LyrArc Article Gist
India in 2022 and looking at 2030 has great potential in the world. India's interests as a democracy are clearly aligned with the US and Europe. In the past when India was small in economic terms after emerging from the British Empire as an independent nation and out of the fire of the partition and wars in South Asia in 1962, 1965, 1971 policies of ambivalence in foreign affairs took place. At that time says Manmohan Singh, a former prime minister who negotiated for rouble -Indian rupee agreement in the 1970's and 1980's India was finding its way for its small but growing economy. This was in the context of the Nehru-Indira Gandhi policy of non-alignment of the early years after independence when India was never presented with an opportunity to make a difference in the world and was only a small part of the world economy. Today's situation is different. The US and European Union now see the need for a principle based economic order and while one may quibble about the small details, in the larger sense, history has intended for us, the US, the European Union, UK,  British Commonwealth of which we are a part, to stand together economically and politically with our shared parliamentary systems based on western- British and American- democracy and values.  Never has history presented such a huge opportunity for billions of people- to meet the aspirations across continents from North and South America, European Union, to Africa, Asia south and south east and Japan. All countries that aspire to the free societies that have evolved over hundreds of years. It is also the spirit in which Hind Swaraj was written in 1910 by Mohandas Gandhi and which was turned into reality only 37 years later under his leadership and vision for India. The non-alignment period of 2 decades was more of a intervening chapter that resulted from a sense of grievance rather than in the spirit of courage and spirited effort that Mohandas Gandhi embodied and led India with. In Manmohan Singh's direct unmistakable terms and from the vast experience he brings as a respected Indian civil servant- "India as the largest peace loving democracy stands to gain enormously from this principled trade aspiration of the western block of nations of the US and European Union. It presents a tremendous opportunity for India to become a large producing nation for the world and a global economic powerhouse. However, to capitalize on these opportunities India needs free access to these markets, an accepted and global currency to trade in and seamless trade settlements." Manmohan Singh sees millions of factories manned by hundreds of millions of people of all castes, creeds and religions of India. This is a pivotal moment of change for India and India must grasp it firmly. It is also the Mohandas Gandhi of Hind Swaraj taken to a new level from 1910 to 2050, and today's young people's aspiration for India.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
It took 75 years for a British prime minister to visit Gandhi Ashram on the banks of the Sabarmati river in Ahmedabad. George Bernard Shaw, the English writer, in a handwritten note at the Nehru museum in Allahabad after meeting Gandhi says "ask somebody 100 years hence" about Gandhi's contribution to the world. Today it is more clearer than ever. Mohandas Gandhi wrote Hind Swaraj on a ship from South Africa to London in 1910 after negotiating with the British government on behalf of Indians in South Africa. In 1915 Gandhi returned to India and used his savings to buy 110 acres of land for the ashram on the banks of the river Sabarmati in Ahmedabad. By 1923 Gandhi was questioning the expenditures of the British government that did little for the development of the country and a budget that was focused on military expenditures, in his magazine Young India, with nothing for developing the country except for railways and transport. Gandhi launched his non cooperation movement for self-rule or Swaraj from the Ashram. By 1937 elections were held and the first provincial assemblies were set up in an experiment for self-rule. In 1930 the Salt March for noncooperation in the British salt monopoly, salt seen as the common man's right, was launched from the Ashram. In 1942 the Quit India movement was launched in the middle of World War II. In 1945 after Labour party's Clement Atlee won the election in a landslide against Winston Churchill the path opened for Britain to start negotiations with Gandhi for independence. In 1947 India was free. Why 75 years for a British prime minister? Much of the period after 1950's was lost in the recovery from partition, wars on Kashmir, China's entry into Tibet and the invasion of India. The non aligned movement under Nehru and Indira Gandhi and successor governments to 2000 appearing more as voicing a grievance for being left out led to an ambivalence of the US and UK towards India, and reflected a period when India was small in economic terms and lacked the opportunity to find its place in the world as a country with the largest population in the world. Which today with with Bangladesh and Indonesia sharing a common history of Hinduism and Buddhism represents 1.6 billion people. In the Nehru home museum in Allahabad there is a hand written note by British writer George Bernard Shaw who visited India and the Nehru home. It says it would take maybe 100 years before the world realized the significance of what Gandhi had done and only at that time would the world truly understand Mr. Gandhi. Mr. Boris Johnson's effort to make up for 75 years that went by without UK prime minister's visit to Gandhi Ashram in Ahmedabad is one such moment that George Bernard Shaw had seen coming.  