LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ gives the background and positions taken by Patriarch Krill of the Russian Orthodox Church, and his support for the war in Ukraine as part of Russian lands nationalism. Russian lands nationalism is an idea that comes from the beginnings of the Russian version of Christianity that had its origins in Kviv Ukraine in the 10th century. Patriarch Krill has had a varied role questioning some some state policies and then backing off and supporting the state says WSJ. In 2011 patriarch Krill stood up for protesters critical of manipulation in parliamentary elections that year. Patriarch Krill grew up in the years of Soviet rule and was 24 in 1970 when he began his work in the church. He was rector of a seminary in Leningrad by 1984 and after being critical of the Soviets and war in Afghanistan was sent to Smolensk says this report in WSJ. After he returned he worked with the Soviet state, and after voicing concerns in 2011 about parliamentary elections described as manipulated he has supported the Russian state as it becomes assertive about Russian lands nationalism. To understand the Orthodox Church in Russia one has to know its presence in the post Soviet period. About 63% of Russians belong to the Orthodox Church. It also includes Ukrainians. After Crimean invasion by Russia the Ukrainian Orthodox Church that makes up one third of the Russian Orthodox parishes was recognized as a separate church by Patriarch Bartholomev of Constantinople. Patriarch Bartholomev and Pope Francis the two leaders of the eastern and western churches in Constantinople and Rome have been critical of Patriarch Krill and his support for the war and the idea of Russian lands nationalism. Since the war some parishes in Russia have signed a letter opposing the killing of brothers in Christ and one parish leader was fined $500 for his statements. There is now intense debate among Russians about what this war means in bringing conflict on brotherly peoples about their preferences in 2022 for aligning with Europeans in the western part of Europe. For most of Europe in the 21st century there is a big change, in the countries near the Baltic sea in Northern Europe, in countries in the middle of Europe, in Eastern Europe, the 21st century is seen as a time when states and peoples are making their own choices about freedom and what their preferences are particularly the young people. They no longer understand or conform to ideas of the earlier period or centuries. And this is what has made Ukrainian young people oblivious about what Russian lands nationalism means and its relevance today. Buddhism is today not prevalent in South Korea a democratic state and in China a Communist state in the way it existed for centuries. For it to be relevant people need to begin to believe in it as in Japan or Sri Lanka or Thailand. In the 21st century young people are making different choices and this may well be where the Ukraine war shows that people's choices count particularly in the 21st century, and it has little to do with the west or the US or NATO or even Russia. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ report traces the development of rail, trucking, container shipping and forklift use in Germany, Russia and the US. The World Bank Logistics Index shows Germany ranking first, the US 14th, China 26th, Russia 75th out of 160 countries.  Russia's military relies on a supply system that uses crates instead of container shipping, not much use of forklifts, and relies on rail and conscript labor. During the invasion of Ukraine in April Russian supply lines that did not control rail failed to supply forces leading to slow progress. Because of dense rail lines in the eastern Donbas region Russian supply lines have worked to sustain advances. About 750 miles of rail lines have also been repaired by a special force set up for this purpose.  In a larger sense the problem of logistics and supplying front lines remains. This report shows the contrast between the development of Russian logistics and American logistics described by military experts in the US. The Russian system evolved in the early years of the 20th century based on conscript or free and abundant labor compared to the US where labor was scarce and costly. Automation progressed rapidly with American business taking up use of forklifts and containers during the 1940's extending to its use in the military. During the Vietnam war Cam Ranh Bay US bases were converted to modern container and forklift use. Russia continued through the sixties till today with a different and less automated system of logistics and movement of goods.    The use of modern logistics in Russia is limited to the amount of freight that gets moved in Colombia and much less than France says this report in WSJ. Much of the industrial base in Russia is built around oil and gas exports and manufacturing with movement of supply chain parts has never taken the importance that it has in Germany or the US. This limits the capacity of the Russian military outside the rail lines located towns and cities in Donbas where it has recently made gains. ...

