LyrArc Article Gist
A rapid increase in the number of Russians with favorable views of the US going up past 30% as one sign of the effort to improve US Russia relations by Trump and Putin is seen in March 2025. A call by Trump to Putin will take place March 18, 2025 to start discussions on how to settle the Ukraine conflict including land, power plants and exchanges and getting to the root cause of the war- NATO expansion. Some solutions include NATO being disbanded in its current form as archaic as there is no Soviet Union, its original goal being stopping Soviets from setting pro- Soviet governments, setup in Czechoslovakia and attempts to do this in Greece and Turkey. Truman formed NATO for this purpose in 1949 after the Berlin Blockade by Soviets. WIth nuclear arsenals being replenished in Russia and China, India, Japan, small nuclear states such as North Korea, Pakistan, the situation is different today with responsible policies needed today on this issue which are impeded by the idea of NATO on the borders of Russia and the Eastern European and British view of Russia as the pre-eminent threat not shared by India, Brazil, China and the new administration of DJT in the US. A long period of peaceful coexistence and arms control developed in the late 1960's, 1970's and 1980's between the US, German Federal Republic and Soviet Union/ GDR Germany. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Pakistan prime minister Nawas Sharif's friendly overtures to India. The need for improved trade and economic relations with India to improve Pakistan's economy and fears that the military and intelligence services or extremist groups could torpedo these efforts.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Russian position for a ceasefire in Ukraine and peace talks is set forth by president Putin. "Our principled position is that state of Ukraine must be neutral, non aligned and free of nuclear weapons." Putin wants Ukraine to give up Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions, Russian speaking regions in the east of Ukraine. Capitals of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions and some of the territory is controlled by Ukraine today. It means that Russia could accept a ceasefire under the present lines of control. It also means Ukraine would not be part of NATO, though it could be part of the European Union, as a peace settlement. All western sanctions on Russia would have to be lifted. Throughout the decade of this war Russia has maintained close connections to the Russian speaking eastern part of Ukraine with historically close ties to Russia and as Ukraine public opinion shifted to the EU Russia began its efforts to bring these regions under its control even when German-Russian relations were better during Merkel years. Russia has the support of China and Brazil in its position. At some point if a settlement is reached one possibility is that the line of actual control or LAC would be put in place. It happened in the Korean War, when the demilitarized zone was setup and in other conflicts on the Indian border with China and Pakistan, in Cyprus between Greece and Turkey. For it to happen Russia will have to dispel fears in the EU and the US that Russia will continue the conflict at some later stage till all its objectives are achieved. This requires removing the perception that Putin is set on achieving all his objectives to reopen the war at some later stage. Mr. Putin hinted at this by saying "today we are making a concrete real peace proposal," and adding that Russia was not ''talking about freezing the conflict, but its final resolution." In this situation it is the western doubt about Putin's intentions that is another barrier to a settlement on European security, with continued destruction in Ukraine when the war has entered a stalemate where both sides have exhausted their resources and have little to gain by prolonging this conflict. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Michael Boskin, the elder president Bush's chairman of the Council of Economc Advisors was instrumental in setting up the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Here he points to the dire need to open up trade between India and Pakistan. Trade today between the two countries is $2.7 billion. Under trade models Boskin says the trade could be 20 times larger, about $50 billion. This would increase benefits and wages in both countries and is badly needed and long overdue.

LyrArc Article Gist
Mohamed Hanif of the BBC's Urdu Service points to the manner in which the CIA and the ISI collaborated in the two time destruction of Kabul. And he points to a Pakistani view outside of the military which is not obsessed with India and would like to get down to the basics- electricity and infrastructure, better lives, and a safer neighborhood. In this perspective the Pakistani military and the Americans both do not understand the basic needs of the large majority of Pakistanis yearning for a better life. Contrast this with the Thomas Friedman piece which complains on the other side, with a note of innocence, of becoming a sucker in this game of a two-faced Pakistani military and intelligence services using the Americans for their own game, supporting the Americans and the insurgents at the same time. Hanif almost has the last word in this, pointing to the ordinary Pakistanis who are just poor and looking in.

