World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
With the change in U.S. position on climate change, carbon emissions, and the move to raise tariffs on China's exports to the U.S. China faces a new dimension in its global relationships. Against this background China is shifting to a long term view of its relationship with India. China's new foreign policy leaders after the recent party Congress, vice president Wang Qishan and Foreign Minister Wang Yi, now see the need for new partners in a multipolar global world for the long term as China and India countries with large populations and a need for stable world trade share common interests. Wang steers the Central Foreign Affairs Commission with Yang Jiechi as director. China now sees " a lot of shared interests, concerns and positions," in the words of China's Representative Lu, in the long term issues of globalisation, urbanization, pollution, and concern for achieving stable development with high growth rates.  China now takes the long view looking back at the unprecedented change of the last 100 years, as it maps out its plans for the future. The U.S. has challenged the ideas in the blueprint for development of "Made in China 2025," particularly as it relates to western transfer of technology to China. This has created a new situation for which China is still looking for answers, and ways to come up with new strategies for development without the nearly unrestricted access to western technology of the last 2 decades.  Shared positions on world trade with India and India's close relations with the U.S. add credibility in China's  negotiating positions with the U.S.                  ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China's breakneck growth was enabled by housing construction, and coal in a way that created problems of climate change. Now China's largest housing developers Evergrande and Country Garden together have a staggering $500 billion in debt and in serious financial trouble in or near default. How will China's government respond? It let Evergrande who had defaulted on debt payments build 300,000 apartments last year, just to protect home buyers. Now it's founder Mr. Xu is taken in for questioning and "illegal crimes." Making sure that the apartments on which people made deposits are built would cost another $72 billion, says Nomura. Yet suppliers, painters, builders and brokers are owed another $390 billion, in one estimate. And foreign creditors are getting together for complicated restructurings. Evergrande had entered wealth management promising 8 or 9% returns and has stopped making payments. All this is affecting public confidence in the future and China's growth story. For decades China depended on housing construction for high growth rates. Now the process is unwinding with both in financial difficulties. This NYT report says that after Evergrande's default, Country Garden failed to make a payment on $200 billion in debt last week and has 400,000 apartments that it sold but has not finished building. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
XI Jinping tells China's National People's Congress that "western nations- including the US- have implemented all round containment, encirclement and suppression against us, bringing unprecedentedly severe challenges to development." Addressing the private sector Chamber of Commerce representatives which create significant number of jobs in China he said the Communist Party "has always regarded private enterprises and private entrepreneurs as our own people, and will always support them whenever they run into difficulties." Job creation in China is a challenge with high youth unemployment estimated at about 20%. The pandemic worsened the situation for state finances and for unemployment for migrants, the construction slowdown has added to this. The burden of trillions of dollars of local government debt increased during the pandemic with the central government lacking the resources to help, creating problems in the local economies.  This WSJ report says Xi's speech seeks to present his government's performance in the light of these challenges and future challenges as growth slows in China. The trading relationship with US-EU added to employment and income problems for China's economy and people, yet it had one weakness an over concentration in manufacturing in one country that European and US business placed in one country. The building of a  new supply chain that creates manufacturing in other countries to reduce this concentration, and the limits placed on access to western technologies by China to protect US-EU in competition, places new development challenges for China, which Xi alludes to. In the past China was able to use huge stimulus to tackle its debt by creating more growth that supported this debt creation. The pandemic may finally have reversed this as trillions of dollars of debt have built up, and construction of homes and infrastructure has reached a saturation point. This is the kind of situation that Japan entered in the 1990's after three decades of torrid growth and development rates. History is being repeated as China like Japan is entering a new phase of an aging society. In this sense the challenges China is facing are very different from that of Russia. Creating jobs is a perennial problem in India and China with their large populations and rising aspirations of people after centuries of underdevelopment, something that Europe including Russia does not face in anywhere to a similar degree. in this sense there is more in common between the EU and Russia even when they are in a war, than Russia and China, and China has more in common with India. The struggle in Europe as Cambridge historian Brendan Simms has pointed out in his History of Europe, is more about the balance of power which is the story of European history since the 1450's where no one country has been allowed to act with impunity in invading its neighbors and other countries formed a concerted group to prevent this. Be it France, Austria, Britain or Russia that acted seemingly with impunity. China has little to do with it or Europe's history. President Biden is right to say that the US only competes with China in the economic and business fields, and seeks to find common ground on climate change and food insecurity. The US has supported China throughout the twentieth century since the time of Woodrow Wilson in 1913, around the period when Tsinghua University was established with US help. The US helped China during the Japanese invasion and the Cold War period ended with renewed relations.  ...