George Bernard Shaw's handwritten not at the Nehru Museum in Allahabad says- "What is the place of Mahatma Gandhi in political philosophy? I do not know. Ask somebody a century hence. I recollect Gandhi as only a very likeable fellow- Mahatma from India. We did not talk Mahatma shop."       G. Bernard Shaw            28/6/1947     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Paul Bremer the American in charge on the ground in Iraq issued a decree on May 22, 2003 disbanding the Iraqi army, to extirpate all forms of Saddamism and dismantle the intelligence and command centres of the Iraqi military. This was not part of the original invasion plan according to some reports. Bremer's decision sent many of these officers to fight against the Americans as insurgents, cost American lives and lives of the insurgents effectively turning the invasion into a years long war with hit and run insurgents formerly of the Saddam army. Also effectively destroying or weakening the former elements of Saddam's army. In the process it gave Shiites the first hope of living free of Sunni control and Sunnis who wanted no part of Baathist politics and repression their freedom to exercize their rights, it also brought in the turmoil and lack of security, the bombing of Shiite holy sites by politically motivated Sunni elements and Shiite reprisals, that led to effective partition of the country something a long history of ethnic conflicts and colonialism may have already exacerbated long before the arrival of Americans. The documents of the war planning may suggest that keeping the Iraqi army intact was part of the plan but Bremer could not have issued the decree and had Bush back him up unless Bush and Rumsfeld felt the same way about extirpating Saddamism, seeing it in the way Americans treated Nazis and Nazi instituitons after invading Germany and seeing it the way the Americans saw the Japanese militarists and their institutions after the invasion of Japan. The Baathist treatment of the Kurds, the gas attacks on the Kurds, the destruction of Shia in the marshes after the first American invasion, the repression of Sunni and Shiite, were reminiscent of Nazism and Japanese militarism....

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

LyrArc Article Gist
Security is at the heart of India's foreign policy. S. Jaishankar points this out at Thiruvanathapuram. He says this was true of the effort at Balakot and even in the midst of Covid at the Line of Actual Control with China when India sent up enormous numbers of troops to defend the border. This is also behind the stand with China that security and LAC comes first in all relations with China. Trade and exchanges all come in the context of LAC, settle the LAC issues first then we can proceed with better bilateral relations, this is what India is telling China.  There are good reasons for this. India has a large border in the most formidable terrain of the Himalayas which is also close to the plains of India in the LAC with China. Any difficulties at the border would weaken India's secuerity and weaken development efforts in the same way that Japan sought to weaken Chinese development through invasion in the 1930's. Tibet looms out of the past. When China invaded Tibet Nehru's couple of pages in Discovery of India on China show that he had no idea of the China that had emerged with Mao and the CCP in its historical struggle against Japanese nationalists and imperialists. He had an idea of China that came from the Buddhist period and India's links from the past. The ruthless Japanese invasion that China confronted on its soil, and British colonial incursions before that, had already transformed the China of the past, which now under Mao in 1948 may have sought more defensible borders by extending them to Tibet as a buffer state. Historically the British had never tolerated Russian or other European or Japanese interference in the border states such as Tibet. There was also the question of capacity. By the time of the invasion of Tibet in the early 1950's China had already fought the Korean War with the US. India's army and defense forces were just coming out of partition and ill equipped for the task of defending the borders in Tibet region. Current governments in a more normal setting cannot change this part of history, yet can take full recognition of the facts that this has created. A strong defense has to be created for defending a border that extends for thousand of miles now that China has unlawfully occupied Tibet. On it also depends a strong and vigorous development effort that helps build the kind of modern defenses as the economy grows and absorbs new technologies rapidly. Both defense and development go together, one cannot have defense without rapid modernization and development, and one cannot have rapid modernization and development without defense. A weak defense would lead to distractions in development leading to the lack of rapid modernization and development as the intruding power interferes in insidious ways in the internal and external links of the country. This is the lesson of colonial interference of western powers in Asia. As Brendan Simms shows in his new book, Europe - Struggle for Supremacy 1500 to the Present, it is also the lesson of a different kind of colonialism inside Europe since 1500, where weaker states inside Europe fell behind with interference in turns by the imperial powers of France, UK, Austria-Hungary, Prussia and Russia. Poland, Finland, Czech Republic in the past and even Ukraine today are just some examples of what can happen when one loses sight of this principle. Poland and the Polish Commonwealth in the 19th century, Hungary right down to 1956, and China in the 1910-1930, India in the 18th and 19th century were weakened internally even after recognizing the problem, so that recognition of the problem is not an adequate condition to prevent countries from facing such foreign interference. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the Washington Post uses Frequently Asked Questions to give readers an understanding of the India China border conflict. The roots of the conflict lie in  China's claim to Tibet based on Chinese troops going to aid Tibet in 1792. This based on the Qing dynasty sending troops to aid Tibet after a Nepalese invasion of Tibet. Tibet and Nepal are neighboring countries in the Himalayan mountains,  Nepal has a border with Indian state of Bihar, and Tibet is north and northeast of Nepal, all in close proximity of several hundred kilometres from India but four thousand kilometres from Beijing near Korea and Japan. The Sino Nepalese war, called the Gurkha war in Chinese, was the result of a dispute between Nepal and Tibet over debased silver coinage supplied by Nepal to Tibet and Tibet's demand for compensation, as well as a dispute about salt supplied by Tibet to Nepal. Chinese forces were repelled by  the Nepalese Gorkhas, and eventually the conflict was settled with a peace treaty between Nepal and Tibet with Chinese mediation for the Tibetan side. When the British East India company intervened in the region in 1815 China was not present, and when Nepal and Tibet had another war in 1855 China was not present.  For the first half of the twentieth century Tibet printed its own stamps and was an independent country negotiating treaties with Britain. China's brief intervention in 1792 is the fact cited by China for its claim to Tibet. Crossing the high mountains to get to Tibet from China's western frontier was for most of history and during this 1792 intervention, a journey that took 3 or 4 months with yaks and mules. Because of the sheer logistics China was present only in a symbolic way in Tibet or Nepal, both regions far more autonomous and remote from China than say a Finland near Russia. It takes 5 hours to go from Helsinki to St Petersburg in Russia. This is about the distance between the border with Nepal in Bihar, India, to Tibetan border with Nepal. By contrast it takes four thousand kilometres journey from Beijing to Tibet and over steep mountain ranges and rivers which would took months of journey with mules and yaks all the way into the twentieth century.  Finland was part of Sweden till 1809 when it became part of Russian Empire, till 1917 when it became an independent country. The Soviet Union invaded Finland one more time before World War II and was repelled, but this is attributed to Russian fears that Finland could be used as a base for an invasion of Russia. Tibet was a buffer between the British Empire and China. Chinese Nationalists party and Communist party thinking may have changed after Japan's invasion of China in the thirties, making extending China's western frontiers to the borders of India as part of the new nationalist idea.  How else can one see Beijing in East Asia throughout its history suddenly at the border with India after its takeover of Tibet in 1950. The period in 1950 when India was just coming out of the partition and tackling millions of refugees on the border with newly created Pakistan.      ...

LyrArc Article Gist
It looks likely that after ignoring the chances of the former Iraqi army disappearing in the war and becoming insurgents the Bush administration military has now embraced them in the form of Awakening groups in Anbar province, initially with tribal groups with ageold traditions predating even Islam but now more dangerously in Baghdad itself with former members of the Baathist military. The tribal groups have limited loyalties but are not friendly to the Shiite led government and fight among themselves. But the Baghdad Sunnis who have already suffered from the Shiite led national police and militas are hostile to the Shiite led government. This is why the movement is growing so quickly as the war against the Americans is turning into an effort by Sunnis of all kinds of politics to turn their attention to the eventual conflict that they see with the Shiites. These Awakening Groups are numbering some 65000 and could quickly reach 100,000 and are watched suspiciously by the SHiite led army and police who refuse to integrate them into the army and police making them more likely to look to money from elsewhere once the Americans stop paying them. The Americans for their part are paying them $300 per month which will cost the US military budget some 234 million dollars and save a lot of American lives and give the US already convinced that this is quite possibly a civil war situation not entirely of its own making , an opportunity to have cover for a withdrawal that shows honorable intentions to Sunni and Shiite alike. The American officers clearly say that once they withdraw there won't be anybody to administer the contracts. Would other Sunni countries like the Saudis step in with economic aid. This is a possibility. This may be why some Iraqis are actually now going back home from overseas, adefacto partition is already taking place, And the Awakening groups only provide the safety to Sunnis in their Baghdad neighborhoods. from the Shiite led police and army. Why would'nt the US simply recognize the defacto situation call it partition or anything else, its the defacto situation. Is it because that leaves most of the oil in Shiite or Kurdish areas, Basra and Kirkuk? But in effect thats what the defacto situation is because most of the oil production as figures show is from the South Oil Company