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
The reckless behaviour of German elites in pursuing increased dependence on Russian oil and gas and ignoring American warnings is shown in this report in The Guardian. The first links to Russian oil and gas were started under chancellor Brandt in 1970. At that time the dependency on oil and gas supplies was much less than 10%. Dependence increased during the Schroeder and Merkel years to the extremes that exist today. Not much more even in the year of the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. It was the misconception of chancellor Schmidt of the SPD in his differences of opinion with presidents Carter and Reagan on the risks of increasing dependence on Russian energy that marked this period. Schmidt believed Germany was right in its conviction that increased trade would bring peaceful cooperation without realizing that economic dependency is never a good thing. Poland had a skeptical view- German elites including business elites were being corrupted. Cheap Russian energy was being used in the Schroeder and Merkel years as a competitive business advantage without considering the risks involved and the admonitions of American presidents of the dangers. With Steinmeier of the SPD there was the immense guilt of the millions of war dead from the German invasion of Russia in 1941 that acted as a brake on evaluating the increasing dependency for energy that reached over 35% by the time he was foreign minister. The fall of the Berlin Wall was seen not as a result of multiple factors including the positions taken by Carter and Reagan, the losses to the Russian economy from the war in Afghanistan, and the general decline of the Russian economy. German leaders saw this as coming from the new relationship being built with Russia. German business and Schroeder- Merkel even allowed not just new Nordstream pipelines under the Baltic Sea but also transferred ownership of reserves, the gas and oil storage inside Germany to Russia's Gazprom. German Economy minister Habeck says the storage tanks were emptied so that there would be added surge for oil and gas prices after the attacks on Ukraine. This Guardian report ends by saying that Mr. Steinmeier still needs to show why he pursued policy of cooperation with Russia with increasing dependency to the point that a cut off of Russian oil and gas supplies would lead to gas rationing in Germany in the event of a sudden cutoff. Was it a form of sensible cooperation taking dependency to such extremes. Similar questions remain for chancellor Merkel. With the added question for Merkel about the increase in trading ties with China even after the Trump administration had warned of the serious risks to US and European competitive advantage in technology and manufacturing, and the increased dependence on a supply chain that was fundamentally weak as shown clearly by the pandemic.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
President Biden faces three potential crises this month -one in Ukraine with a buildup of Russian forces for potential invasion, Chinese actions with Taiwan, and potential collapse of Iran nuclear talks. Biden also convenes this week world leaders of democracies in virtual talks on how to respond to actions of Russia, China, Iran and other countries. Biden's goal is to ensure the US and its allies remain strong without provoking crises.

LyrArc Article Gist
As the focus shifts to the east, the war in April in Ukraine shifts to a prolonged war. It also means that the focus now is also on economic separation of US and European economies from Russia and China. As it was this overdependence that lacked prudence or good sense, that emboldened Russia in its relations with the US and Europe, and China in its relations with neighbors in Asia. This report looks at the arms aid Ukraine may need to defend the region on its eastern border with Russia. Russia plans to focus on the separatist Luhansk and Donbas regions in the east which have sought closer ties with Russia. The war in the east has dragged on already for over 10 years.The rest of Ukraine and particularly western areas near Poland such as Lviv and areas near the Baltics have shown strong sentiment for an independent Ukraine able to choose her own path. Throughout history the Baltics and Poland have had a strong influence on western Ukraine and Russia on eastern Ukraine bordering Russia, with influence swinging one way or the other throughout Ukraine depending on the period in history. After the westernization and modernization of Russia under Peter the Great in the 17th century and of Prussia as a German state independent of the Hapsburgs in Vienna around the same period, geopolitics shifting the balance of power took on a bigger dimension. Putin's actions can only be seen as a throwback to using the tactics of invasion going back to this period in history from 1700 to 1950, when dominant powers France, Austria led by Hapsburg dynasty, and Britain with the Dutch fought wars seeking advantage mostly on territory of German states and Italian states, and in all parts of the world. This also laid the grounds for colonization of large parts of Asia and Africa by Europeans in this contest for dominance through trading companies that traded for profit, and used tax revenues from acquired lands for profit making and military activity. In some ways poor economic choices such as the excessive dependence of the US and European economies and their integration with China and Russia have led to the war. As they created advantages Russia and China did not have in technological capabilities and stronger economies that make war an alternative to support foreign policy goals. In the long term it is this these unsustainable economic choices that will be pulled back following the pandemic for shorter supply chains closer to home. This prudent economic separation could not have happened without recent events, as even now Germany industry says its dependence and integration with Russia is hard to reverse for gas supplies, and American business is only now making the changes away from dependence on China in its supply chain.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Decline in capital investment in 2016-2017 expected at Lukoil and Rosneft as the Russian government postponed a reduction in taxes on oil exports for 2016. Russia is dependent on oil exports for a third of its national output, and about half of its budget depends on oil revenues, a major weakness, but this is being managed carefully till oil prices recover. Russian officials say the $50 a barrel assumption for oil revenues in 2016 in the budget is optimistic. Yet Russian output decline is expected to be limited to about 3% a year from 5% for Lukoil in future years from decline in investment, because of drilling new wells and use of horizontal drilling technology on older fields. In 2015 oil output increased modestly to 10.73 barrels a day from 10.58 barrels a day in 2014. Russia's oil industry benefits from a tax system that favors the industry. The export duty on oil and the mineral extraction tax are based on price. A declining ruble which has gone from 35 to the dollar before its invasion of Ukraine in 2014 to 86 to the dollar in Jan 2016, has a favorable impact. This actually helps the industry because workers and oil equipment suppliers in Russia are paid in rubles, and oil revenues are earned in dollars. As a result new technologies such as horizontal drilling now make up one third of oil supplies from 11% in 2010. Chinese suppliers also provide new technology drilling equipment, as China is not part of the sanctions. Gazprom Neft's CEO Dyukov says it can make a profit at oil price of $15 a barrel. Because of the tax system after tax revenues are stable at the oil companies in Russia, even as government tax revenue declines. All this points to resilience in the short run for the Russian oil industry. The decline in the value of the ruble is seen as an opportunity to shift away from an overdependence on imports during the period of high oil prices. Alexei Kudrin, former Russsian finance minister, sees growth returning for the Russian economy in 2017. This may actually be good news for the struggling economies of U.S., Europe, India, China, and other countries which would be boosted by low oil prices sustained over a longer period- something made possible by competition between big oil producing countries Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran, and the profitability of oil production at prices below $30 to $20 a barrel....