FRANCE 24 Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Xi Jinping is seen in this WSJ report as putting China on a course as a competitor of the US compared to other leaders such as Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin, yet these prior leaders faced a enoromous gap in technology and capital to make it ludicrous. The shrinking of this gap is a result of free markets theory that took no account of the national interests of the US or of the European Union in shifting manufacturing lock stock and barrel to China.  A deeper look at China requires looking at it from putting oneself in China's situation since the period of the 1912 revolution and the 1919 May 4th movement for Science, Modernization and Democracy, to better understand its motives and realities. Jiang Zemin could not pose the question of competing with the US at the time because China's per capita GDP was less than $100 in 1990 and by 2000 during Hu Jintao's term still about a tenth of American per capita GDP.  Even today with population in North America of about 500 million in the economies of US, Canada and Mexico, China lags far behind in technology and capital resources. The Biden administration does not believe in this idea of free markets theory, wrong from the beginning that prevailed incredibly and puzzingly for too long, that it does not matter where you make as long as it is made at the least cost anywhere. It ignored what China and the US under Biden both believe for the US or China that the US is its people and the people is the country. For the US the Civil war itself as Lincoln said in rallying people to the Union, was fought because labor was more important than capital. When looked at the situation in China as stated by Xi at the party congress recently is for having made progress for the overriding goal of Modernization to build a moderately prosperous socialist economy. Huge problems in China remain hidden- ensuring self governance that is honest and accountable to the people, creating jobs and opportunities for hundreds of millions of young people even as supply chains shift after the pandemic in Europe and the US, India and other countries to their home countries for Made In USA, Made in Europe, and Made in India. China is not such a believer in the flawed free markets theory of the non existence of national interest to not grasp the natural aspects of the US and EU, India wanting to build their own manufacturing up again to the fullest. In this situation it also probably realizes the need for a pause to the rampant free markets type of growth that has damaged China's water, air and environment as much as it has damaged the world through climate change. Quality of growth is the new ethos and this gives the US and China, India, the EU and other countries a common frontier to shoot for. The nuclear aspect is also there and managing this well is a common interest for all countries exercizing responsible leadership. ...
The White House Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
"To Invest (at home), To Align (with allies), To Compete (with the world)" sums up the approach of president Biden with China. It also sums up the approach at home and overseas. Biden senior adviser, Jake Sullivan at Council of Foreign Relations sets out the framework and path for managing US-China relations into the future for many decades. Here at the Council of Foreign Relations he shows how- through careful study of the relationship's history, the changes in the relationship, and where it is today in 2024. Having participated in previous administrations Jake understood how it has evolved, where mistakes were made by both China and the US, where misperceptions took hold and need for clarification, for action. The old Strategic Dialogue followed by Paulsen under Bush 2000-2008 allowed the relationship to be guided by business interests, -without any clear strategy or idea where it was going except maximizing interests of business on both sides- was continued by Kerry under Obama 2008-2016. Sullivan, Blinken and Biden have built a Strategic Economic Cooperation Framework that has clear goals on the American side and goals on the Chinese side, and work between the two presidents and their cabinet ministers. Trump 2016-2020 rejected the earlier Strategic Dialogue but was not able to set up a sound framework that would guide future relations for decades. Sullivan helped set up a new framework around three principles- To Invest, To Align, and To Compete.   Here he describes how the plan to invest trillions in infrastructure in the US was part of this plan's principle To Invest. On Align it was to derisk not decouple by reducing the excessive concentration of supply chains in China, that was revealed as a problem in the pandemic years. Building up manufacturing at home and in India, Vietnam and Japan. Align also was to have allies Japan, South Korea and India to be aligned with the US policy. It also meant that all three countries would follow the same framework for their economies To Invest, To Align, To Compete.  By combining the strengths of the 2 largest economic centers Seoul/Tokyo with New Delhi/Sydney in Indo-Pacific the leveraging effect of US strength could be felt to support its position. And third to compete on level field so that America retained control of its technologies and implementing exports controls. And sharing this in  open communication with China that the US was protecting its technology and interests the way China has done in the past for its interests. The benefit of open communication even where there are differences had the advantage of not turning this into open rhetoric that damaged relations as had happened under previous administrations. Wang Yi on China's side having seen and approached it with careful study and reflection had similar goals to stabilize and put the relationship on a sound footing. Sullivan met extensively with Wang Yi in meetings in several locations around the world. Ministers Yellen, Raimondo, Blinken, Kerry, were sent to China for extensive discussions as part of this strategy in 2023 leading to remarkable change in the mood and confidence in US- China relations after tumult in 2016-2020 and uncertainty in previous administrations. Much credit goes to president Biden and Jake Sullivan, Anthony Blinken, and also to Wang Yi and Jinping in no way diminishing their own initiative, so that for the first time in decades the US China relationship is now on a stable footing. Both countries faced common challenges around counter narcotics, around climate change, and other issues. These are being addressed. Competition is managed carefully and no rhetoric is taking place so that the largest two economies and about 1.7 billion in US and China and 2 billion people who are allies in India/Indonesia/Vietnam/ Korea/Japan living on the same planet earth can have economic and other cooperation  with different cultures, economic structures and systems of government. The result of such a framework also gives the basis for cooperation with America's allies to invest in Africa and Latin America and in the people of these two continents as another level of alignment and investment for a safer better world. ...