LyrArc Article Gist
Zalmay Khalizad, a former diplomat to Iraq, reports from Iraq after discussions with prominent Iraqis, describes the state of U.S. relations with Iraq under the Abadi government. He says the Ayatollah Sistani in Iraq prime minister Abadi, and Iraqi public opinion, now favor improved relations with the U.S. following the sectarianism promoted by prime minister Maliki and Iran's expanded role in Iraq. Other reports show Iraqi opinion in transition as the U.S. withdrawal promoted by Maliki has led to 2 million refugees, and huge dislocation of people with the expansion of Islamic State from Syria into Iraq. The change in opinion is also towards promoting better relations with Sunni countries. People in the region do not see a bright future with an increase in religious tensions that only lead to more destructive behaviours and increase in refugees. Towards the end of the Bush administration there was some hope that Iraq would see a bright future, only to see this reversed under Maliki's sectarian policies. U.S. public opinion has shifted away from any involvement following the failure of the people in the region to resolve differences and live peacefully. The cost of the wars with little gained as a result of the failure of the people in the region to work together in the common interest is a part of the public debate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016. Sectarianism in the region is the root cause of the growth of the Islamic State and the expansion of the war in Syria, and this has not only worsened the situation for the people in the region, delayed economic development given large oil resources, and left the region worse off than before. It has also led to the refugee flow into Europe worsening the situation in the European Union, adding to tensions in European societies such as France, Germany, Denmark and Sweden, following terrorist attacks and political parties promoting fear of immigrants. What started as a U.S. response to terrorism originating in this region in New York, followed by the war in Iraq, has led to more convulsions in this region, a huge number of refugees, whole country populations displaced, and requires a fresh rethinking about what people in the region can do to live and work together and promote the peaceful participation of people in their own development and growth, before Western societies consider further involvement. The statement about lost to Iran in the title also suggests framing of statements in the old way that are the root of the problem. When the dust settles years from now Iranians, Iraqis, Saudis, Yemeni, Turkish, Pakistani, Indian and other Muslim societies may want to look back at this period as reflecting the dangers of getting caught up in the geopolitics of world powers, letting religious sentiment override calmer thinking, and reflect on the brighter aspects of the common Islamic heritage in Iran, Turkey, India, expressed humanly as it is always is in different ways and forms. They can also take hope and confidence in the fact that European societies have struck the same rocks and emerged calmer, wiser, and better than before....

LyrArc Article Gist
Bret Stephens on the foreign policy debate about supporting or not supporting dictators. On the big one today of Iraq after the large gains with Maliki in Iraq it could be said that its not an easy path either way with each path fraught with dangers, but in the long run if one perseveres and again in the spirit of democracy and with the people in the region themselves and their leaders having good sense and good judgement and putting the interests of the whole region before their personal interests, given this you are always going to do better by your people and the people in the region affected, by respecting democratic ideals and principles. Pakistan is not a good example because its leaders have put their personal interests before the interests of their people but even there things are changing. Zardari's dirtier and clumsier hands are mentioned by Stephens but even here this time the opposition led by Nawas Sharif decided that its more important to respect the electoral process and democratic ideals and let Zardari run Pakistan. Administrations like the Bhuttos and Zardari's have alway been corrupt so there are no high expectations but even here the people of Pakistan will find a way to make the progress they desperately need and find the leadership that can provide it. The military muffling and jailing dissent and not respecting the independent judiciary may not affect the person on the street in Des Moines or Delaware but for people in Pakistan who have suffered under military rule this may be a different story. And in the Middle East things were not that much better with dictators in power either in Palestine and its an area where the conditional part of leadership in the region having good sense and judgement should be considered as well as history. In Iran its not between the Ayatollah and the Shah, before the Shah an elected government in Iran was overthrown when its anti western oil company stance was seen in the light of the cold war. It was the overthrow of that government that brought the Shah in. Had it continued the internal politics of Iran would have been resolved by the people there. In other words western oil interests and lobbies and the cold war distorted the process there. Without the two Iran's politics would not be of much interest to people in the USA and governments there also would have no reason to be especially friendly or especially hostile to the USA. So once one removes the distorting factors and takes out the countries which cannot be used as good example like Palestine and Iran, on the big one Iraq where the people and the leadership in the region did not fail even in very difficult situation and the US persevered, respecting democratic ideals and principles was the best course with the best results. The improved Libyan relations should not be chalked off as a point in favor of dealing with dictators. With better or worse relations with Libya it made little noticeable difference or probably no difference to the people in Des Moines or Delaware. For Iraq it makes a big difference to get it right by both peoples. Libya which had closed itself off from western technology and ideas now opens itself up because this way it can improve life for people in the region, this may be the only thing that has changed. And Stephens puts it another way its more sustainable. But why is it more sustainable to respect democratic ideals and principles given that the leadership of people in the region affected and the people themselves have good sense and judgement? Because in doing so one is respecting oneself one is more true to one's own people's idea of a good and just society and one is respecting other people....

