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.


NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
It took Scholz one year after the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine to visit Ukraine. By comparison new German chancellor Merz visited Ukraine in three days after taking office. Merz in his first speech in parliament said- “In Ukraine, nothing less than the peace order of our entire continent is at stake. In this historic moment of decision, Europe must stand together more closely than ever before.” Starmer of UK and Macron of France had already formed close relations with Ukraine in 2025. Merz, Starmer and Macron now have a clear objective not to let Russia advance its objectives in Ukraine or Eastern Europe.  This report by NYT's Schuetze and Santora from Berlin and Kviv, shows the changing situation in the war. The war is now expected to to go on for another year as the Russian side sees its economic industrial base larger than Ukraine's industrial base letting it prevail over time. Russia has spurned the offer of US peace negotiations or tacitly agreeing to it but continuing the war with large missile attacks on Ukraine. In this situation Germany plans to help build industrial base in Ukraine for war effort and supply arms and equipment, financial help. Ukraine says it needs $30 billion to continue the war effort in 2025.   ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
France's foreign minister Michele Alliot-Marie is criticized for vacationing in Tunisia during Christmas, when demonstrations were taking place in the country. Ms. Alliot-Marie also took a flight on a private jet owned by a Tunisian businessmen connected to the family of the ousted President Ben Ali. Reports in the French press say France had approved the export of police equipment and crowd control devices to Tunisia as the demonstrations were taking place, and that the French ambassador in Tunis had no idea of the extent of anger of the Tunisian people. Sarkozy later replaced the French ambassador. Ms Alliot-Marie said that it was her intention to spare the lives of Tunisians by supporting better police tactics. The Socialist leader in Parliament, Jean-Marc Ayrault, asked Ms Marie to resign. French President Sarkozy supported Ms. Marie, who has held positions as minister of defense, interior and justice. French prime minister Fillon says that calls for her resignation were "a purely political polemic."...
New York Times Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Rappaport of the NYT asks how it is possible that the U.S. Treasury is critical of the EU Commission's ruling that Apple pay back $13 billion in taxes because of its low tax rate of .005% in Europe, when Treasury is strongly critical of tax avoidance. The negligible tax by Ireland, base of Apple operations, is seen as a state subsidy not available to competitors. It also, as the EU Commission says, does not correspond to economic reality because the revenues are mostly made outside Ireland. An arrangement that is basically a strategy of tax avoidance. Today the leading candidates for president, Trump and Clinton, the major parties, and Congress, all are critical of tax avoidance strategies which deprive Treasury of much needed revenues. Restoring upward mobility is a priority today and programs to provide tution free access to public colleges, healthcare access, and infrastructure development, require public funding. Then why is the U.S.Treasury critical of the EU ruling? It is because Treasury sees this as money that should be coming to Treasury not the EU. However Treasury has failed to make this clear. The Financial Accountability and Corporate Transparency Coalition's Clark Gascoigne, calls it very ironic. And other experts say the money would not be coming to the U.S. anyway unless a low tax rate induces Apple to repatriate profits to the U.S. One expert calls it hypocritical. Senator Schumer says he agrees with Paul Ryan that tax legislation for a low tax rate for repatriation of profits back to the U.S. should be the next step, so that an infrastructure fund can be setup. Senator Levin and transparency advocates sees the EU action as normal and to be expected, as the anti-establishment sentiment today comes from such dealings that create the impression that the system is rigged in favor of some corporations. ...
International New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
As part of the effort to become more competitive with Asian automakers, VW is using new strategies with labor to reduce costs. VW made a one-off payment of about 6,300 to each of 80,000 employees at its western German manufacturing plants. In return VW secured union agreement to change work schedules at the plants to 33 hours a week from 28.8 hours, without having to make a pay increase. This is part of concessions being made by labor as Germany tries to improve its competitiveness. VW's second largest shareholder is the German state of Lower Saxony, and VW makes many automobile parts in its German plants in addition to automobile assembly, making employment a major issue for industry, labor and government.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Wall Street Journal reporters Walker in Berlin, Forelle in Brussels, and Meichtry in Rome, reconstruct the events during critical days after the indecision and failure to reach agreement during the July summit of eurozone countries. This took the form of intervews with leading players and over 25 policy makers. What emerges are accounts of how Germany's Angela Merkel, daughter of a Lutheran pastor, and protege of Eurozone founder, former German chancellor Helmut Kohl, handled the crisis. Merkel was widely criticized in the media for indecision. What emerges is an account of a leader who took decisive action at key moments in the crisis- leading to the formation of new governments in Greece and Italy taking action to improve finances, and negotiations with banks represented by the International Finance Corporation leading to acceptance by banks of a 50% loss on loans to Greece to reduce Greece's unsustainable debt burden. Merkel also worked with the European Central Bank's departing president Frenchman Claude Trichet and new president Italian Mario Draghi to resist French president Sarkozy's efforts to have the ECB assume responsibility for the crisis through large scale buying of Italian and Spanish bonds; which was opposed by German public opinion as a backdoor way of having German taxpayers assume responsibility for European debt. Shown are