The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In the meeting in the Oval Office Biden and Modi had this to say about India US relations. Modi called it a "transformative" decade. Mr. Biden called it a "new chapter" in ties, taking on tough challenges in coronavirus vaccines for the rest of Asia outside India and China, tackling climate change, and ensuring rule of law in the Indo-Pacific region.  Biden's view- "I think that the relationship between India and the US, two of the largest democracies in the world, is destined to be stronger, closer, tighter, and I think it can benefit the whole world." A look at the US under the Biden administration shows a US that is very different from that of the US in the period of presidents since Harry Truman when he met Jawaharlal Nehru at the White House in October 1949. Biden sees the US needing renewal of its infrastructure, reviving worker incomes and families, regaining its leadership of the free world, for its role and place in the world. Throughout the period 1949 to 2020 for 70 years India was never seen as a modernizing nation of 1.2 billion people. For most of this period it lacked the good governance and speedy implementation of modernization of economy that is essential for a truly good relationship. By releasing the potential of the younger generation in a country where people under 35 years form the major part of the population, with good governance and development agenda, the Indian prime minister has changed the entire dynamics of the India US relationship. This is happening in the way China had done in its relationship with the US after 2000 by modernizing the country. India is now the country with huge potential and the country the US sees as helping it build its own role and place in the world. The sheer size of India and its population with countries around it in the east such as Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam with shared values in south and southeast Asia bring together a population of close to 2 billion people much larger than China, to determine the direction of Asia.  This is the new chapter that president Biden has in mind, and it is also the "transformative decade" in the eyes of prime minister Modi as India finally puts behind it years of bad governance, and speeds up modernizing its economy.   ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Areddy describes the choices facing China's president Xi Jinping as he faces protests in Hong Kong demanding the resignation of Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying. Protestors are also calling for canceling of a plan to limit nominations for chief executive to a committee loyal to Beijing. Xi Jinping has experience with Hong Kong affairs as he held the portfolio for Hong Kong affairs as part of the leadership when he was vice president. There are precedents where Beijng has changed course, as it sees it important to put memories of Tiananmen protest suppression behind. In 2003 six years after Britain handed Hong Kong to China -under an agreement for "one country, two systems," that granted separate status and system of government to Hong Kong- an anti-subversion law was pulled back. And the unpopular Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa, a shipping magnate, resigned after 18 months. Beijing has to balance its concern for the "contagion effect" of protests on other parts of China, with the need to maintain the right climate for business and investment in Hong Kong and other financial centres. With slowing growth and limits to overexpanding credit, a crackdown in Hong Kong would further exacerbate problems with the international community, and create tensions in Taiwan about future reintegration with China. China warned foreigners not to interfere, and the American Consulate in Hong Kong stated it "strongly supports Hong Kong's well-established traditions and Basic Law protections of internationally recognized fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of expression and freedom of the press." The British government also pointed to Hong Kong's "fundamental rights and freedoms, including the right to demonstrate," which were in the spirit of the 1997 transfer agreement....