LyrArc Article Gist
Inherent conflicts between views of Reidel, Biden and other policy advisors such Richard Holbrooke, all wary of Hamid Karzai's government in Afghanistan and General McChrystal -whose experience in tactical strategy was his strong point, not an overall perspective that took into account factors outside US control such as the people, their history, recent history, the terrain, lack of viable government, neighboring Pakistan- spill out into the open. Holbrooke, the special ambassador to the South Asian region has serious differences over Karzai with ambassador to Kabul, Eikenberrry, and with Jones, National Security Advisor. Eikenberry has his own differences with Karzai. See the group "Eikenberry Cables," which provides his cable reports from Afghanistan which talk about Karzai, the Afghan military, and the prospects there, in bleak terms. The same Eikenberry is shown here telling Jones that Holbrooke's chilled relations with Karzai are not helping, and Jones assuring Eikenberry that Holbrooke is on the way out. Followed by Secretary of State Clinton supporting Hilbrooke by talking to Obama. See also the group "April 2010 Biannual Defense Departmet Report on Afghanistan," which shows that of 92 districts surveyed none supported the Karzai government, somethig that must cause policy team members to pause and think....

LyrArc Article Gist
The new prime minister of Pakistan Abbasi consults with former prime minister Sharif in Murree, Pakistan, after the Supreme Court disqualifies Sharif from the position. Sharif's brother, Shahbaz, the chief minister of Punjab province will contest a by-election for parliament to replace Abbasi.

LyrArc Article Gist
The India-Pakistan-Afghanistan issues are still framed in the old way in terms of communalism, cold war then and the war on terrorism now. These policies were a legacy of the colonial policies of an earlier empire designed to preserve foreign rule, with a policy of perpetuating divisions between communties on religious and other lines. Modernization, the spread of mass communications that makes possible the reduction of prejudice and division by assimilating different values and beliefs into acommon aspiration for progress and better living standards, and the spread of education, commerce, and technological progress, create the conditions that should put this behind us. Put behind us communalism, and the political and military structures of communal states. Pakistan needs to be transformed from a communal state with a military structure designed to preserve that state - resulting in conflicts with its neighbors- into a state that represents a community and a religion, but in all other ways seeks peaceful coexistence and economic integration with the rest of South Asia. A good example of this is Mexico with its own culture, language and religion (Spanish Catholicism), and Canada with its own bilingual French-English heritage and British political structures and allegiances, both arriving at an arrangement of peaceful coexistence and economic integration with the USA with its different political structures and culture and sporadic conflicts with Canada and Mexico. This has promoted the peaceful development of the North American region. The US involvement in the region can then be seen as a misguided effort that continued framing the region's differences in the old British way or in a cold war stereotyping, first with John Foster Dulles in the India-Pakistan conflicts, and then with Reagan in the Afghan anti-Soviet war. This has worked to exacerbate the conditions that led to slow progress in the drive for economic development, infrastructure building and modernization in all of South Asia. Just as in Europe, as in North America, the processes of economic development work best when a policy of inclusiveness and integration of different communities and people is followed. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In an effort to normalize trade relations Pakistan's government plans to move forward with a step by step approach that will end the restrictions on Indian imports by Jan 1, 2013. The first step is ending a system that allows a list of 2000 import items from India and replacing it with a list of 600 items from India that are banned, allowing the flow of all other goods. This negative list will be eliminated by the end of 2012 leaving in place restrictions on sensitive defense items and some staple goods. Ashfaque Khan, dean of Pakistan's National University of Sciences and Technology Business School advises the government on trade issues. The trade between India and Pakistan stands at $2.7 billion for the year ending March 2011. This is much smaller than the $60 billion in trade between India and China which is growing. The trade between India and Pakistan is likely to grow significantly in the next ten years as trade barriers are removed and normal trade is established.