LyrArc Article Gist
The decision to replace Gen. McKiernan with Gen. McChrystal and to have Lt. Gen David Rodriguez as his deputy, was made by Defense Secretary Gates and Jt Chiefs chairman Mullen, after thinking about this during the transition to the new Obama administration. The failing war effort in Afghanistan with the Karzai government controlling only pockets of Afghanistan and Kabul and leaving the countryside to the Taliban has alot to do with this. Gates feeling is "we can and must do better." That it took so long, with the Taliban only 50 miles from Islamabad, Pakistan, and the question of Paksitan's nuclear weapons falling into thier hands vexing the adminstration, shows that things slowed down with the transition and the economic crisis. The decision was not adifficult one considering that McKiernan had little to show for his efforts, and the rapidly deteriorating situation by all accounts. McKiernan was a senior officer who spent his entire military career commanding conventional forces, serving in the Balkans and the Iraq war in 2003, and has the wrong midset and background for counterinsurgency warfare. McChrystal has experiences suited to counterinsurgency warfare, having commanded commando teams that took out leading insurgents. He is also director of the Joint chiefs of staff, so known to Mullen for his abilities. Rodriguez commanded the 82nd Airborne Division in eastern Afghanistan, is seen as aleading expert in counterinsurgency warfare. He is also Gates's senior military advisor so known to Gates for his abilities. The new strategy is to go with counterinsurgency warfare to turn this thing around. This puts 2 commanders with this kind of experience in Kabul, and close communication with Gates and Mullen because they worked together before. With additional troops, and shift in resource acquisition at the Pentagon that Gates is trying to secure for this kind of warfare, this creates the kind of combination that could help the US in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and achieve more modest goals. See the links to Gates's and Petraeus's more modest goals....

LyrArc Article Gist
Commander David Adams shows how with 250 paratroopers of the 82nd Airborne division, he was able to achieve greater success than 2500 American troops are able to do today in Khost province of Afghanistan. He says he did this by building roads, a spring water system for 12,000 villagers, and other ways to befriend the tribals and villagers, and letting the tribals do the watching and keeping order. Insurgents who operated in the area, or the IED's placed by them, were then reported by the tribals. By working with and befriending the tribals, a smaller number of troops were able to do much more. Adams quotes Mohammed Aiaz, a Khosti advising the Provincial Reconstruction team which Adams headed who says: "If troops don't understand Afghan culture and fail to work within the tribal system, they will only fuel the insurgency. When we get tribes on our side, that will change. When a tribe says no, it means no. IED's will be reported and no insurgent fighters will be allowed to operate in or across the area." This is a very significant observation. To repeat Aiaz: if troops don't understand the Afghan culture and fail to work within the tribal system they will only fuel the insurgency. And adding what Adams say is needed, it means roads built and irrigation canals built or old ones repaired, visible evidence for the Afghan villagers to see of progress, something reporters like Dexter Filkins are saying in their reports, and which is also being told to McChrystal in Filkins recent NYT magazine artice on McChrystal. When told this- McChrystal -whose whole training is as a Special Forces commander who flies in by helicopter to Afghan villages- has only this reply "it takes time" and again at the next stop "it takes time." See the groups for -Commander Adams, and for Dexter Filkins which touch on similiar development issues....

LyrArc Article Gist
Prof. David Spiegelhalter of Cambridge University is critical of the British government for not finding out how many people may be infected by coronavirus. He says he is not telling how anybody should feel or what they should be worried about, but at least the people's anxiety should be proportional to the risks they actually face. His estimate is that based on the death rate of 1% its possible that there could be 3.5 million people in Britain who are infected with coronavirus or higher. Sir Spiegelhalter is professor at Cambridge University for the public understanding of science. He says this "basic information" is essential in making the decision such as how far and when to go out of lockdown, and that the British government has failed to do this in a timely manner required for tackling coronavirus without risking more lives.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Journal editorial says Petraeus's experience would have been better utilized as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. The fear is that he may have been miscast or shunted aside at the CIA. Cartwright is expected to become Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. General John Allen who takes over from Petraeus in Afghanistan has no experience there. Panetta faces a challenge at Defense to reduce spending.

LyrArc Article Gist
Who should lead the Conservative Party in 2016 till the next elections in 2020? The Economist magazine says strong negotiating skills and stamina are needed, and on this point it says Theresa May, Home Secretary, does better than former Energy minister, Andrea Leadsom, who has not done such tough negotiating and is not so well known as May. May had the support of 199 members of parliament to 84 for Leadsom, whose experience is less and was junior Treasury minister in prior position compared to May's 6 years in the position of Home Secretary handling immigration issues. Being an ardent Brexiter Leadsom has an advantage with Brexit supporters, though May handled her Brexit Remain position in a low key way and can appeal to both sides of the Conservative party. The result will come from a postal ballot to 150,000 members of the Conservative Party.