Washington Post Original article ›
DW.COM Original article ›
The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Indian prime minister Modi shown in a meeting together with Biden of the US, Fumio Kishida of Japan and Albanese of Australia at the Izumi Gallery in Tokyo during the announcement of the joint efforts for launching and promoting the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity. The IPEF led by the US will have four pillars of trade and supply chain resiliency, clean energy and climate change action, taxes to promote investment in infrastructure, and good governance. Seven of 10 members of ASEAN have joined including Indonesia. India is a key partner of US and Japan for the new IPEF economic alliance. Prime Minister Modi of India says about IPEF- "India will work together with its IPEF partners to build an inclusive and flexible Indo-Pacific Economic Framework. I believe that resilient supply chains must be based on three pillar foundation of trust, transparency and timeliness, and I am sure that this framework will make these pillars strong and lead to prosperity, peace and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region." Attracting large investments in India and other reliable partners in a new supply chain that shifts out of China are part of the Biden plan working together with Japan and South Korea. Investments directly into the US are also part of the same plan. Gina Raimondo US Commerce Minister says- "I would say, especially as businesses are beginning to increasingly look for alternatives to China, the countries in the Indo-Pacific Framework will be more reliable partners for US businesses." US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan says the IPEF is intended to boost US manufacturing. By boosting US manufacturing and technological advancement with investments inside the US that directly benefit American workers and families the IPEF will serve the US and the free world in ways that will shape the coming decades to 2030 and 2040. With investments in the US will come investments in India as a reliable manufacturing partner to replace China by 2030 is envisioned by Jake Sullivan and president Biden. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Daniel Bell at Tsinghua University in Beijing, Andy Xie, economist in Shanghai, Zhang Habin, professor at Peking University, and Michael Meyer, author and hutong expert, talk about what issues are important. Bell says Obama mania is absent among the young in China, though they respect his intellectual abilities, and Chinese are not looking to the USA for ideals. They are looking to Chinese culture and characteristics, and democracy is seen in this light with emphasis on Chinese characteristics. This means the US has to engage at a deeper level with China. Treat China as an equal with something positive to offer, says Bell. Andy Xie is concerned about the US-China relationship, based as it is today on tenuous grounds, where what happens in Florida and California can have a significant and immediate effect on what happens in Guangdong. With 70% of the furniture sold in the US made in China, the effects are immediate when housing slumps. So he says the US lost 3 million jobs since the subprime crisis, and China lost 20 million jobs. And for the 5 million college graduates coming out in 2009, they will be adding to the 5 million college graduates from previous years who are seeking jobs. Ten million unemployed college graduates mean China is seeing whole new conditions as the backdrop of US-China relations. Habin says its important for the US to set an example in climate change and emissions of greenhouse gases. The US should sign an agreement with China with binding targets, make its technology available to China, and provide development aid to make this technology and other assistance accessible to China. Cooperation on this issue is vital to future relations says Habin. Meyer says the hutong, small enclaves of old Beijing with lanes and small homes, that the city officials call neighborhood slums, but actually have a sense of community and a vibrant life, are worth preserving. He questions the Walmart and Pepsi commercial culture, and questions building of the American car culture urban plan that generates pollution, lacks community feeling, and is not energy efficient. In fact he has a point here, because the US is shifting away from its own older urban planning design that encourages urban sprawl, as in California. The new Sacramento urban plan that is being adopted for the future in America has energy efficiency, more community and easy interaction, less urban sprawl in mind. See the link to this. But Meyer says Chinese planners insist on their right to make the same mistakes American urban planners made. And Meyer quotes the head of the first Chinese environmental NGO, who says, "if the Chinese want to live the American way of life we need 7 earths to support them". Which raises a disturbing question of the US postwar way of life with its large SUV's, urban sprawl, and less sense of community. Wouldn't the US have to join India and China in the worldwide scramble for resources to preserve this way of life? Just this week China signed $51 billion of deals for natural resources, see the link. And is the rapid decline of the SUV, just the first sign of changes that are taking place, with the economic changes in coming years leading to grappling with issues of better quality of life, smaller quantity of things, health and obesity and lifestyles, community, all coming to the fore. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The International Energy Agency says China used 2.252 billion tons of oil equivalent in 2009 compared to the 2.170 billion tons of oil equivalent used by the USA. This oil equivalent measure covers crude oil, nuclear energy, coal, natural gas and renewable energy like hydropower. To give an idea of the scale of the increase- China's total energy use was only half of that of the USA in 1999 ten years ago. China plans to reduce emissions by cutting the carbon dioxide per unit of GDP by 40-45% from 2005 levels by 2020. But China looks at higher energy use in the years ahead. Much of the energy use is propelled by infrastructure building and energy intensive use in industries.
