LyrArc Article Gist
Ashraf Khalil describes the history of relations between the Muslim Brotherhood leadership and the leaders of secular parties with prescient remarks on how this creates problems in Egypt's transition to democratic government. The mistake made by the Muslim Brotherhood leaders, says Khalil, is to insist on a quick move to elections in November 2011, with the Brotherhood hoping to gain advantage in seats with its organization already in place compared to the secular parties which need more time to stage an organized effort. If this results in a lopsided result with the Muslim Brotherhood gaining more seats than its real strength, and the secular parties feeling left out in a revolution to set up democratic government that they led, Egypt's transition to democracy will remain flawed. This is now the stuation as the military which sets the rules and the Muslim Brotherhood have agreed on immediate elections. The Muslim Brotherhood's leaders have spent years being suppressed by the Mubarak regime, and lack the experience needed for such a difficult transition as Egypt faces, even with the best of intentions. Compressing the transition into a short time frame makes it even more difficult. Errors of judgement by Muslim Brotherhood leaders in not developing a consensus, and the uncertain role of the post-Mubarak military and police, compound the difficulties and risks....

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

LyrArc Article Gist
Five rules the editors of the WSJ say should be followed when working on cleaning up the banking system. A clear no, as Krugman and other experts point out is for the government to make the rather imprudent move to take on all the debts of the banks as in Ireland. A second rule is not to underestimate the size of the problem and delay action till the problem gets much worse, when its harder to deal with. ECB president, Mario Draghi, pointed out the problem at Spain's handling of Bankia bank as a clear example, telling the European parliament recently: "There is a first assessment, then a second, a third, a fourth. This is the worst possible wayof doing things. Everyone ends up doing the right thing, but at the highest cost." A third rule is to set clear rules about banks, who gets rescued and who gets closed and why- so that its not left upto the discretion of officials. On this rule Spain's outgoing Zapatero administration gets good marks from WSJ for settting clear rules to the cajas svings banks. A fourth rule applicable to Europe is to first setup the expertise and conditions for a European banking regulator before setting up a banking union and direct injection of funds by the EFSF into banks of individual countries. A fifth rule is to avoid creating even larger mega banks by consolidating failing banks with large banks, and continuing the government's implicit guarantee of the bank because it is "too big to fail" and creates systemic risk- this is the situation after action by the U.S. Federal Reserve, regulators and the U.S. Treasury....