in the Shiite south. See the link to the recent article WSJ Dec 13, 2007, on oil production numbers from the South Oil Company and in the north. Of 2.5 million barrels 2 million barrels came from South Oil and 500,000 from the north. Not much of the oil money is going to the Sunni areas anyway and the national government members are not willing to even meet with the Sunni representatives in some areas. From the larger standpoint of oil supply in world markets and oil prices this means that the current increase supply into world markets will see two new phases. For a while there will be good supply as the insurgency settles down to prepare for a sunni led government in sunni areas under cover of US protection and withdrawal because violence against pipelines ect will diminish. The when the US withdraws this production will decline for a period as the sunnis and shiites form their own separate governments. After that as peace settles down on the region in a kind of coexistence of sunni and shiite governments oil production in Iraq will see a modernization and significant increase. As the new Shhite government will need a lot of money to fund reconstruction of its areas Iraq may hav an incentive to really bump up production like the Russians did afterthe Yeltsin chaotic years. Note that of the $2.4 billion oil investment budget for 2007, only 30% of this was spent in 2007 according to the link WSJ Dec 13, 2007, even though the industry is using dilapidated and old equipment and facilities and badly needs investment, so the impact of a real modernization and investment once the country's Shiiites and Sunnis have their own governments and coexist and peace settles in the region would be huge increase in oil supply. In this sense this is why its been so difficult to understand oil prices and supplies. Twisters have been thrown into the works for the Iraq area because of the civil war situaton and for Iran the nuclear situation and the rhetoric simply complicated matters even as Iranian production was declining and its internal demand growing. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A whole range of issues can be seen in the debt crises in developing countries. The margin for error shrinks with poor governance, lack of honest assessment and transparency for finances, wars and conflicts within or outside the countries, living beyond their means, lack of focus on development, infrastructure that is unproductive or unaffordable including some Belt and Road Initiative infrastructure at higher interest rates. Countries that are dependent on overseas remittances, tourism, that were hit hard by the pandemic have seen their finances further weakened reducing the margin for error even more to the point that the smallest tipping point can lead to huge crises. Once the finances are weak all it takes is an external tipping point that creates serious crisis. The war in Ukraine with shortages of wheat, fertilizer and skyrocketing oil prices acted as that tipping point. Because this was a major blow the crises have a level of magnitude that is more than a payments crisis. One sees this in South Asia in Sri Lanka and Pakistan, and in the Middle East for countries such as Egypt and Tunisia shown in this WSJ report. It is now not simply a crisis but a crisis of great magnitude because in the case of Sri Lanka and Pakistan this WSJ report says that both countries foreign exchange reserves have dwindled to the point where they can pay for only one or two months of imports according to central bank data, analysts and IMF. This crisis has affected countries that were seeing steady foreign investment such as Turkey for decades, then a sharp falloff in foreign investment with a change in the climate for foreign investment. The crisis has taken the form of high inflation, significant depreciation of currency that makes imports costlier so that shrinking revenues from loss of remittances, tourism, or other sources will now have less value in supporting import needs. Lack of a credible path can delay setting a path out of the crisis. The $1.5 billion fuel and electricity subsidy made by the prime minister of Pakistan in late February was done without IMF approval leading to the IMF program having to be renegotiated. Lack of national political and cultural consensus on a solution simply makes it that much more difficult to find the way through it. In this regard South Korea was able to tackle the 1997 financial payments crisis effectively because of a national consensus. The situation in Egypt- Egypt has borrowed $20 billion from the IMF since 2016., placing it second to Argentina in aid from IMF since 1980's.  In 2020 and 2021 Egypt' government spent more than 40% of its revenue servicing its debt, and is forecast to do the same in 2022. The situation in Tunisia- A shortage of sugar, flour, and other critical supplies, and government delaying wage payments to civil servants. The government got $400 million in financing last month from the World Bank and hopes to secure a lifeline from the IMF. Compared to the period between the 2 World Wars the two bright spots are China and India where lessons of the past of civil wars, religious or political conflict, and poor governance, lack of knowledge of how the western countries industrialized and modernized, was replaced with the conviction that drives patient effort, courage in the face of adversity, honesty, and humility to learn including from western countries that have forged their own path through the same difficult road. The most difficult experiences have offered lessons which were learned- for South Korea the Korean War and invasion from the north, China the civil war and Japanese invasion, for India the partition of India and million of refugees. Stagnation from stumbled efforts also taught lessons, the Great Leap Forward in China, the License Raj with corruption in India.       