The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Jaishankar was asked at the 2021 GLOBSEC conference in Bratislava in 2021 why he thinks anyone will help India in case of a problem with China after it did not help others for Ukraine. Chancellor Scholz of Germany cites Indian Foreign Minister Jasihankar's remarks in Bratislava, Slovakia, in 2021. Jaishankar said- "Europe has to grow out of the mindset that Europe's problems are the world's problems, but the world's problems are not Europe's problems. That is if it is you it's yours, if it is me it is ours. I see reflections of that. There is a linkage today which is being made. A linkage betwen China and India and what's happening in Ukraine. Chia and India happened way before anything happened in Ukraine. The Chinese do not need a precedent somewhere else on how to engage us or not to engage us or be difficult with us or not to be difficult with us." These are Scholz's remarks at the Munich Security Conference. Scholz says Jaishankar has "a point."  "This quote from the Indian Foreign Minister is included in this year's Munich Security Report and he has a point it would't be Europe's problem alone if the law of the strong were to assert itself in international relations." To be credible European or North American in New Delhi or Jakarta, it is not enough to emphasize shared values. "We generally have to address the interests and concerns of these countries as a basic prerequisite for joint action. And that's why it was so important to me to not merely have representatives of Asia, Africa and Latin America at the negotiating table during the G-7 Summit last June. I really wanted to work with these regions to find solutions to the main challenges they face growing poverty and hunger, partly as a consequence of Rusia's war, as well as the impact of climate change or COVID-19. There is another side to this -Scholz and Germany's president Frank Walter-Steinmeier are from the social Democrats party which has sought closer cooperation with Russia, and also carry a great deal of ambivalence for the war. America is not fighting this indirect war in its neighborhood, Germany is. And some of the roots of this conflict go back to the Napoleonic invasion of Russia in the 1800's period and the German invasion in the 1940's. Macron is even more ambivalent in his position and he has remained this way from the beginning- not committed to humiliating Russia. In a way it is the position of the Social Democrats from the historical context of Germany's invasion of Russia, and Christian Democrats eagerness to create a German recovery with low cost Russian energy that created the dependence that Russia sought to use. In what it sees as the unfairness of NATO being allowed to expand right next to its borders. Because of a sense of righteousness on both sides- Russia of the Soviet period failing to see the feelings of a Budapest in 1956, East Berlin in 1953, and Prague in 1968, sees little wrong in an invasion of Kviv. And with it all the biography of Brezhnev the last leader of the Soviet Union, describes that very struggle in the Great Patriotic War the soviets fought against Nazi Germany which was fought by Ukrainians including Leonid Brezhnev with great will and purpose against all odds.  Cambridge historian has written the history of Europe that Scholz is cited to be reading in 2021- Europe The Struggle for Supremacy 1453 to the Present.  It shows Europe since 1453 engaging in balance of power of European powers, Sweden Denmark, Russia, Austria, Germany, France, Britain, Turkey, continually for 500 years. Europe simply forgot its own history. Asia including Japan, China, Indonesia and India, simply emerging from the situation of falling behind in science, technology, and the industrial revolution and building their economies with the help of the US since the Meiji Restoration in Japan in 1868. The Balance of Power Simms says was maintained for 500 years is simply based on no country allowed to act with impunity, no country allowed to do whatever it wanted because of its position of strength at that moment or period of time. In that situation all other powers regrouped to keep the balance from being upset. The war in Ukraine is also likely to end in a way that is consistent with that which Brendan Simms writes about because this has not changed now for over 500 years. Biden knows this and it has fallen on America to shoulder the burden for this in the last 150 years, Scholz is aware of this, Modi in India sees this, and Jinping in China realizes this even with its concerns about Taiwan.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Darren Woods of Exxon gives the view of many in business in the U.S. when he says of the Paris climate change accords of 2015- "We need a framework like that to address the threat of climate change." GE's CEO Immelt says a decision to leave the Paris accords "is not going to change one thing we do for energy efficiency, and I think all business is going to feel the same way." Most utilities including AEP see the political changes in government as coming and going, making it important to base their long term strategies on the economics and the general trends worldwide. Only support for the move to leave is coming from some coal companies and the steel industry, a small fraction of the overall industry in the U.S. Not mentioned here is the moves worldwide, by China motivated by health and pollution concerns to shift away from coal after disastrous pollution effects seen in China, and the decades old effort in Germany that has made the country self sufficient in renewable energy through use of solar and wind energy. India has set aggressive targets for renewables energy and is likely to join this long term trend as the economics shift in favor of wind and solar, especially when the health costs are counted in.   ...
