarkozy and Hollande in France, Cameron and now Theresa May in Britain, and for other leaders in the U.S., and one can see how Merkel is different. It has much to do with sincerity and authenticity as a politician. Her favorite soup is potato soup, she drives a VW Golf small car, and lives modestly, shopping in the local grocery store. When it comes to protecting ordinary German people in what Germany owes in bailouts to indebted countries she could be tough with bankers and politicians. All this makes people of different political views see something valuable and to be respected in Angela Merkel, particularly at times like this. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Germany and the European Union are improving their defenses as the conflict drags on. The US position DJT has articulated is to bring an end to the war to end the daily loss of lives on both sides. Looking back was it worth loss of hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides and the damage to the economy, to housing from bombing, and the millions of refugees many older people, just for the Association Agreement with the European Union in 2013-2014. This has been completely mismanaged by all sides, the EU officials responsible, the governments in Europe including Russia and Germany, and Ukraine's political parties and their appeal to the people, and by the administration of Obama in the US. DJT and administration officials have long made it clear that they don't want this war, the war in Ukraine. A conflict that has been going on in some form or other between parts of Ukraine in the west and Russian influenced regions in the east as governments changed before and after protests in Kviv in 2013 over an agreement on association with the European Union long before the current war; some favorable to Putin and some not like the current government. So it is surprising that Medvedev would make remarks about DJT and the US to draw a confrontation between the two powers US and Russia in this way in X, remarks DJT calls "inflammatory."  Especially when the US is trying its best to negotiate and end to the war by pressuring both sides. It's defending of Ukraine only to stop the missile attacks on it's cities to give peaceful resolution a chance, not to aggravate the conflict.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A complete breakdown in negotiations between the U.S. and Russia happens after Russia continues its bombing campaign in Aleppo. About 275,000 people and 100,000 children are in the war torn area in northern Syria. The U.S. had called on Russia to stop the bombing campaign, but Secretary of State Kerry failed to persuade Russia to commit to a ceasefire. The result has been international criticism of the Russian role in the war, and speculation on what president Putin sees Russia gaining from this intervention in DW.com and other sites. 

LyrArc Article Gist
India's Foreign Minister told a conference that China's forward deployments at Galwan in violation of 1993 and 1996 agreements was an attempt to change the Line of Actual Control. China after years of peaceful development under previous administrations, during which China had gained from the trade relationship with the US and foreign investment from the US business community, sought  to put India at a disadvantage using its larger economy and technological assets obtained through American business assistance. This was done by making forward deployments right at the Indian border to change the Line of Actual Control in progressive steps. Jaishankar made it very clear. "It is hard work, very patient work, but we are very clear on one point, which is we will not allow any unilateral attempt by China to change the status quo or alter the LAC. I do not care how long it takes, how many rounds we do, how hard we have to negotiate- this is something we are very clear of." Going back to the period of independence with Nehru in 1947- China's occupation of Tibet was an occupation of a peaceful country that led to the situation that India faces today of a border stretching from east to west on the Himalayas that faces China. Faced with the partition and refugees from that partition India under Nehru was not in a position to respond effectively to that occupation. Does China gain anything from being at that border through the occupation of Tibet is a serious question? Why? Because it faces a Vedanta and Buddha driven culture and people with population of 1.8 billion stretching to the Indonesian islands that were and still are the fundamental source of  China's own Buddhist culture and tradition.  US business has allied with one country after another Japan, China and now India. The US has faced wars with Japan, and sometimes in a failed attempt to understand the aspirations of  Southern Asia allied with British ideas of the region which were based on the policies of British Empire to divide the region on religious and language, caste based barriers. US business also lacked a true perception of the importance of working class and families in the US as it sent factories and surrendered its own manufacturing to China. The world is now changing following the pandemic and new supply chains and manufacturing policies of the US are being structured. It is in this context where India's pace of economic growth and technological advancement will change its capabilities and its capacity to meet the aspirations of 1.8 billion people in Asia with a common tradition and culture. It is in this context that one can ask the question does China have anything to gain from the occupation of Tibet and being on the border with a country and cultural tradition of 1.8 billion people stretching across South and South east Asia?  ...