LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the Wshington Post is sharply critical of the Obama administration's policies of inaction in Syria and Iraq. It says president Obama and his administration will have to answer for the policies to the American people and the people of the Middle East and Europe.

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial says president Obama's inaction, including the smaller step of not putting in place a safe zone in Syria, comes at a price for Liberals. The recent action by Governors in Michigan and other states turning down Syrian refugees, it says is one of the moral consequences of Obama's policies. For Liberals it says a policy of inaction and turning America's back to the needs of ordinary Syrians during the Arab Spring is not neutral, it also has consequences. The consequences for Liberals is the steady stream of refugees to Europe, and the greater intolerance in western societies as the safe havens created by these policies in the Middle East lead to terrorist actions in Europe or the U.S. In short doing little or nothing carries risks for the kind of society liberals want to see. Through developing policy in response to the Bush Administration's policies the Obama administration makes a series of errors of its own that compromise liberal values, including the collapse of the Arab Spring without American and western support, and the creation of a huge refugee crisis in Syria, Iraq, with a spillover to Jordan and Turkey, and further spillover to Europe. Liberals in Europe also face a similiar situation, including Liberals in France....

LyrArc Article Gist
This Journal editorial on Oct 5, 2012, says that by not offering leadership in the Syrian conflict beause it would lead to a wider conflict the U.S. and the European Union face a wider conflict. The current crossborder shelling between Syria and Turkey is the latest evidence of this. Turkey and the Saudis cannot handle this on their own. Without U.S. leadership the costs of this conflict will be even greater, and even poses risks for the Turkish economy if handled badly.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Obama called Libya and the policy of not following up on helping establish a stable democratic government in Libya his biggest mistake. Kristof of the NYT says people looking back would say Syria and not establishing safe zones is Obama's biggest mistake. He describes the 470,000 deaths in Syria as a huge tragedy that could have been avoided to a large extent by setting up safe zones. In addition the UN estimates that millions of refugees on a scale similar to the partition of India in 1947 were created.There is bipartisan opinion on this. Kristof cites General Cartwright's opinion in a conversation he had with Cartwright that this should have been done. Others who agree are Madeleine Albright, Bill Clinton's Secretary of State, who spoke at the Democratic Convention about how America helped change her life as a young refugee after Russia's invasion of Czechoslovakia following Prague Spring. Albright says force should be used carefully so as not to aggravate the situation but action taken where needed, something that was done successfully under Bill Clinton in the Bosnian conflict following Serbia's ethnic cleansing policy under Milosevic. Not only that, with the diplomacy of ambassador Holbrooke Clinton was able to negotiate the peace accords that hold till today- a huge achievement.  Kori Schake, director of defense strategy in the George W. Bush White House also agrees. This would have improved U.S. relations with Turkey as this was a key Turkish request. And it would have reduced the dimensions of the refugee crisis in Europe, which has hurt the European Union. The Brexit "No" vote many in Britain have attributed to ads showing refugees in endless numbers streaming across Europe's borders. Similar ads were used in Austria's elections. Kristof points out that Secretary of State Kerry's job of negotiating a peace is difficult in these conditions. Another issue raised by Kristof is the lack of Obama's leadership in helping the refugees in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey, as he points out only 41% of this is funded. David Miliband former British Foreign Secretary, who heads the International Rescue Committee , says 200,000 Syrian kids are growing up in Lebanon without an education. George Washington counseled against getting involved in the wars on the European continent for a young nation, this advice was not followed in the Reagan and other administrations without showing the carefulness needed before action is taken. As Hillary Clinton has once pointed out the situation has resembled a pendulum swinging in the other direction under president Obama, and former Defense Secretary, Panetta, has expressed similar views. Hillary Clinton and Leon Panetta, Gates, Gen. Jones, served in the first term of the Obama administration, many of these mistakes were made in the second term by president Obama and his White House advisors Dennis McDonough, Valerie Jarrett who clearly lacked the deep foreign policy experience of Hillary Clinton, Leon Panetta (who served under Bill Clinton), and Gates who served under many presidents). ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Critics of the Obama administration's so-called "light footprint strategy" for the Middle East say it is more about keeping distance from problems in that region. This is a reaction to the extensive involvement of the U.S. in two wars in that region and intuitively makes sense, as well as being in line with American public opinion to focus on problems at home. The shift or pivot to Asia of president Obama also comes in that context. The problem with this approach is that this ignores the fact that most of the momentum and effort for the freedom struggles throughout the Middle East from Tunisia first, then Libya, Egypt, and now Syria, comes from within. The lead role is now being taken by France and Britain, with German public opinion also lined up in support. The U.S. in forfeiting its role as a facilitator with strategies such as "no-fly-zones" is losing the opportunity to gain the goodwill in the Middle East with cost that is negligible in comparison to the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan, and comes after the huge U.S. effort to remove one dictator in Iraq. A minor followup effort is all that is required from an administration that pushed for the "surge" in Afghanistan. When history is written the investment of the Obama administration in Afghanistan may show little results, if what is considered by the media and experts as an unpopular and undemocratic government of Karzai falls in the aftermath of the U.S. withdrawal. There is little doubt in public opinion in the U.S. and worldwide that the movement for freedom and democracy in the Middle East and democratically elected governments will become a lasting facet of the new Middle East. It also provides huge opportunties for trade and investment as is shown by the gains made by Turkey in just 2 years. This is why the Obama adminstration policies in the Middle East show a lack of grasp of the facts showing the Middle East as opportunity more than threat for the next decade, especially in its overreaction to the Bush era policies. This happens as there is a demographic explosion of young people in the Middle East. An administration that was keen to sense the demographic changes in North America, has failed to grasp this fact and why the struggle in the Middle East flashes daily on television screens young people carrying on the struggle. A pivot to Asia means a pivot to the Far East more than Asia because India is part of the South Asian-Middle Eastern region, which presents another paradox because as China is slowing the entire South Asian-Middle Eastern region of Asia is where future growth is expected to accelerate in the next decade. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman's view of Afghnistan differs significantly from New York Times correspondent Filkins understanding from years of reporting going back about a decade. Filkins sees the complexities of Pastun country inside Afghnistan and Pakistan and the military and ISI's involvement, and other correspondents have pointed to the narcotics trade and corruption. Kerry's simplistic view is that the Taliban do not enjoy much support, when actually Americans are seen on the ground as foreign occupiers. These correspondents in the field point to this as an everpresent danger, which would tilt support to those fighting foreigners, with nationalist and Muslim sentiment prevailing over everything else. And Kerry appears to be too willing to dismiss allegations of narcotics involvement of the Karzai administration with the "show me" comment. For critics of the Bush administration this is simply astounding, when so much is at stake. Does patient mean digging in one's heels slowly? But that is how the Vietnam intervention ran into trouble, without public sentiment in support of the plans....