three critical moments when Merkel intervened. In October 2011, after Italian prime minister Berlusconi reneged on promises to make pension and other reforms to improve Italian finances because of political resistance. He survived a parliamentary no-confidence vote by one vote. Merkel took the lead on October 20, by directly calling Italian President Georgio Napolitano on the phone, to urge him to take action for forming a new government in Italy. The result was Napolitano talking with all political parties to form a new government, leading to the formation of a government by a non-political figure respected in Italy, former EU commissioner Mario Monti. A day earlier, on October 19, French President Sarkozy met ECB president, Trichet, at an event honoring him as departing ECB president in Frankfurt's Alte Oper concert hall. Trichet, Merkel and Sarkozy met in a side room. Sarkozy asked for decisive help from the ECB for large scale buying of Italian and Spanish bonds to lower yields, which had reached 7% on Italian bonds. Trichet responded that the ECB's charter did not allow it to finance governments, with the meeting ending in a shouting match between the two leaders. On October 21, EU and IMF inspectors warned that Greece's debt was reaching unsustainable proportions and austerity measures alone would not work, unless the bondholders, the European banks, took losses of 60% on their excessive lending to Greece. At this point France agreed to the German position arguing for this level of bondholder haircuts or losses, fearing the prospect of large future bailouts that would jeopardize France's triple AAA credit rating. The July 2011 summit accord had only provided for 10% in losses for bondholders. On October 27, at a meeting that went past midnight, Merkel and Sarkozy called IIF head Charles Dallara, who headed negotiating for the banks, to EU headquarters in Brussels. Merkel handed Dallara an agreement containing the 50% bondholder loss demand, and told Dallara- "This is the last offer." Merkel was saying banks would be left with nothing if they rejected it and Greece defaulted. Dallara called bankers and the IIF accepted Merkel's agreement. The final moment that October came on October 31, when Greece's prime minister Papandreou said he would call a referendum on the bailout provisions and austerity measures demanded by the IMF, the EU and the ECB. Bond markets reacted negatively to the announcement fearing a rejection and a Greek default. The Group of 20 leaders was meeting in Cannes, France on Nov. 2, 2011. Papandreou was asked to come to Cannes for a pre-summit meeting. Here Merkel told Papandreou- "the real question" for the referendum was, "Do you want to be in the euro, or not?" Days later Papandreou, lacking support in Greece from political parties and opposition inside his party, submitted his resignation. A non-political figure respected in Greece, former ECB vice president, Lucas Papademos, was appointed prime minister to head a Unity government. Polls after the appointment showed three fourths of Greeks said that this was "a positive step for Greece," with Papandreou's party getting only 11% support and the opposition led by Samaras about 20%. The criticism leveled at Merkel is that Germany should take responsibility for debt throughout the euro area through the issuance of eurozone bonds or the ECB buying large amount of bonds of Spain and Italy. Merkel faced strong opposition inside Germany and from the Bundesbank to this idea. The other criticism was based on austerity measures worsening the finances of Greece because of a lack of growth in the economy, which is true; yet Germany may see the situation in Greece as taking a long time to be resolved in any event because of excessive and faulty financial management. For Italy and Spain putting finances in order was a necessity, and austerity measures should lead to short term sacrifice but improve prospects for the long term by returning the economies to growth. Another criticism is the installation of governments that lack popular or electoral support. As the polls in Greece showed the Unity government there has far greater support and public opinion blames the politicians for the huge mess. In Italy, Berlusconi was widely seen as losing popular support when he resigned. And in Spain Mariano Rajoy, the newly elected prime minister, was elected with a huge majority in parliament following winning in local government elections. Merkel also held her own party, the Chrisitian Democrats together at the recent Leipzig convention. Mario Draghi, was elected with German support to head the European Central Bank. He has long argued for better management of Italian finances as head of Italy's central bank. Draghi was able to support Merkel with carefully planned and managed actions. First to reduce interest rates to support economic growth in a slowing eurozone. Following this with the ECB's Long Term Financing Operation in late December 2011, to provide unlimited loans to European banks at 1% interest for three years in exchange for a broadened list of collateral deposited at the ECB. In a final twist in this drama, Charles Dallara, who was a key negotiator for the U.S. Treasury in setting up the Brady Bonds- that converted bad Latin American government debt owed to U.S. banks in the 1980's into long term debt with large reductions in principal owed and lower interest rates. This was in exchange for guaranteed repayment with 30 year U.S. zero coupon bonds. Dallara was now a negotiator for the banks to reduce the chance of the very same bondholder haircuts that he had negotiated in an earlier period to solve the Latin American debt crisis. Other players in the drama were Axel Weber, head of the Bundesbank, Germany's central bank, who resigned after strong and outspoken opposition to the ECB's large scale purchase of bonds of Greece, Italy and Spain. Jens Weidmann, his protege, who replaced him. And Jurgen Stark, German representative at the ECB, who also resigned in opposition to Germany assuming responsibility for eurozone debt. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Even China has not campaigned the way Canada, Mexico and British, American media have against DJT Tariffs because China knows it is basically about getting an even playing field when it is the only country with $1 trillion in trade in its favor in 2024, 12 times the Japanese high of $82 billion trade surplus in 2007. But why should China campaign when the American and British, German media are going to do the job for China? A simple quiz to K-12 would ask school children when is the last time a country has a $1 trillion trade surplus? Answer: Never. Greg Ip has written a few years back that the devastation of China outshoring of American factories and jobs was unlike the 1980's Japan trade invasion because of first China's size, second by the speed with which it happened at 10-14% Chinese GDP growth. There is a third Japan was an ally needing US for security and backed down, China's case is different it is challenging the US for control of the world economy and will fight this one over the long haul. Greg Ip of WSJ on the 53 countries asking to negotiate US Liberation Day April 2, 2025 Tariffs. These countries include Allies of the US in full support asking to negotiate Israel, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, India Allies of the US in partial support asking to negotiate Britain Allies of the US not in full support asking to negotiate Germany, France Allies of the US in the past campaigning against the US, asking to negotiate Canada, Mexico Not Allies of the US, not in full support, not campaigning against the US China A look at his list tells one only one thing, mostly all trading partners except for the $146 billion exports of the US which represents exports to China are the exports that are at risk if things don't work out on tariffs. This is what the media today WSJ added this last week to the NYT, Wash. Post and the BBC, Guardian of UK, German media will not tell the reader.  The DJT Tariffs and Tariff negotiations are Lighthizer Tariff negotiations which won the fight with Japan in the 1980's over unfair trade and gaining a level playing field. Lighthizer as Deputy US Trade Representative conducted the tough negotiations with Japan. He was USTR in 2016-2020 and his Deputy Jamieson is now USTR in 2025       ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Buried in the Pew Trust study in 2017 showing that only 9% of French, 24% of British, 36% of Germans and 37% of Americans feel their children would be better off financially, is the divide between college educated and those with a high school diploma. Only one third of Americans are college graduates, and 69% of them are satisfied with the economy's condition. Of the high school diploma holders or the rest of the population, only 55% think so. This is likely to take a long time to correct, particularly with the loss of good manufacturing jobs and drop in wages in manufacturing of the last two decades,  the need for more technology and skills in the jobs environment, failing schools and families in the social environment.

NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The UN badge and logo for sustainable development goals is becoming highly popular in Japan. It has 17 colors for the 17 Sustainable Development goals set by the UN- ending poverty, reducing inequality, improving education, other aspirations of the people of the world. It is something India, the US, Canada, Britain ,Germany, France and other nations should adopt in the way Japan has done. India has taken up specific goals, clean India, clean water, electrification, and made it available to all 1.2 billion people, in its own version of SDG. Introduced into Japan by 2016, this badge is now so popular that there it is everywhere says this report in NYT. In children's playgrounds, in comic books, on NHK broadcaster's video with about 1 million views, on Buddhist temple websites, and used by businesses. In 2016 it was made official national policy by Mr Abe's government and a task force established on them by the government. In 2017 it was adopted to its charter by Keidanren, the business federation.  In the US very few know about S.D.G.'s but in community oriented Japan it has been taken up with zeal. It is part of the conversation and one survey shows 40% of Japanese business were working towards the goals in 2021. It has been adopted by Education Canada Network and it is a good way to bring this idea in education to schools and colleges in North America, Britain, EU, India and China, as well as Africa and Latin America, other parts of Asia. In India some of the SDG's are already the focus of campaigns by the Modi government Goal 0  Clean Nation one that has not been coined yet one that is called Clean India or Swacch Bharat Goal 1 Zero Hunger was taken up during the vaccination for covid campaign to get free foodgrains and vegetables to all 1.2 billion people. Goal 2  Clean Water and Sanitation or Har Ghar Jal getting clean tap water to all rural homes by 2024. Goal 3 Infrastructure, Industry, Exports Goal 4 Renewable Energy The sequence is different from the UN SDG's. The difference is it is a goal set for universal meaning everyone and delivery meaning by a specific date, and the priorities are set in the numbering. The Indian SDG campaigns under the Modi government and at federal and state levels are unprecedented in history for a population of this size, and now present a model for all nations in Asia, Africa, Latin America on how to go about doing the SDG's in practice. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Many of the 255 Comments on this article in the NYT say it is misleading or grossly misleading title. Michael Crowley of NYT quotes Wertheim for his conclusion that there seems to be a sense that the world is out of control, there is chaos under president Biden. This is subtly presented and clearly wrong. Wertheim is the author of a book that questions America's exceptionalism, and says "isolationism" was somehow concocted by policy makers such as Eisenhower and Dulles, both Republicans for a postwar world built on American supremacy. What Crowley and Wertheim do is put their very idea of asking questions about policy which is a part of the discussion into misrepresenting through misinformation about what happened. Biden has acted with courage to close wars no other president not Reagan/ Rumsfeld who started the conflict with Iran by arming Iraq's unprovoked war on Iran, not Bush who initiated the war in Afghanistan, not Obama and Trump who did not close the war in the mountains around Kabul that is a "graveyard for Empires" - the Maratha Empire in India in the 1700's that opened the door to British rule in India, not the British Empire wisely staying out of it, the Soviet Union beginning its decline there, and the US mired in it similar to the Soviets. Crowley/Wertheim are only making things worse- Netanyahu was emboldened by the former president and made a major security failure. Putin miscalculated in