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Anton Harder in this Wilson Center publication of research uses correspondence between Jawaharlal Nehru and his sister Vijaylakshmi Pandit ambassador to the US in 1950, to show that the US made an offer for India to take a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. India had supported two resolutions on June 25, and June 27, first condemning the invasion by North Korea and second the organizing of a UN force of 29 countries to push back the North Korean invasion. Even though the US is not seen as actively engaging with India during that period and seeing through British eyes the colonial policies of encouraging  different powers in South Asia, that may not be true.  Who was India's foreign minister in 1950? Jawaharlal Nehru was both prime minister and foreign minister till 1964, which means there was less discussion of foreign policy than happens today during the Ukraine invasion with Jaishankar a career diplomat with 30 years experience, Rajnath Singh, and Mr. Modi, in talks with president Biden recently, and in further discussions Modi had with EU's Von der Leyen and UK's Boris Johnson, Kishida of Japan. Who was India's defense minister in 1950? Baldev Singh, a Sikh independence struggle leader was Minister of Defense for 1947-52 and tackled partition of Punjab and Kashmir issues. The rest of the years to 1957 when India faced the Chinese invasion of Tibet India's defense minister was also for most of the period Mr. Nehru, except Ayynagar in 1953, and Kailash Katju in 1955 and 1956. The controversial V.K. Krishna Menon was Defense Minister from 1957 to 1962, when Indian defenses were further neglected leading to the Chinese invasion of India in 1962, and his replacement by Yashwantrao Chavan. The purpose of this is to look back at what happened in earlier periods to understand where India stands today- and what choices it makes today. Clearly the US was looking for allies then and now. Nehru saw things from his own reading of history seeing China and India as both suffering from western invasion, not realizing that China's experience under Mao was different- that of Japanese invasion and bombing of China's major cities not just colonization of Hong Kong and other ports for trade under British trade based policies in 1850-1900. Thus a Communist Chinese version of China's defense involved taking over border regions such as Tibet putting China in direct and open opposition to India. Nehru never really grasped what was happening in Tibet and the war China fought against the Nationalists. American general Stilwell loved China deeply and had an understanding of its people as shown in Tuchman's account in her book Stilwell and the American Experience in China 1911-1945. Stilwell during that war had a better understanding of China, the strengths and weaknesses of Mao's China and of the Nationalists under Chiang, than Nehru. Some of these errors post 1950's and a concentration of foreign, defense and embassy positions in the person of Mr. Nehru and of Nehru family member such as Mrs. Pandit led to the Indian failure to act on Tibet and see it as see it for what it was -facing a Communist Mao led China that had fought the Japanese invasion as different from Bodhidharma's China of the history books. Bodhidharma's China will outlast Mao's China, yet it is Mao's China that India faces today. This also tells us that India has to think in new ways- as Lincoln said during a period when America was also making its own progress as an industrial nation in the 1860's. "The dogmas of the quiet past are not adequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise to the occasion. As our case is new, we must think anew, we must act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and we shall save our country." India's values are values of democracy heightened not just by Mohandas Gandhi's ideas with Hind Swaraj written in 1910 just as powerful in 2022, but also by the heights of Ladakh where elections are held in remote regions of the Himalayas. India's values are values that are also shared in the best that America has in its values and culture and in the defense of freedom.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Trofimov provides a much needed perspective to the situation in the Middle East in 2015. The title about redrawing borders on ethnic lines is misleading, as the essay's conclusions point to the need for various communities to find a way to live together without ethnic cleansing and intolerance in attitudes. With modernization different communities, Sunni and Shiite, already live together in the larger cities in the Middle East. Trofimov points out that the original intentions of U.S. president Woodrow Wilson were for diversity, and building modern institutions of government as the best way forward. This was not carried out by British and French rulers following struggles for independence against the colonial authorites. Following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in 1918, Britain and France were the dominant powers, and the boundaries were drawn up for Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Palestine, Saudi Arabia and other states, under the British-French Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916. Britain and France increased the role of minority groups to maintain their control following independence struggles in Iraq and Syria, a situation which helped Alawites gain control in Syria and Sunnis in Iraq. Shiite rule in