LyrArc Article Gist
David Brooks of NYT povides this exceptional essay on a long neglected question. If so much of the politics today is about different communities that are alienated from each  other, what is it about these communities that makes this happen, and how did this come about? After decades of integrating communities and building the economy after the second world war through a strong middle class, what has happened now to see all that progress reverse itself. Rural America and the less educated voted in one way and the urban areas voted in the opposite way, one feeling neglected and the other becoming more segregated in cultural outlook, education, and work. Brooks cites a new book by Richard Reeves of the Brookings Institution called the "Dream Hoarders." The book shows two structural barriers that divide America. One is the residential zoning restrictions, housing and construction rules that keep the less educated away from the opportunities and schools in cities such as Portland, San Francisco and New York. The second structural barrier is the college admissions game that favors the parents and children of the better educated classes. The immigrant communities who come from families that are struggling hard to get into the middle class and upper class work hard to get an edge. As a result about 70 percent of the students in the top 200 competitive schools in America are from the top 25% in the income distribution.  Other barriers are formed by the extent of investment parents in one group put into their children, estimated at 300% by Brooks compared to a flat line for the other group. This accelerated investment leaves the other group far behind. Social barriers form to prevent the kind of interactions one would find normal in an open democratic society. Brooks say the cultural differences show up in the language and product selections, in food and other choices. Just take a typical Brooklyite and someone from western New York state. It is not the intent of one group to look upon this as a desired result. It is their indifference to what is happening that is alarming for a free, open and democratic society. It is their lack of understanding about the implications for life in a free, open, democratic society, of segregating themselves from the vast expanse of humanity around them. It is their lack of knowledge of the history of this continent built on the idea of education and opportunities for all from the time of Benjamin Franklin in Pennsylvania and the early settlers, the idea of out of many one- E Pluribus Unum. Yet out of this crisis something good can emerge if a way is found, and leadership is needed in the right direction with the right ideas, consistent with the ideals that guided the best leaders from its past. What resentment, alienation and wrong direction cannot do, courage, perseverance and right direction can do.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The step that Osborne took to lay out Britain's Conservative party's plan to tackle Britain's awful deficit of $280 billion, and making this journey through the bleak landscape ahead is forbidding but enormously useful, says the Economist. Everyone shares the burden equally and the Conservatives will keep the 50% tax on higher incomes, raise the age for pensions, freeze public sector pay in 2011, take away middle class tax breaks.

LyrArc Article Gist
Harold Meyerson poses some difficult questions for those who like Mitt Romney say America's choice is between the merit based society Romney sees and the "European social democratic vision." In Romney's words- "a merit-based opportunity society- an American-style society- where people earn their rewards based on their education, their work, their willingness to take risks and their dreams." Meyerson cites several studies to show that European societies today are more dynamic on several measures of performance than America's. In intergenerational mobility he cites a Brookings Institution study by Julia Isaacs, that shows incomes are three times more likely to remain the same in America compared to Denmark, Norway and Finland, and one and a half times more frequently than in Germany. Another measure evident from Germany's experience is the degree of union-company-government cooperation to worker retraining, corporate boards that have representatives of workers and management, the "kurzarbeit" program of retaining employees to smooth out impact of cyclical swings in the economy on workers and companies, and worker's willingness to show restraint on wages especially because management wages are not way out of line as in America. Meyerson reminds readers that the U.S. had a more merit based society in terms of upward intergenerational mobility, distribution of rewards of work between workers in manufacturing and service sectors and management, educational mobility with the G.I. bill, in the first 30 years after the Second World War. In a separate article in the Washington Post on Jan. 5, 2012, David Ignatius poses questions about the effects of globalization in shrivelling the middle class. The access to lower wage manufacturing in China, India, Mexico, and other countries, and lowering of wages in the U.S. to be competitive, was part of globalization. The two tier wage structure in the U.S. automobile industry is one example, making middle class wages a thing of the past. Globalization opened up new markets for American companies. Yet many of the gains in employment were made in emerging markets, as the example of GM's expansion in China showed, with automobile manufacturing expansion inside China....