Ukraine, Biden simply acted in the way any wise American president would -strengthened NATO with Finland and Sweden, providing reasons for Russian restraint yet without escalating the conflict. To say this is chaos is to misinform and misrepresent, and favor the very Supremacy that former president Trump proposes as policy based on US power. By contrast Biden' approach is peace through strength from building close relations between partners in Europe and Asia, not provocation or supremacy. Wertheim is only one voice in a larger discussion not the authority he is presented as. For Wertheim to say "isolationism" was a bogey and point to 1950 as the point when it was created is simply wrong. It existed in some form from the early days of the Republic. Washington was an advocate of not involving the fledgling Republic in foreign entanglements of France even though it was an ally. It is not that response to isolationism is the cause of America embracing the role of leading the Free World as it is now. It is simply the situation leaders faced. Truman faced it when Soviets planned insurgencies in Turkey and Greece which would not exist as democracies today without Truman. And across Eastern Europe Hungary 1956 Ike acted cautiously. Czechoslovakia 1968 LBJ Johnson acted cautiously already in the wrong war with Vietnamese nationalism.  ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
All sides had to make concessions to reach a new agreement on a restructuring of Greece's debt, and new terms for loans to Ireland and Portugal. The agreement was reached after negotiations between France, Germany, the ECB, and eurozone countries with a declaration issued on July 21, 2011. The powers and financing of the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) were expanded to be the main mechanism for channeling EU funding to reduce the burden of Greece's debt. Germany will provide new funding and be open to additional commitments, something German chancellor Angela Merkel had resisted since the beginning of the crisis in 2010. Earlier funding had come with high interest rates and only when the situation had reached a crisis, with Germany insisting on the punitive rates and conditions as a way to discourage countries from taking advantage of cheap borrowing. In exchange for commitment of German funds Ms Merkel had insisted that banks and private creditors share in the losses. Private bondholders resisted but finally agreed to take a loss of 20% of principal on a small portion of the bonds. Their larger concession was to take lower interest rates and extend the maturities to 15 years and 30 years on new bonds which are guaranteed by the EU. The specific terms of the agreement are as follows: The EFSF and the IMF will lend Greece 109 billion euros over 3 years at 3.5%. Private creditors including German and French banks will "voluntarily" turn in their old bonds for new ones that mature over 15-30 year periods. These new bonds include 15 and 30 year Greek bonds with varying coupons. Some of the bonds would have a 20% discount on principal. EU leaders say the private sector contribution amounts to 37 billion euros through 2014 and 106 billion euros through 2019. Another part of the program is for the EFSF to buy back some of the Greek bonds on the secondary markets, which would mean Greece would now owe a smaller amount to the EFSF on these bonds. The EFSF will now have additional financial support from Germany and other EU countries and be authorized to provide aid to countries before a crisis situation arises. It would also have power to buy Greek bonds at prices on secondary markets to reduce the Greek debt burden. Ireland and Portugal are also assisted in the agreement. The interest rate for EU aid to Ireland and Portugal is taken down to 3.5%. Ireland is paying about 6% on the EU portion of its 67.5 billon euros bailout and efforts to reduce the rate were resisted earlier. The main theme behind these concessions and provisions is to give Greece, (and Ireland and Portugal) a chance to grow. High interest rates came under strong criticism because it only increased the size of the debt burden of these countries with a shrinking economy and high unemployment. The failure to come together behind a broad and sensible agreement with all parties making serious concessions, the EU, the ECB and the political leadership in these countries especially Greece, was undermining confidence in the euro and the eurozone itself. By mid-July Italy and Spain were feeling the effects of contagion in the financial markets, U.S. debt ceiling negotiations were unsettling global financial markets, the pressure was intense to come up with the workable agreement achieved on July 21, 2011. ...
SPIEGEL ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This piece in Der Spiegel points out that Brexit may be an opportunity if European leaders recognize that there can be different levels of unity, and that different countries in the EU can advance at their own pace with Germany and France providing a core group. There is no longer the need for continual enlargement of the European Union as has happened before. It also offers a time to take some deep breaths and reflect on the progress so far and where it has come short, what to do about it, such as the bureaucracy that has grown in Brussels, the different views on immigration, and public sentiment. Actually the whole progress towards the European Community, and then the European Union has evolved over time. In the immediate postwar years, after one setback Adenauer once said during the difficult negotiations in 1951-52 between France and Germany to set up the European Coal and Steel Community, predecessor of the European Community and the European Union- "arme Europa, arme Europa," (poor Europe, poor Europe). The Dutch and Belgian delegates had strong differences for the headquarters for the ECSC- Turin was rejected, Liege and Brussels were proposed, until Monnet was made head of the High Authority of the European Coal and Steel Community with headquarters in Luxembourg. Monnet himself considered stepping down a couple of times because of differences, and the Editor of Le Monde described Monnet's plans for European integration as "a leap in the dark." This was the first of many difficult steps in the evolution of the European Union. Nationalist feeling was nothing new, as the Gaullists opposed Monnet's drive for European unity when it differed from their ideas. Still Monnet persevered and progress took place every ten years as it must now.  ...