todays Iraq has not lessened tensions, and intolerance only creates tensions in the broader region. Which makes redrawing boundaries around ethnic lines in a defacto acceptance of the current situation, not the lasting road to peace in the Middle East. In Iran, Russia with Britain was involved in the partition of parts of Iran into three zones, a Russian zone including Isfahan in the north, a British zone in the south east and a neutral zone in the middle. This happened in 1907 soon after a independence movement helped write a constitution in the 1901-1907 period, showing that many foreign powers were involved in the region, not just Britain and France. The discovery of oil in 1908 by a British company created the question of how to distribute the profits, which led to 70 years of disagreement and tensions in Iran. The resulting tensions exacerbated the conflict between religious authorites and Mossadegh in the early fifties with the fear of Communism, and exacerbated the conflict between the religious authorites and the government under the Shah by 1979 with misuse of oil wealth, ending with his overthrow and the supreme authority of the Ayatollah. Oil has proved to be as divisive, and wasteful of development opportunities, in Iran as it has been in Nigeria and other oil dependent nations. Multiple issues exist in the Middle East, not just the artificial redrawing of boundaries by the French and British, which makes the defacto redrawing of boundaries along ethnic divisions, not the answer but another step with its own dangers, along the path towards peace and economic development in the region. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Is time slipping away for Russia to restore what it sees as its special relationship with Ukraine, as Ukraine finds its own identity through its language and independent Orthodox Christian Church since 2019. This WSJ podcast report is by James Marson who lived in Kiev from 2007 to 2012, and Ryan Knutson, with the Archbishop of St Michael's cathedral in Kiev, and the editor of Elle magazine edition in Ukraine joining in.  To understand Ukraine one has to know that Russian is the language of the cities, which means people in Kiev speak Russian. People in the countryside Ukrainian. This is very unusual for a nation and it shows the condition of the country for centuries where intellectuals in cities dominated cultural and political life distant from the people in the countryside. For centuries Ukraine was dominated alternately by either Poland and Lithuania or Russia other than a period of 200 years around 1250-1400 when the Mongols were dominant. The peasants and countryside suffered greatly as in India and other parts of central Europe in the long history till the modern period in 1900.  Russians see their origins in the Kyivan Rus, a state bringing together the different ethnicities Ukrainian and Russian in the period 1000-1240 under the Byzantine Church in Constantinople. Kyiv, the modern capital of Ukraine called Kiev today being the capital of this state. This is the cultural connection that president Putin and Russians see as one they do not want to see drift away. After the Russian state drove out the Mongols in 1240 the northern provinces and Kiev became part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, and the rest became part of a new Russian state. After 1650 Ukraine became part of the Russian Empire and by 1800 with the partition of Poland was fully made part of the Russian Empire. Russian is now after 1800 the language of the intellectual class in Kiev and the cities, and Ukrainian language persists in the countryside. In 1804 Ukrainian is banned as a language and subject of instruction in schools. The end of the Russian Empire under the Tsars in 1917 ended the ban on the Ukrainian language and a period of respect of the cultures of the different soviet republics including Ukraine ensued. Putin has strong feelings on Kyiv, or modern Kiev, as the place where Russia as a country began. He wrote a 7000 word essay says this report in WSJ in 2010 on this relationship as he sees it.  Yet the period of protests in Kiev since 2010 has resulted in Ukraine building  its own identity as a nation. Magazines in the country are required to use Ukrainian for 50% of their circulation. People in Kiev now use Ukrainian instead of Russian as the sense of national identity is being revived. During 1917-1921 Ukraine fought a war with the Bolsheviks after the Russian Empire collapsed. This history is why Russia is acting now to push for Ukraine not drift completely away. It is also what makes Ukraine different from Poland which has cultural ties to Western Europe. It is why the US or Germany is not willing to go to war with Russia over Ukraine, as it would over Poland. It is also why Russia may not see war as the best option as about one third of Ukrainians say they will fight to defend their country, according to this report. The situation is complex and this is why both sides want to negotiate some way out in which Russia wants the US and NATO respecting its sense of connection with Ukraine in its history with Kyiv as the place Russian state started, and Russia not going further. Russia's tangible proposal is for no to Ukraine joining NATO or the European Union. The US and Germany want something else- the right of Eastern European nations that suffered from Tsarist or Soviet domination or German Hapsburg domination to finally be able to assert their own right of self-determination as democratic countries. This would include Finland. And also Sweden. Ukraine is not another small Eastern European country. Population is 44 million and it is the second largest by area in Europe after Russia.  