LyrArc Article Gist
NATO's new guiding document and security concept now includes China for the first time as a shared security challenge. In the past there were concerns about China yet Germany and France continued economic engagement with China as before. The clearly worded statement by Xi Jinping and Putin expressing strong disapproval of a world in which the US and the EU play a prominent leadership role, made just before Russia launched its attack on Ukraine, has changed the sentiment in Europe. It is now becoming clear to Germany that the world has changed.Under Merkel Germany expanded trade ties with Russia on energy and with China as a major trading partner. The first steps are now being taken to decouple the trading relationship with China and restructure Germany's trade away from China towards other parts of the world including India, Vietnam and other Asian countries. Mr Scholz pointed to this needed shift during the Trade Fair in Hannover. As part of this shift NATO now sees cooperation with Indo-Pacific partners Australia, Japan, and South Korea and India essential for meeting the challenge of Russia today and of China over the long term. The NATO document says about China that "its stated ambitions and coercive policies, challenge our interests, security and values." Here are some of the ways the world has changed today. There are new administrations and newly elected leaders in the US, Japan, South Korea, and Germany. The new administrations are led by leaders in Japan and South Korea that are keen on working hand in hand with the US to meet the challenge from China. In the US president Biden seems determined to build up America's strength to meet any challenges China can pose. In Germany the administration is run by the SPD socialists with the Greens and the Free Democrats coalition. The Greens led by Robert Habeck and Annalena Baerbock have taken a strong position to face up to Russia's invasion in Ukraine, and Mr. Scholz is following step by step and has distanced himself from old SPD and CDU policies of  Angela Merkel of close commercial ties with Russia and China.  Indian prime minster Modi was a close partner at the G7 conference in Munich, Germany. The leaders of Japan and South Korea attended the NATO summit in Madrid and met with president Biden as shown here.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Prime minister Modi of India's visit to Japan in September 2014 leads to a commitment of about $35 billion in Japanese investment over 5 years. Japanese companies such as Suzuki, Toyota and Toshiba already have large investments in India.