The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A senior Indian diplomat, and former ambassador to China, Gautam Bambawale, says China's action in the June 15 clash at Galwan Valley was the worst violence since 1967. He sees it as a premeditated and well thought out action. His view is that India's relations with China will deteriorate further. That this was an action by the PLA to take territory to what it sees as the LAC or border. For small tactical gains he says "China has strategically lost India." This will impact trade and other relations going forward in his view.  Nothing of this sort was expected says Bambawale. All the agreements put in place since 1993, everything for tranquillity at the border, all the mechanisms, have now collapsed. Bambawale has provided a very lucid and clear account of the relations and the border issues. He goes on to say that Chinese observers have given reasons for the Galwan clash with PLA- that India should stay away from the US and other democracies such as the European Union. Some reflection shows that the opposite has happened. And further reflection would show that the same situation was repeated in the period of transfer from British Empire to Republican India, and from Nationalist China to Communist China from the period 1947 onwards. Different perceptions and different leaderships that gave the perception of gaps between the two countries. In the 1950's after the Korean War Chinese perceptions about India could have led to the incursions that brought China to the borders of India in 1950, similar perceptions of gaps in development and capabilities could have led to the conflict in 1962. From 1993 peace prevailed with India after China entered the World Trade Organization under president Clinton in 2001 following a 10 year effort. Because the focus in China was on development after a series of crises, internal sense of a widening technological gap with the US and Europe, disagreements with the Soviet Union, and the experiments with market economy, internal struggles for democracy. With that period coming to a close as the new trading relationship has led to working class losses in factory jobs in the US, China is faced with protecting its economy as it and the US look at changing supply channels and how it affects both countries. It is a critical time for China as it faces governments in US, France, UK and Canada determined to protect their own interests in manufacturing jobs, renewing supply channels, and in technological advancement. The response is similar to that in 1962 when seen from the Communist party perspective as a gap has opened up with India following China's progress in the 30 year trading relationship with the US and Europe. That gap and the difficult situation China faces today with the US and EU in trade and technology has brought forward the Galwan clash and future clashes in Ladakh and at the border.  As Mr. Jaishnkar, India's Minister of External Affairs as well as former ambassador to China,  has pointed out this is a very different aspirational India that China faces. The same kind of grassroots development that happened in China and rapid pooling of capital, human resources and technology inputs for development is taking place in India, and will continue for the next two decades, quickly bridging any gaps in modernization between the two countries. The difference between a youthful population in India and aging population in China and Japan, is likely to add another dimension. China's Buddhist culture that came from India is not likely to go away, more likely is that China will see a revival of Buddhist ideas of wellness and living more as culture than religion. The experience with British colonialism that prevailed both in India and China, and which from its base in India caused so much grief to China during the Opium wars will recede from memory. Extending borders from historical memory of Japanese incursions into border areas in Manchuria could have led leaders after 1950 in China to extend borders to remote areas in the Arunachal region of India and communist theory books may have created the perception of defensive moves. In the context of an aspirational India similar to China, and no real intention on the part of India to extend itself in any way to China's provinces in Sichuan, this extending of borders as a defensive move will be seen as stemming from memories of Japanese incursions in the 1930's, but simply costly and not relevant in any way to China's own aspirational development and progress. ...

Putin Blinked

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman says Putin acted emotionally by letting impulsive reaction to the anti-Russian feelings in western Ukraine determine Russian policy following the collapse of the Yakunovych government. The months long Russian response in Crimea and eastern Ukraine may have secured Russian pride at a large cost. This includes the damage to the relationship with Germany, seting the EU on a path to look for other sources of energy to reduce dependence on Russian gas, a natural gas deal with China in which the price was kept "a secret" and may have provided China with a bargaining edge considering the timing of the negotiations. The most severe impact is in the loss of confidence within Russia, reminding the Putin administration that though the economy has grown in the Putin years it is still fragile and connected to the global economy. The capital outflows of the magnitude of $160 billion at a time of high inflation and sharply slowing growth actually put at risk the gains Putin and Russia made in the last decade, and risk the future agenda to improve the standard of living of the Russian people eyond the major cities. Putin's own assessment would eventually be closer to that of Alexei Kudrin. Kudrin, finance minister in Putin's previous term, correctly saw the dangers of impulsive policy concentrated in one figure, and the suppression of other voices including the opposition needed for Russia to be governed in a manner similiar to western Europe, to attain a similiar level of economic progress and standards of living. In today's global economy even the U.S., France, UK and states inside Germany need foreign investment for jobs, new ideas and technology, and the opinion expressed on media television and internet shapes investor sentiment to a larger degree than fully understood....