France 24 Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
FR24 gives this video of the televised national debate in France between Macron and Le Pen. Macron took up the challenge of not enough attention being given to Le Pen's ties with Russia and her position of skepticism when it comes to the European Union and climate change. "You are dependent on the Russian government and you are dependent on Mr. Putin. When you speak to Russia, you are speaking to your banker." Le Pen says she had taken that loan from a Czech-Russian bank only because French banks refused to lend to her. "I'm absolutely and totally free woman." The candidates also clashed over Le Pen's proposal for banning Muslim women from wearing headscarves. Le Pen described the veil as "a uniform imposed by Islamists." Macron sad that such a plan would violate France's secular rules and would trigger "civil war" in a country that has the largest Muslim population in western Europe. The Fench colonoized parts of North Africa during the period after 1830, with French colonies in Algeria, Morocco and other parts of the region, leading to immigration from this part of the Arab world. After a series of terrorist incidents the French public lost patience with Islamist tendencies leading to a general swing to the right in French politics including Macron. Yet mainstream parties such as Macron's continue to support France's secular values. The traditional parties from the period before Macron such as the Le Republicains of the De Gaulle period in the sixties and the Socialists from the Mitterand period (1981-1995) both failed to win more than 5% of the vote in 2022 showing the many changes happening in France.  During the Macron period as president Yellow Vest protests brought up the issues of working families having a hard time making ends meet. Macron has responded to such protests with some aloofness but also with a tendency to organize town hall meetings to listen to people express their frustrations.  France has established a stronger welfare state than the US and Britain, and for this reason issues related to the dislocation of smaller towns because of the shift of manufacturing to China are part of the general trend that had affected both the US and western Europe, requiring a more unified response. This now takes shape with the renewal of manufacturing in the US and all the western European countries. Candidates with platforms such as Le Pen's to provide relief for the current surge in the cost of living could offer temporary band aid solutions but not address the root causes that require a renewal of French manufacturing and bringing good jobs home or closer to home. The will and aspiration to bring a next generation industrial revolution to France and Europe is the kind of solution that is needed, one that would revive towns and communities across France and across Europe. Much of the technological capabilities are there in Europe, needed is the will and aspiration.  ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
An intimate biographical account of new Chinese leader Xi Jinping and his connections with Muscatine Iowa, where he visited as a head of a Chinese farm delegation in 1985. Xi Jinping remembers the trip vivdly and plans to spend time with friends from that visit during a visit to the U.S. in 2012. He spent two nights during that visit in the bedroom of two college age boys of the Dvorchak family. This revealing account of Jinping's life shows that the actual story of his life is quite different from the title of "princelings" or privileged sons of former communist leaders that is suggested by this reference in the media. Because of the volatile nature of Chinese politics, his father Xi Zhongxun, who led communist partisans in the struggle of the pre World War II years, was rehabilitated twice after falling out of favor. The first period was in 1962 and it was not till 1979 when he was fully rehabilitated. During this period which coincides with the growing up period of Xi from 9-26 years of age, Xi experienced many hardships. During the years of the Cultural revoultion Xi was sent at age 15 to Shanxi province where his father had led partisans. He lived there for 7 years in a traditional cave dwelling in the village of Liangjahe doing farm work. He was denied admission to Tsinghua University twice before being accepted in 1974. There he graduated with a degree in organic chemistry. This was followed by three years working as an assistant to Geng Biao, defense minister and a partisan who was a colleague of his father. The next job was deputy Communist party chief of Zhengding county in Hebei province. Iowa Governor Branstad visited Hebei in 1984, and Branstad played host to a animal-feed delegation led by Jinping in 1985- the visit to Muscatine was part of this trip and which Jinping has told others he enjoyed more than his visits to Oregon or California that year. The second time Xinping's father went out of favor was after his criticism of the crackdown of protests at Tienanmen Square. These experiences have given Xinping a confidence and experience in different situations that other Chinese leaders including the current leaders lacked. If Jinping has inherited some characteristics from his father he may also have the courage to take China in a new direction, and make the kind of changes China needs as it shifts away from an export based economy. At the same time rule in China is by consensus of leaders on the communist party's standing committee. His father helped initiate the special economic zone in Guangdong province in 1978, and Xi Xinping held senior posts in the provinces of Fujian and Zhejiang and in Shanghai, giving him close ties with industry and local government in areas that led the export based economy. Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore puts Jinping in the" class of Nelson Mandela type leaders, who has great emotional stability to not let his personal misfortunes and sufferings cloud his personal judgement." Of political positions Jinping has a certain wariness. He once responded to mention of him as the potential leader with the words: "Are you trying to give me a fright."...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In this WSJ report a top American Defense Department official before resigning says- "I have no problem with feeding China or trading with China. I have a problem with arming China." Advanced or sensitive manufacturing technology is still being approved for export to China says this report in WSJ, even as the US perceives this to be a national security threat. Experts say the Commerce Department report approval process needs overhaul and the US needs close coordination with the European Union on this process. Of the total US $124 billion in exports to China in 2020 only half of one percent needed a license Commerce Department data reviewed by WSJ shows. Of that small fraction of one half percent Commerce Department approved 2562  applications or 94%. This even includes array of semiconductors, aerospace components, artificial intelligence technologies that could be added to China's military. This means that even towards the end of the Trump administration with its talk about national security threats, through the four years 2016-2020, nothing much happened in this important field.  