LyrArc Article Gist
Gen. Martin Dempsey took a cautious approach to U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Syria. He did not approve of the way Gen. McChrystal expanded U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, and the hasty manner in which the Iraqi army was trained under his predecessors leading to some commanders being appointed who later became members of sectarian death squads. Under his command the U.S. limited its role in Afghanistan and Iraq and handed more responsibility to local forces. Gen. Dunford who succeeded Dempsey as chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff for the U.S. follows the cautious approach set by Dempsey. Dempsey's approach extends to what he believes is an Heisenberg effect in physics where when you you observe or touch something it changes the way it functions and operates. For critics such as Senator McCain, who served in Vietnam as a pilot, if Dempsey did not want to intervene in some country, he could invent the reasons not to get involved. President Obama exceeded the caution exercized by Dempsey, leading to a situation where the U.S. after hasty action under a Republican president seemed to lurch in the opposite direction under his Democratic successor by not taking action where U.S. presence was needed, followed by a corrective course to make up for this....

LyrArc Article Gist
Sheila Bair, former head of the U.S. FDIC, points out flaws in the rules for capital adequacy ratios and risk weighted assets which allow banks to increase their capital adequacy ratios. The ratios show the financial strength of the banks and their ability to absorb losses, which makes their accurate calculation very important for the safety of the U.S. banking system, especially with large "too big to fail" banks. Bair says the 2013 U.S. Fed stress tests showed Bank of America as having a capital adequacy ratio of 11.4%, when it should actually be 7.8% without the risk weighted adjustment. The mortgage banking crisis showed how the risk wieighting can be flawed and give a distorted representation of the acutal risks facing the banks in its assets. For Morgan Stanley the 2013 stress tess by the U.S. Fed showed the capital adequacy ratio at 14%, taking out the risk weighting adjustment this drops to 7%. Bair says its not the idea of risk weighting that is the problem, but the way it is applied- for example considering sovereign government bonds in the eurozone as zero risk, or that only 20% of the accounting value of debt one banks buys from another bank is to be taken into account in setting the ratio. Go back to the drawing board she says, it makes no sense that Citibank debt be shown as having one fifth risk of IBM's. ...