LyrArc Article Gist
German perceptions of Mikhail Gorbachev are shown here in DW.com. He is revered in Germany because of Gorbachev's efforts to end Soviet rule in East German state called the GDR, leading to the fall of the Berlin Wall. Gorbachev supported German reunification but did not do this is in a way that ensured that ordinary Russians and citizens of the GDR could make the transition to democratic processes in a smooth way. He also failed to grasp that economic transition could be difficult and would require extensive aid and grants from the west, and that safeguards and protections for retired pensioners and vulnerable sections of society needed to be in place. The following is a reflection of the background in political government and economy of the events in Europe leading to the war in Ukraine.  As a result Gorbachev's instincts were right by first 1956 as a student, and then 1979 as government official about the need for democratic processes to realize the real potential of Russia, just as has happened in many countries that lacked these processes for change in government- Japan, Germany, South Korea, India, Brazil and many countries in Asia and Latin America. But not realizing that these countries made the transition with considerable American and British assistance. Even where there was no direct assistance indirectly the British setup the first limited Swaraj or free rule in India, with elections and elected assemblies in Indian states in the 1930's, following the pattern in Dominion states Australia and Canada. Mohandas Gandhi negotiated within these processes for rights of South African Indians and Colored people, gaining experience, including study of British law.  A son of poor farmers in the agricultural region of North Caucasus, in Stavropol, it is relevant today that his maternal grand parents were from Chernihiv in Ukraine. He came to power in 1980 after entering the Politburo that year. These were the waning years of Leonid Brezhnev, president of the Soviet Union who followed Nikita Khrushchev (1953- 1964). Khrushchev was from eastern Ukrainian region near Donetsk. Leonid Brezhnev was a protege of Krushchev since 1931, from Kamianske, Ukraine.   Gorbachev was influenced by Khrushchev's speech that denounced Stalin in 1956 in favor of a freer and more open society. Khrushchev, became first secretary of the Communist party in 1953 after the death of Stalin and set the pace of post war Soviet society from 1950 to 1964. He removed the fear of the dictatorship of the proleteriat working class, increasingly dictatorial under Lenin, and blatantly arbitrary under his successor to make Soviet Union a freer society.  Yet his tendency to make decisions on his own without consulting others, and the failure of agriculture in the Soviet Union including food shortages led to his replacement by his protege Brezhnev. Brezhnev's whole career was built under Krushchev in Ukraine, in the army in Ukraine, and as a political leader in the Soviet 18th Army that entered Prague in 1945 defeating the Nazis. Why is this relevant? Gorbachev was educated at Moscow State University when the Soviet Union was in the Sputnik era, and felt at the time that it could reach the 1950's standard of living in the US- very different from the earlier leaders. Yet he may have been too much of an optimist and not hands on in understanding the working of a modern economy as large as Russia and the interests of different groups of society that had to be be balanced and protected. His understanding of the US and of how the US and British economies had evolved was limited or nonexistent. The isolation of the Soviet period may have compounded this. The Russian state in the Soviet Union could not simply unwind the power of the state and its intervention and everything would come out right of its own accord.   Leonid Brezhnev, the Ukrainian Russian who succeeded Krushchev from 1964 to 1979 let the system of Soviet rule remain as it was, in the Great Stagnation, leading to lethargy, lack of innovation, and a weak economy with military expansion. Gorbachev tried to regenerate the system by opening it up, but failed to see that there was a risk that it could come apart quickly as it did in just 4 years after he became president in 1985. Only the centralized power of the state had kept the Russian state together from the Tsarist period through the Communist period. The risks of this Gorbachev failed to grasp. What if it happened too quickly without a safety net for the people who could not make the transition. What lawlessness and failure of the rule of law could happen. The US and Britain had evolved their democracies over centuries. Wars were fought in the US and Britain over rights and responsibilities of kings and parliaments. In the US Lincoln fought the civil war not just for emancipation but to ensure safeguards for free white men on the farms so that Labor did not get disabilities placed on them by Capital (entrenched forces of Capital of which the southern plantation economy was only one aspect.)  Japan and Germany were set up as democratic states through American power and constitutional frameworks with Marshall Plans or agreement to take in unlimited imports from Japan. This bad scenario happened in Russia because Gorbachev failed to set the conditions first and work patiently to achieve them including introducing limited  elections and parliamentary processes first in Russia.  Leaders such as Yeltsin who succeeded Gorbachev in 1989, winning the elections that followed, failed to provide a safety net for the vulnerable in the 1980's. Unemployment increased rapidly, life expectancy dropped in Russia, and the economy failed in the early years after 1980. A Marshall Plan like that offered to Germany could have helped but Gorbachev's failure may have been his failure to provide this transition by arranging for West Germany and the US to support a planned transition, a kind of Marshall Plan of Aid, and maintaining a gradual move to democracy as the country was given time to learn institutions of American and British parliamentary democracy. No such Marshall Plan was negotiated for a smooth transition over inevitable obstacles, no safeguards were put in place for illegal efforts to control the state by rogue elements and to seize assets of state companies, no efforts to first introduce limited elections and parliamentary processes for learning democratic process in Russia, and the people of Russia were left with a memory of the this period as a bad lawless period from 1989 to 2005.  