The difficulty that the Trump administration faced and America faces is putting company and business interests first or American security interests and retaining competitive technological advantage interests first. American administrations and business have consistently failed to follow what plain ordinary Americans understand by America first. Even when it is clearly evident that America is handing over sensitive advanced technologies with very little in return, and creating out of nowhere competition that poses serious risks for the national interest, business and administrations operate indifferent to the national interest. Even right into the period when this is making the world a riskier and more dangerous place.   This is the state of affairs today, and the situation is not about Congressmen visiting Taiwan or ships going through the seas in that region, or international law. All that is American policy  and is well known and well understood. What is missing is the right action and the right determination behind other action that is sending a different message at the same time -that the US is oblivious to its own interests. That administrations, even those such as the recent Republican one under Mr. Trump, see a higher priority in following American business wherever it goes in pursuit of individual company interests alone, even if it does not accord with the national interest. Lobbying groups distort what policy should be in the public interest and in the interest of both countries, leading to a breakdown in the whole process itself whenever governments surrender their role of protecting the public interest.  Outshoring manufacturing was bad economically at the level of communities across the US, leading to divisions that weakened the country in the last decade, it was also bad for the economy of the country with loss of the best manufacturing jobs, beyond what economists in their ignorance of the big picture sought to show was the consumer- often the same person who lost a job or stopped seeking work- paying less. It was bad also for China as it created the hyper growth that rapidly contaminated land, air and water and created an inherently unstable relationship in trade with destruction of jobs at a pace that America had not faced with Japan and with which it could not cope. Could a pace that worked for both nations have worked? At the root is the notion that business knows best even if it is in plain sight to every plain American that the country's most advanced technologies are being shipped out. Governments do not fulfill their responsibilities and fail when they fail to tell business what rules are in the public interest, as it was never in the first role of business to protect the public interest. That the European Union has simply followed the US in this has created a problem for both the US and the European Union of deviating from what plain Americans or Europeans see as abundantly clear.  Even in plain dollars and cents business and economists fail to grasp the true cost for the whole country or whole people compared to the benefit for an individual or an individual company. The cost of wars even small wars can be be trillions of dollars which are borne by the whole country or people, and most of it by the middle and less economically well off classes in a country. Creating a belligerent competitor in world affairs and the risk of conflict and war is to lose trillions of dollars when the benefit to an individual, groups, or individual companies is no more but a tiny fraction of that trillion dollar cost, not including what all the plain people pay in human lives. It is not that anyone benefits as the people in the belligerent competitor country follow the same pattern of loss that would happen in the US. One should ask is it not a loss for China also? The example of Imperialist Japan is not so far off in time for Americans or Asians including the Chinese and Japanese people who suffered so greatly to forget. Business remains oblivious to the public interest not just for America but for the world, individual companies do not see it as their role beyond that of pursuing individual company interest. Is it not then for the government to set the rules. Is it alright for government to not fulfill its responsibilities? Even when this pushes the world faster to into conflicts as technologies take the place of exercise of wisdom in conflict, and even when there are unmet challenges such as climate change that affect the whole planet.  ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
"Defend blue sky and breathe together" says a painting on a brick wall in the coal producing region of Shanxi, northern China. China is finally acting seriously to impose strict environmental rules from the top. Old coal stoves are thrown into a dump as China shifts away from coal stoves to heat homes. So many new homes shifted to natural gas in Shanxi province. population 37 million, that demand overwhelmed natural gas supplies. Results are to be seen in cleaner air in Taiyuan, capital of the province and in Beijing itself.  President Xi's commitment to climate change accord reached in Paris is seen as firm in this report in the NYT. The head of the gas, coal and power markets division of the International Energy Agency, Mr. Peter Fraser, says that even though homes use only 6% of total coal used in China, the effects are disproportionately high because homes do not have any emission reduction mechanisms. Natural gas demand has increased by 16% in 2017 as provincial officials eager to meet the demands issued in Beijing to cut coal emissions even let some homes and schools go without heat in an early winter spell. This extraordinary report shows how in cities in northeastern China the people welcome the change to natural gas and cleaner air. Even in coal country, in cities like Linfen population 4.4 million, the change is seen as people welcome the clean air and officials build natural gas connections to execute the plans issued in Beijing. In Beijing itself Greenpeace estimates show 54% reduction in PM 2.5, harmful particulate matter for breathing by 54%, a startling fact showing Beijing's determination and effectiveness of its actions. Natural gas is more expensive and citizens do not complain in neighboring provinces near Beijing because the state provides adequate subsidies to compensate people. Decrees are being enforced to avoid coal stove use with people knowing they could see action by authorites if reported. Compare this to the problems of crop burning around New Delhi, in Haryana and Punjab provinces, and one can see that centralized control and direction has advantages when used in the right way for a good purpose and supported by people who want to breathe clean air. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Coral Davenport of the NYT provides some of the basics of the Paris climate change agreement. This includes an effort to cut greenhouse gas emissions by half to avoid a situation in which atmospheric temperatures rise by 2 degrees Celsius or 3.6 degree Fahrenheit.  The earlier effort to negotiate an accord failed in 2009 in Copenhagen. This time all 186 countries were asked to signup with the USA and China, the No. 1 and No. 2 polluters and India leading the way. Germany is well on its way to self sufficiency through development of solar and wind energy with the German government leading the way, and France leads in the use of nuclear energy. How did this happen now? As Davenport points out there are scientific studies. But this is not the primary reason China is shifting.Davenport fails to emphasize the health concerns and pollution concerns that motivated China to shift away from coal. China's industrial revolution of the last 3 decades has come at a huge cost in pollution of air and water, and president Xi Jinping has decided to make the shift away from coal a top priority. It is estimated that mortality rates for areas of high coal use north of the Yangzte river have higher mortality rates than areas of lower use of coal south of the Yangzte river. The other big polluter India is shifting because it is learning from China's experience. Davenport mentions the resistance to the scientific evidence in the Republican party. As a result it is already clear that it lacks support in Congress and under a future Republican administration. In a fashion similar to healthcare, president Obama failed to create a consensus before proceeding in the hope that this would be better than waiting. However American industry is already moving away from coal as documented in Links- "The Trump executive order on coal and the continuing shift to natural gas." Utilities in the U.S. are making the shift away from coal because of the economics and planning ahead as governments can change every four years. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
NYT reporting on the wealth of China's elite is followed by restrictions on journalists. Visa restrictions were eased for students, tourists and business travellers, but tightenend for journalists under the Jinping administration in 2014. This NYT editorial says NYT will not succumb to pressures from the U.S. or any government, including China, to change the high standards of reporting, and will continue to meet the fair reporting needs of its readers worldwide.
The Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The firing of John Bolton as National Security Adviser opens up the possibility of a meeting of Trump with President Rouhani of Iran. There is a need for both sides to begin talks on a nuclear deal that would replace the one Iran signed with president Obama to address issues raised by Mr. Trump and Republicans. Iran and countries that buy oil from Iran such as India, China and Japan have an interest in relief from sanctions imposed by the Trump administration on imports of Iranian oil. The European Union is keen to preserve aspects of the nuclear deal. Relief from sanctions is critical for Iran to develop its economy. The last two decades have seen Iran struggle to develop its economy with the sanctions imposed by  different U.S. administrations.   President Trump expressed flexibility on sanctions saying "we will see what happens. I think Iran has potential. They are incredible people." President Rouhani urged Mr. Trump "to put warmongers aside." Mr. Trump told reporters that he had resisted Mr. Bolton's opinions on issues and realized he had moderate views when compared to someone like Bolton.  Trump told Iran "We are not looking for regime change. We hope we can make a deal and if we can't make a deal thats fine too. But I think they have to make a deal." Helping the U.S. and Iran come to talks is president Macron of France who hopes to setup a meeting at the UN General Assembly which meets next week following his efforts at the G-7 meeting in France last month. In the past when tensions were high in the Straits of Hormuz President Trump refrained from aggravating this by saying actions that are "disproportionate" should not be taken and respected Iranian intentions. The tone of the conversation between the two sides has moderated to the point where both sides realize the need for coming to some compromise. This is in sharp contrast to the period a few months ago with rising tensions in the Straits of Hormuz and the seizure of an Iranian ship. Bolton's opinions were not the only issue for president Trump. He was also seen as the source of leaks including one that said Mike Pence, the Vice President, had opposed Mr. Trump's plan to bring the Taliban to Camp David. Also contributing to the new climate for talks is Mike Pompeo the Secretary of State, who has promoted the idea of talks with Iran. He told the media about such a meeting at the UN General Assembly in New York- "Sure. The president has made it very clear that he is prepared to meet with no pre-conditions." The willingness to try new ideas even contrary ones to policy pursued only a short while ago as long as the desired goal is reached is a feature of this presidency and key advisers. From the beginning of the Trump administration there is a firm sense of the need to end the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. and reduce foreign entanglements that have dragged on wasting resources and destroying priorities. With a willingness to try all sorts of approaches even ones that appear to be contradictory always keeping the end goal in sight. ...
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist points out the shortcomings in Indonesia's effort to attract foreign investment and increase growth under the Widodo administration.
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A German reporter questions the value of the G20 meetings following the violence on streets at the last Hamburg meeting. He says the first G20 during the global financial crisis was useful but later meetings have not lived up to the hope for discussion and search for solutions to world problems. Global trade is at the top of the agenda following the tariffs dispute between China and the U.S. Divergent interests of participants are a problem. Would going back to G-7 in private meetings be a solution asks this reporter.


Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us