LyrArc Article Gist
Vauban is a "car- free" upscale communitynear Freiburg, Germany, close to the German-Swiss border. Except for the main street where atram to Freiburg runs, and two parking lots outside the community, there is no place to park cars. About 70% of the people there do not have cars and 57% sold their cars to come here. There are no car garages or parking places with each home. Bicycles are hte main means of transport. Vauban hasd 5500 residents in one square mile. The basic concept of having stores placed only awalk away is being followed more and more as America and Europe shifts away from intensive auto based use of space for living. The whole post war location of housing and stores and community activities was based on large use of the automobile. This is now going through big changes. David Goldberg, of Transportation of America says " how much you drive is as important as whether you have ahybrid." A fast growing coalition of hundreds of groups is advancing the cause of building communities with stores only a walk away and less need for the automobile to get around. Outside Hayward, California, Quarry Village is anew development that is trying to reduce autos to one per home. So car based is American culture that most zoning laws require 2 parking spaces per residential unit, and in the federal transportation bill 80% of appropriations in prior years used to go by law to highways and only 20% to other transport. This even though passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse emissions in Europe , and upto 50% in some car-intensive areas of the USA. One solution to the problem is to use smart planning to avoid the suburban sprawl, and shift to smaller more fuel efficient automobiles, and build better mass transit and rapid transit and fast rail linking most towns and cities, that will moderate all the excess that took place after the war. This may be the direction smart planning is taking us, and places like Vauban remaining niche communities for green advocates and a sort of reminder that its possible to go in this direction....

LyrArc Article Gist
Joe Nocera talks to experts like Simon Johnson at MIT. Johnson says that when he talks to other experts, after a two minute discussion, they say we should just nationalize the banks. Here Christopher Whalen, a veteran bank analyst, of Institutional Risk Analyst, and Joshua Rosner of research firm Graham-Fisher, say the same thing, with the phrases, lets get on with it or just do it. Says Simon Johnson, thats what we told emerging market countries, Thailand in 1997, or Russia in 1998, when he worked at the IMF. He says we told them to close down some of the banks, and take over the others, and inject government capital. He adds its the best practices, and its straightforward. So asks Nocera, is Geithner talking about the stress test banks will be subjected to, as first step preceding nationalization, more of a calculated approach to gradually introduce the idea of nationalization. But he isnt sure, as Geithner also told David Brooks of the NYT, that governments were not so good at managing banks. No one knows for sure. But says Nocera thats exactly what the government did to solve the S&L crisis. And the man who was former chairman of the FDIC, and helped run the program for the Resolution Trust Corporation, says the government did a pretty good job of it, taking over banks, replacing top managers and directors, and stripping out the bad assets and selling off the now healthy banks to private buyers. So can it be done again and will it be that hard? Yes, its been done before, and its not that hard say these experts. Every month that the administration and Geithner procrastinate puts the banks in a deeper hole, and will mean more layoffs and a worse crisis, even years taken to recover. What he has'nt mentioned is that even if after some procrastination the government gets around to doing it to clean up the mess, there is one added complication this time that is different than what happened with the S&L crisis or with the Swedish cleanup, or the Japanese cleanup after 2003, this time the global economy is caught up in the crisis which makes recovery that much tougher....

LyrArc Article Gist
Most of the problems in Eastern Europe follow from overborrowing by the privae sector , consumers and corporate borrowing, in foreign currencies. According to David Roche of Independent Strategy, private sector foreign currency debt rose to 126% of foreign exchange reserves between 2002 and 2007. Roche is former head of research and global strategy at Morgan Stanley. As a result he says, 50% of household debt is in foreign currency in Hungary, 30-40% in Poland and Romania, and over 70% in the Baltic states. The debt in lowcost foreign currencies like Swiss Frances, Euros, and even yen, also expanded in the corporate sector. BY mid 2008 non-financial corporate debt in foreign currencies reached over 45% of corporate laibilities in Bulgaria, over 30% in Ukraine and Baltics, and over 20% in Hungary and Russia. To get an idea of the way the foreign subsidiaries of major western european banks expanded their lending, note that lending to homeowners between 2002 and 2007 doubled each year in Romania, rose 60-80% in the Baltics and Bulgaria, rose 20-30% in Poland and Hungary. And lending to corporations grew 20-30% a year. There is aclear suggestio of reckless lending and reckless borrowing in these numbers just as was seen in the way mortgage lending ocurred in the USA. The history of this kind of lending goes back to the reckless lending in Latin America in the eighties that led to lost decades many years before, and is a recurring story. Now Roche sees loss of GDP of 5%-6% for Turkey, Russia, Romania, Czech Republic and Poland, and 8-10% in Hungary, Bulgaria and the Baltic states. That would take 40% of foreign exchange reserves in Turkey,Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary and Ukraine. And this will have a human cost in jobs lost, crime, poverty, and years of progress lost in these countries. And it will ricochet back to the parent companies of the European banks that did a lot of this lending, with $130 billion additional losses, and a loss of 10% of tier one capital (equity capital plus disclosed reserves) of Western European banks....