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The French system what works and what does not work compared to the Anglo-Saxon systems of Britain and the USA. Health care works, public transport and high speed rail works, nuclear energy and the energy industry works, education works for small elite universities but fails in the larger system. The large public projects are executed well, and France has done well with its long tradition of the state building infrastructure projects. But when it comes to individual initiative and starting up new companies such as in computers and high tech of that kind, France does not do so well. And the state collects a larger proportion of taxes than in other countries to finance these benefits. France is also good at rule making, which serves it well in controlling the kinds of bubbles that regularly hit the Anglo-Saxon countries. And with 21% of jobs of all workers in France in the public sector and government, with 49% when one includes related sectors protected from economic downturns, the French workers are much better protected than workers in Britain, USA and other countries from economic downturns. Unemployment stays high in upturns and at 8%, and in downturns does not go too far above 8%....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
German plan takes shape Saturday as Finance Ministers of the 14 eurozone countries meet in Paris after the G7 meeting in Washington. It will include capital injection into banks in exchange for equity stakes, but further details are being worked out including the size of the plan.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Hungary has only 17 billion euros of foreign exchange reserves but has to repay 27 billion euros to foreigners in the next 12 months, accordin to Barclays Capital. Hungary may need help from the IMF or the EU. Most Hungarians borrowed in Us dollars and Swiss francs and now that the currency has lost 21% ofits value just this month repayment is getting harder. As investors withdraw money from emerging markets the value of their currencies is dropping quickly. Even increasing interest rates is not helping as Hungary raised rates from 8.5% to 11.5% but the foriint dropped a further 3% on October 22, 2008. The Ukrainian, Polish and Turkish currencies have all seen a declilne of 20-30% in a few months and this makes debt burdens harder to repay. Hungary, Poland and Turkey all ran up large foreign debt in recent years when credit was easy.
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Modi's success in tackling problems of electricity development in Gujarat state and the model for India, as a new Modi administration is elected for India in 2014. Other areas that are the focus for development include high speed rail and transportation, other infrastructure development, creating new jobs in manufacturing. Modi made three trips to China in the last decade as a four term chief minister of Gujarat state (similiar to a governor of a U.S. state), and has adopted a China type focus on infrastructure development and manufacturing for the western state of Gujarat, which was part of the old Bombay state in British times. Mumbai, the new name for the old British settlement of Bombay on the west coast, is about 300 miles south of the major Gujarat city of Ahmedabad, at one time a major textile manufacturing center. Mumbai and commercial minded people from Gujarat occupy a role similiar to Shanghai in India's economic development. Under British times trading minded Gujaratis settled on the east and southern coast of Africa, in the Persian Gulf, with retail businesses. Of India's two largest companies the Reliance Group made its early start in textiles in Gujarat in the seventies, set up by a young emigrant who returned from the Persian Gulf. The Tata Group which owns Land Rover was set up by a Parsi immigrant community in Gujarat. Its founder Jamshedji Tata set up India's steel industry under the British at the turn of the century. The Parsis settled in Navsari, Gujarat, immigrating from Iran and other parts of the Persian Gulf centuries ago. When the media talks of Modi's origins as a tea seller's son, one has to take this in the context of the origins of people such as Reliance founder Ambani who was the son of a schoolteacher from a rural village in Gujarat. With about a 1000 mile coastline facing the Persian Gulf, Gujarat has been known to engage in the textile trade long before the arrival of the Portuguese and the British in the 1600's, and before the Muslim period from the 1300's. Many Gujaratis settled in Mumbai and are a key part of the commercial, financial center in the city. Just as Britain with its commercial centre of London evolved over centuries with commerce affecting attitudes towards democracy, free media and capitalism compared to more feudal France, Gujarat and Mumbai has evolved in a similiar manner compared to other states in the north of India. With all the media infomation and misinformation on Modi's mishandling of communal riots little has been said of the unique position of Gujarat and Gujaratis in the industrial development and modernization of India. Compared to other parts of India historically there is a greater degree of tolerance in Gujarat for other communities, similiar to Britain's compared to France and Spain, because of this commercial outward looking orientation for new ideas. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A complete breakdown in negotiations between the U.S. and Russia happens after Russia continues its bombing campaign in Aleppo. About 275,000 people and 100,000 children are in the war torn area in northern Syria. The U.S. had called on Russia to stop the bombing campaign, but Secretary of State Kerry failed to persuade Russia to commit to a ceasefire. The result has been international criticism of the Russian role in the war, and speculation on what president Putin sees Russia gaining from this intervention in DW.com and other sites. 