Russia may also see the move to bring this up at this time as a way to unify the country against what it sees as threat from NATO. As Brendan Simms of Cambridge notes in his recent book -Europe, France went through a period after 1600 when it needed external danger as a way to unify the country, as much as unity of the country to fight external danger. The economic costs after building Nordstream II pipeline are to0 great for both Russia and Germany, and for the US and Russia during the pandemic, which means there is a real need to find a way out for all sides.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This NY Times editorial cites Defense Secretary Aston Carter's comments after the fall of Ramadi to Islamic State, that the Iraqi army units at Ramadi outnumbered the Islamic State militants but "lacked the will to fight." It points out the problem of the Iraqi government using Shiite militias which further aggravates sectarian tensions.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Iraqi army moves against Kurdish Peshmerga in northern Iraq after taking Raqqa from ISIS and Kirkuk from the Kurds. The fragile peace between the autonomous Kurdish region and the central government in Iraq broke down after the Kurdistan autonomous government held a referendum in all Kurdish controlled regions in Iraq, including parts taken from ISIS. The Kurds held the referendum for an independent state on Sept 25, 2017. This puts the U.S. in a difficult position as it supported the Kurds against ISIS, when the Iraqi army was disorganized in 2015-2016. Turkey also opposes the Kurds move for an independent state that could include parts of Turkey.

LyrArc Article Gist
Key points in Putin annexation speech are shown in the Washington Post. Putin presented an anti-western view that went over European history of colonialism in Africa and Asia. It presented a Russian nationalist view oof European powers and the US as trying to diminish Russia throughout history, that refers more to the British than for the country that emerged from British colonies in America with the idea that "all men are created equal." This was similar to a speech made at the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine that stated some of the same points. Putin referred also to the use of total bombing on Dresden, Hamburg and Cologne, by the US and Britain, and the nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the US in 1945, the US action in the Vietnam war. Putin's view- "I emphasize that one of the reasons for the centuries old Russophobia, the undisguised malice of these western elites toward Russia is precisely that we did not allow ourselves to be robbed during the period of colonial conquests. We forced the Europeans to trade for mutual benefit." About this version of history of European colonial powers - it is not entirely true, because as Cambridge historian Brendan Simms points out in his  book-  Europe- the Struggle for Supremacy  from 1453 to the Present,  Russia is itself throughout this period one of these European powers. Russia was also one of the powers present in China before the Boxer Rebellion in 1900, and in 1901 when the concessions were drawn from China in that period. Of the military force of 19,000 that entered Beijing in 1900 and crushed the Boxer rebellion of local Chinese calling for ouster of foreigners from China, Britannica.com shows that most of the them came from Russian and Japan, with lesser numbers from Britain, France, the US and Austria Hungary.  After suppressing the Boxers the foreign powers including Russia, Japan, Britain, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary and also the US asked for reparations and concessions on Chinese ports. Tsingtao went to Germany, The British and Russians getting concessions in Tianjin. Only America stated under president Woodrow Wilson that the reparations were excessive. Wilson converted American reparations into funding for Beijing's first modern university Tsinghua University, where  many of China's leaders were educated. During the period 1901 to 1945 the US opposed British colonialism in India and China. The US opposition with its Pacific fleet was strong enough to prevent further division of China among the colonial powers. In the 1940's the US under Franklin Roosevelt and his representative in China General Jospeh Stilwell carried out the campaign against the Japanese invasion of China so that the national integrity of China could be preserved. Stilwell called for reforms of the corrupt Chiang Kai Shek Koumintang government which rejected Stilwell's advice. Leading to its gradual collapse to the Communists under Mao-tse-tung, as the popular support shifted. It is now known what exchanges took place between Franklin Roosevelt and British governments including Churchill and Clement Attlee, and it can be said that the US under FDR was always putting pressure on the British Empire to free India from colonial rule. In 1942 there is the letter from Gandhi at Wardha to Roosevelt asking for help just before the Quit India movement, and Roosevelt's response is clear in the way he told Churchill by 1943 that America would never go along with Britain's unfair and impoverishing rule of India after winning the war. Roosevelt did not need Churchill's "growling" response, he had already put the British as a junior and much diminished partner. American help was crucial in convincing the British to quit India, which is also why it happened so quickly after 1945.  