Leading to the situation today under Putin of aspiring to the Soviet period as a kind of period that had offered Russia the world recognition it had lost. And this had happened even though the Russian economy had recovered and the standard of living had risen under Putin. Putin's career spanned the period as a Russian official in Dresden, Germany Democratic Republic or Soviet period East Germany to working in the St Petersburg City Council under Yeltsin. He personally witnessed the fall of the Berlin Wall and the fall of the German Democratic Republic from Dresden and Gorbachev's refusal to build a transition period for the changes so that it would not be traumatic for the GDR. Even after reunification these traumas remain in some segments of the older population in East Germany that saw themselves as neglected and support extreme right wing parties in eastern German states by 2020- considering the Soviet period as one in which their lives were less neglected.  After three terms as president Putin with his own traumas from that period in Dresden, and with a mother lost in the period after the Nazi invasion of Russia, a father who survived the Battle of Stalingrad, saw the period of lawless behaviour in the collapse of the Soviet Union as the"greatest geopolitical disaster of the century."  Putin and people around him made missteps and miscalculations launching a war in Ukraine, leading to the situation today- jeopardizing hard won gains for the Russian economy. By 2022 Russian standards of living had risen and the economy was in the best shape it had been in the modern period since the Industrial Revolution. Yet largely exposed because of the dependence on oil and gas during a period of climate change and focus on building future economies free of fossil fuels.  Putin in his own peculiar logic may have seen this as the only opportunity in 2022 before deliinking from fossil fuel reduced the importance of the Russian fuel dependent economy to make some territorial readjusments in Ukraine with a quick war taking Kviv. That turned into a massive miscalculation with the emergence of nationalist fervor in western Ukraine spreading to the whole country of 40 million people. In the future to 2030 with phasing out of the fossil fuel economy, Russia without the connections to the US and European Union's technology and resources it had during Putin's three terms, and facing strict sanctions from US and EU, faces a difficult future. This has cautionary lessons for all countries- the US that read too much into the fall of the Berlin wall and indulged in a losing proposition with free markets that damaged its infrastructure and manufacturing with shifts to China, China understanding of how it to was dependent on the world economy for its future development, India that had to navigate a difficult period and what lessons to draw for building a bigger economy, the EU realizing the failure of its policies of depending on Russia for energy and China for manufacturing with fragile supply chains,  and Russia that there were twists and turns and the need for safeguards and experience building democratic processes before these processes would work for the economy, its people and for Russia as a nation. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Defense Secretary Gates does not see Russia as the threat it was in the Cold War, first because Russia's conventional forces are a "shadow" of what they were during the Cold War, and Russia has adverse demographic trends that will diminish Russia's ability in conventional forces. He sees the Georgian war in the context of Russia's seeking to exorcize, as he puts it, past humiliations. And Gates sees opportunities in the relationship with Russia. Such things as Russia's willingness to work with the US on Afghanistan. Evidence of this is Russia supporting the renwal of the UN resolution on Afghanistan. Another indication is that Russia he says is very worried about the drugs coming out of Afghanistan, and has been supportive to provide alternative routes for Europeans to get equipment and supplies into Afghanistan. These views come across in an interview on December 17, with Charlie Rose, a five time elected Congressman, for the PBS Charlie Rose show. They are also reflected in an article in Foreign Affairs journal's current issue. Gates was a CIA analyst and has some insightful observations. Gates told Charlie Rose that he does not see the Islamic radicals and violent Islamic extremists as a threat in the same way as the threat in the Cold War years. This threat is not as big as the threat to freedom during the Cold War. He says the failure in strategic communications was huge as agencies of the US government engaged in activities in other countries, like the Agency for International Development and the US Information Agency, were neglected starting in the in the 1990's. Communications in other countries of what the US represented and stands for was left to the Pentagon, a role the Pentagon was ill-suited for. He sees the Islamic terrorism as more of an ideological conflict. Speaking at a town hall meeting at the Balad Air Force base in Iraq, in December, Gates pointed to these communications failures as a real challenge for the new administration. But he now sees a huge opportunity in this past failure, and ways of addressing it creatively, in addition to commiting resources and people to this effort. Walter Pincus wrote this article, and its part of the fineprint analysis effort at the Washington Post in which speeches, reports, and other documents are examined by people like Pincus, to catch the really important things, uncovering the fine print that really makes the headlines. Another aspect of this fineprint effort is that there are a huge number of reports, and speeches and documents that had a tone reminiscent of the Cold War during the Georgia war and yet they do not correctly reflect the real situation about Russia, as Gates sees it from his analysis of what is actually happening. Gates has used Foreign Affairs, the Dec 17 Charlie Rose Show on PBS in which he was interviewed, and the speech at the Balad Air Force base in Iraq, to communicate his views and analysis. They are important to underline and emphasize precisely because they show that all that cold war hysteria reporting and speeches may be misleading and lead to improper conclusions and mistakes in policy, wasted effort, wasted resources, and lost lives. And just as the US strategic communications was starved of resources and effort, so also this necessary work to retrieve and give emphasis to the important things is neglected. One additional link to this is the speech, discussion, and QA session in Washington DC at the time of the G20 summit in which President Medvedev and the new administration's elder statesman and diplomat Marilyn Albright, former secretary of state, expressed their hopes and plans for a new era in Russian-American relations. ...