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Russians vote in 2021 parliamentary elections. With 30% of votes cast the United Russia party of Mr. Putin wins 45% of votes cast, followed by the Communist party of the Russian Federation with 22%, and the Liberal Democratic party getting 8%. Russia has mixed voting system with half the seats directly elected from party lists, and the other half assigned to individual candidates. United Russia had 334 seats out of total 450 seats in the outgoing parliament. Putin will need over 300 seats in the new parliament to get the two thirds majority to enact changes to the constitution. Putin needs this to extend his current term which ends in 2024.  Putin draws most of his support from the older part of the population that has seen the hardships imposed following the collapse of Communism around 1990. This led to collapse of the ruble currency, increase in poverty, an effort by oligarchs to capture state enterprises, and a chaotic period for law and order. Shockingly during that period even life spans of Russians declined as reported in the WSJ. Liberals who supported the shift to democracy had not anticipated all the ill effects of introducing capitalist free market systems in such a sudden and free fall way. Such sudden shifts to free markets are now better understood and seen as the wrong way, as western capital markets fail without inbuilt protections, safety net for workers and retired people, and are subject to serious distortions if no vigilant authority exists. This is in reality not a free market but a market captured by the few, in the interests of the few. Once this was clear retired people, pensioners, military, law enforcement, and liberals realizing what had happened shifted support to United Russia founded by Mr. Putin. Mr. Putin faces the typical situation faced by incumbents over long periods where there is a sense of the need for change. Yet the pandemic and other economic crises that could happen in the event of mismanaged economy are never really too distant for countries such as Russia, China, India that are developed but yet have not the strong industrial base of US, Germany, France. Such economic crises including the ruble currency and Russian energy companies were better managed under Putin than under the chaotic period following the collapse of communism and the introduction of so called "free markets" that were anything but. During the recentfree fall in oil prices Putin was able to manage a transition period with the help of president Trump who negotiated a price for oil with the Saudis to protect US shale oil workers and companies, as well as Russian workers and oil companies. As a result Russians particularly young people look for alternative places to vote for opposition parties such as Liberals, Communist party, and other parties. But the majority of Russians including those working for state energy and other state companies tend to stay with Putin's choices for state, regional and federal administration and for parliament. Nationalist spirit also provides additional support as Putin has restored Russia's status as one of the important nations in the world. Some missteps such as interference in US elections have led to a loss of some of this international influence, yet even president Biden understands the situation in Russia and is willing to work with Putin with new rules of conduct Under the Russian system about 70% of the laws are not made by parliament but are done by the government and the administration of the president and then go through parliament. In addition to parliamentary vote there are 6 governor races and three races for heads of regional republics. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Healthcare, climate change, pensions and social benefits, are three issues uppermost in the minds of German voters. Three million new young voters most of them only about 2 years old when Merkel started 16 years in office, look for change. They are well informed and for these young voters climate change is the most important issue. DW.com shows three voters and how they plan to vote. One voter has cast a mail in ballot for The Greens party. The second voter will vote for the Greens. Both because of climate change concerns. The third voter Thurid says her mother is a geriatric nurse and is not vaccinated. She is vaccinated but had talks with her mother and understands her worries about vaccination. She will vote for the Free Democrats because they oppose compulsory vaccination. The three leading parties for young voters are the Greens party, the Free Democrats, followed by the Social Democrats all in the range of 16-18% of support. The Greens have sent out 2 million brochures to voters. Out of 60 million voters in a German population of 80  million, 3 million is only 5% of the vote. What makes a difference is that it is consistent with the general direction of voters young and old, all looking for change in Germany as the CDU party attracts only about 20% or one fifth of German voters. Social Democrats Scholz is way ahead of Christian Democrats Laschet in how voters view each candidate. Will German voters be well informed enough to make a decision based on their desire for change after 16 years of Merkel or will the CDU bringing back in the last days of the campaign the old fears that the communist Left party would somehow find its way into the government using the Greens as a way in- this is a question for German voters. In1994 during the Cold War with Soviets Kohl used this to keep the Social Democrats out and Greens out and formed a coalition with the FDP. Yet today Merkel has grown close to both Russia and China and away from the Western alliance in a way that was unimaginable under Adenauer who helped build the new Federal Republic of Germany after the war. Merkel refuses to even immediately accept a call from a new US president Biden, American president who is closest in style and temperament to Harry Truman who faced off the Soviets in Berlin in 1948.  The FDP opposes a wealth tax or any form of taxes in which the wealthier pay a fair share of what is needed to build crumbling infrastructure in Germany neglected in the Merkel years. In Germany social and economic disparities have grown during the pandemic with poverty increasing during the pandemic as has happened throughout Europe and the world. The US is already committing to increase taxes for the upper incomes. This is where voters have a choice- do nothing with infrastructure, health or climate change or do something by increasing taxes. The choice is now before the German people.  With this question comes a choice for western civilization, with the recent election in the US, and two elections in Germany and then France. Will it look with optimism to the future or will it huddle up in a deeply cautious and slightly pessimistic view of the world that is embedded in Angela Merkel's cautious vision that ended up only responding to crises- some self inflicted as in migration policy, and even self inflicted in tackling euro problems created in the euro currency's faulty design. In fiscal policy as in migration policy Merkel has reversed her position- by supporting European solidarity. Will Germans vote for optimism or never ending caution? Are lessons learned?     ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