During the Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe after defeating Germany in 1945, much of Eastern Europe came under Soviet and Russian domination. Poland was partitioned between Germany then called  Prussia, Austria and Russia, as colonial powers in 1772, followed by further partitions. The roots of the Ukraine crisis in some ways involve Poland and Polish history, as Lviv is only 70 kilometres from Poland. As the view on the Ukrainian side reflects this colonial history of Russia and of Germany in western parts of Ukraine. America under Abraham Lincoln fought a great war of Emancipation to live up to the document of the Declaration of Independence of 1776 that "all men are created equal." The United States of America did not look to colonial possessions for its wealth because of the abundant land in a new continent and the early developments of the Industrial Revolution. Of rail, steamship, of mechanized agriculture and industrial production, in the period after 1850 that made America unrivaled in its industrial strength right upto the 1950's, and  which continues to the present day.  The industrial development of of Japan and South Korea, then of China, and now in India would not be possible without the  hand extended out by America to nations in Asia,  a benevolent hand in creating a tide that lifts all boats. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In the last 3 years foreign exchange reserves from Iraqi oil revenues have tripled to $22 billion, and there are an additional $8 billon in bank accounts in New York from unused funds from oil exports. Yet Americans are shouldering most of the burden for reconstruction of Iraq with $47 billion spent so far and both Senators Warner and Levin are raising questions about why Iraqi oil revenue cannot bear some of thses costs. These questions will grow louder as the US faces its own economic crisis from financial markets in turmoil. Meantime only 22% of Iraq's $6 billion capital budget for infrastructure expenditures has been spent so far. The infrastructure budget itself seems to be very small. After the war and years of decline under economic sanctions of the previous regime one would expect the needs to be huge, yet only $2 billion spent so far is very strange. Even the account here of bureaucratic bungling and loads of signatures required to prevent corruption, and the lack of a computerized banking system requiring the physical handling and moving of truckloads of cash seem strange considering the extraordinary amount of investment and huma effort the US has put into this war and reconstruction. Even this article fails to account for this bizarre situation of dire needs for infrastructure and for basic services of sewage, health and basic food supplies and housing going unmet while oil revenues and US funds go unused. Has this something to do with the militias, lack of security, insurgent fighting, and ethnic cleansing, and lack of agreement and decision power in the administration, that has created a bizarre situation in which nothing much happens. The oil revenues also complicate matters in that in any defacto partition and separate administrations of Sunni and Shiite areas and Kurdish areas the oil revenues need to be fairly divided so that it supports neigborly coexistence of the communities. This delays creation of separate administrations and accountability which could lead to dramatic improvement in services and rebuilding as accountability is missing today with every bureaucrat and politicain waiting to see what happens and what the future will look like....

LyrArc Article Gist
Scott Anderson of the NYT provides an indepth look at the Arab World and its fragmentation through the eyes of five people from each part of the Arab world- Egyptian, Kurd, Syrian, Iraqi and Jordanian. He says the countries that fell apart are precisely the ones that were formed by the British and the French, and Italy, following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire  using divide and rule policies- Britain in Iraq, France in Syria, and Italy in Libya- without much thought given to setting up viable nation states. This is why Iraq has a Sunni-Shia divide, Syria has similar divisions, and Libya with a largely tribal based structure, never really held together after the colonial powers left, and were held together only by strong dictators. Today's problems trace back to these historical events. This is complicated by the largely young demographic and restlessness of the people for change coupled with problems of underdevelopment in education, tribal loyalties, religious loyalties, and lack of political and social structures that could keep the countries together as change and transition to democratic processes took place. The role of the military further complicated matters in Egypt. Even Iran experienced these divisions because of the intervention of the great powers including Russia in Iran since 1900, leading to swings between liberal governments, foreign power supported governments, and a swing back to religious leadership as at present. This is one view of the region, others are presented by Ramadan (Oxford),  Bernard Lewis (Princeton), and leaders in Qatar and Emirates, other experts, some of whom point to the failure in leadership and the elites to find solutions to the problems of underdevelopment, in education, health, infrastructure, and aspirations for a voice in their governance. As the same divisions left by colonial powers affected Asia- in India, China, and Korea, but a larger vision of progress prevailed through crises and difficulties.        ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Sohrab Ahmari of the WSJ talks to Masrour Barzani at a forward base on the Syria-Iraq border in Dec. 2015, at a time when terrorist attacks in France and the U.S. are shifting public opinion in the UK, Germany and the U.S., as well as France.