During a public dialogue during the federal government's open day German Chancellor Scholz takes time to go over the origins of the war in Europe as he understands it. Of Russia acting "clearly with the intention of conquering its neighboring country," in an imperialist manner. Here is what he said- On Nato During talks before the war started in February when he met Putin in Moscow Scholz assured Putin that Ukraine would not join NATO "in the next 30 years." NATO was never a threat to Russia even though Putin says NATO's increasing eastward expansion was to the detriment of Russia's interests. On the origins of the war in Europe- Scholz says Putin launched the war for "completely absurd reasons." During his talks with Putin for example he says Putin told him that Belarus and Ukraine should not be independent states. "This is a war that Putin, Russia, started, clearly with the intention of conquering its neighboring country. I think that was the original goal." "Putin actually had the idea of swiping a felt-tip pen across the European landscape and then saying, 'This is mine and this is yours.' " Something Germany could not accept. Scholz condemns Putin's imperialism. He compares Russia's actions to the early days of imperialism. Scholz was reported to be reading Cambridge historian Brendan Simms book Europe- The Struggle for Supremacy in Europe from 1453 to the Present, before the war started. Simms shows a Europe that fought intermittent wars for supremacy between European powers Spain, Britain, Dutch, French, Germany, Austria- Hungary, Russia, Sweden over most of the period 1450 to 1950. The last part of the period was marked from 1850 to 1900 by an openly imperialist land grab for territory in Africa and Asia between Britain, France, Japan and Germany.  The period 1950 to 2000 marked by the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union and China.    On planning for the war in advance- DW.com reports that Olaf Scholz is convinced that Putin planned this war long before the Russian invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24. On the future of the war- Scholz says he will not end the dialogue with Putin. Scholz and Germany, Biden and the US want to show that the imperialist type of expansion into neighboring states is no longer accepted, not for Russia or China. Scholz says Russia is currently engaged in gaining territory in eastern Ukraine, but it is not certain that it will stay that way, so giving in is not a sensible strategy.  Ukraine needs the Black Sea ports and the area around Kherson on the Dnieper river to maintain its economy through exports of foodgrains. There is international consensus that these exports are essential to most of Africa and other parts of the world. The war in the remaining part of 2022 into the winter is being fought in this area. Another area of international consensus is that of the refugees mostly women and children in other parts of eastern Europe, and the displaced people within Ukraine moving from the east and south to the west. For the first time the US and Germany are providing Ukraine with the air defense systems that it needs to protect refugees, something that was missing for the many early months of the war leading to millions of refugees inside and outside Ukraine.       ...
Institut Montaigne Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The head of the Germany Program at Institut Montaigne in Paris, France, Robinet Borgomano looks at the renewal of German society under the ideas of "respect" put forward by Olaf Scholz of the SPD party. What does Olaf Scholz see as the main issue of our time? - Borgomano says it is the disintegration of European and American societies under the combined effects of technological progress and globalization. Where does Scholz get his ideas of "respect" for workers and families? Isn't Mr. Biden sharing the same ideas in the US? The SPD party got its start at the Bad Godesberg Convention in 1959 when it embraced the idea of a social market economy as a party of the people. Wily Brandt as chancellor from 1969 to 1974, whose personal struggle against the Germany of World War II was based in the Nordic countries, embodies best this renewal aspect of the SPD. Scholz sees his role as renewal of Germany, Europe, hand in hand with Mr. Biden's renewal efforts in the US on the same basic ideas of respect of the dignity of the worker and families that in Germany were seen with Wily Brandt and in the US with Harry Truman who followed FDR. Scholz rejects the overemphasis on the of merit in German society, European society, or American society, in the way it has taken shape in the last fifty years. Scholz cites Michael Sandel's Essay "The Tyranny of Merit" rejcting it because it makes a case for inequality based on merit, on capital allocation on an implied idea of merit of free markets managed in damaging ways for personal interest. It is wrong because it robs the worker and families of the basic dignity that is the right of every individual and of every person. It is wrong because it makes a false justification for growing inequality, and makes those who do not succeed feel that it is their fault. Meritocratic elites have made the idea that those who work hard and play by the rules get all the benefits and wealth even if the rules were first set in a way that benefits them alone. When these rules become implicit they are rarely questioned as happened in the period after 2000. It is not just in Europe and America that this happens, and not just in the 20th century.  Strange but true- During the 1850's in the heyday of industrialization in Britain the Ethnological Society of Britain justified the inequality between the British and Indians in the British Empire by saying Indians were inferior in exams and did not have the motivation or the aptitude and energy to excel in the way British students did. Dadabhai Naoroji, the first Indian member of the British parliament in Mr. Gladstone's Liberals singlehandedly took up the job Sandel and Scholz and Mr. Biden are taking on today to restore the respect of workers, farmers, and families in America and Europe and in all parts of the world. Sandel goes on to say what Scholz has heard clearly- "the parties that made the offer of upward mobility to workers and families have missed the insult implicit in it to a large number of working people." In a way it is going back to the roots, to the founding fathers in America who said in the 18th century that "all men are created equal and they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, and among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," -nothing less.   ...

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