LyrArc Article Gist
Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah sign a powersharing agreement brokered by the U.S Secretary of State Kerry and president Karzai after Afghanistan elections in 2014. The question is whether the two can set aside their differences and make it work, and can they negotiate some form of peace agreement with the Taliban to give Afghanistan and the region years of peace after so much conflict. Pakistan and India's elites and military need to step up to the plate to set aside differences by looking to the long term future of the region and the aspirations of the people for better infrastructure, services, education and healthcare, so long denied to the region. The Kashmir floods, and the floods in Pakistan before that, recent elections in India and Pakistan showing the clear aspirations for development of the people, are a reminder of so much that remains to be done and so much that was never done.

LyrArc Article Gist
Mark Landler's interview with Hussain Haqqani in Oct. 2013 provides insights into the misperceptions on both sides of the U.S.-Pakistan relationship since 1947. Particularly the way Pakistan cannot shake free from seeing everything through the prism of India. He points out that Ambassador Holbrooke had a forward looking approach to the South Asian region, but failed to get the support of president Obama and the weak leadership of president Zardari, resulting in a squandered opportunity for the region to look beyond the twentieth century's conflicts towards a brighter future.

LyrArc Article Gist
A U.S. drone strike kills Tehreek-e Taliban Pakistan leader Hakimullah Mehsud in the North Waziristan tribal area near the Afghan border on Nov. 2, 2013. It also takes out several of his closest aides. This follows the arrest in Afghanistan of his deputy chief, Latif Mehsud leaving a power vacuum in the TTP. The government of Nawaz Sharif in Pakistan opposes drone strikes publicly because of the unpopularity of the strikes in Pakistan. Yet this week Pakistan interior minister speaking in parliament disclosed that only about 67 civilians had died in drone strikes that killed 2160 militants. Because Mehsud was an extremely violent leader in the TTP and remained a threat to the government and army in Pakistan, this may be seen inside the government and army with relief so that a new chapter can be turned for Pakistan that focuses on development efforts, something that Pakistan prime minister Nawas Sharif was elected to accomplish in his term in office. This may also be a positive step for a peaceful transition in the region following U.S. withdrawal, and for peace talks mediated by Britain's prime minister Cameron between Pakistan and Afghanistan....

LyrArc Article Gist
Only 78 years ago a 4 year old boy Eiji Kishida became in seconds a tangled burnt mass of flesh a mile away from where the atomic bomb fell on Hiroshima. It is his second cousin once removed that is meeting leaders of the G7 countries in the same place. It will come as a surprise to know that this is Fumio Kishida the prime minister of Japan. Peter Landers and Chieko Tsuneoka tell this incredible story. Setsuko Thurlow 91 years now living in Canada is the aunt of the boy who saw him just before he died. She was at the army office in Hiroshima which itself was buried in rubble. Mr. Kishida represents Hiroshima in parliament and wrote a book in 2020 about the little 4 year old boy Eiji and the devastation that is seen in a town destroyed by a nuclear bomb. Lyrarc.com supports Mr. Kishida's ideas and vision. First Japan, then China and India have gone through the phase of resisting and overcoming colonial powers. During the phase the influence of Vedanta and Buddhism was eroded, but this does not have to be so, Communism will pass away now that it has done its job of securing for the Chinese people scientific advance and modernization. All three nations are united by the shared links of Vedanta and Buddhism which provide the guiding light for a world that not only turns away from nuclear weapons but away from the wars and conflicts of the period of colonial powers advances of the 18th, 19th and 20th century. To Mr. Kishida's "idealism" we say it is a reality that is within reach. And we remind the world of the Buddha's own words in the Paranibbana Sutta: "But when the blessed One came to the river Ganges, it was full to the brim, so that crows could drink from it. And some people went in search of a boat or a float, while others tied up a raft so they could get across. But the Blessed One as quickly as a strong man might stretch out his bent arm or draw in his outstretched arm vanished from this side of the Ganges, and came to stand on the yonder side." "And the Blessed One saw the people who desired to cross searching for a boat or a float while others were binding rafts. And the Blessed One seeing them thus gave this solemn utterance: They who have bridged the ocean vast.                                       Leaving the lowlands far behind       While others still their rafts bind,     Are saved by wisdom   unsurpassed."     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Voter turnout exceeds 70% in the 2014 state assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir, India. Voters weary of years of conflict voted in favor of economic development and infrastructure building in the state.

LyrArc Article Gist
Former prime minister Nawaz Sharif's PML-N party wins 125 of 269 seats in Pakistan's parliament. The Tehreek-e-Insaf party of Imran Khan won 31 seats and the PML-N party of the current president Asif Zardari won 32 seats mostly in Sindh province. Independents won 31 seats and some of these independents are likely to support Sharif in forming a new government. Election turnout of 60% showed a large degree of enthusiasm in this election and hopes for economic revival in Pakistan. The focus of Sharif will be on improving the economy, tackling electricity shortages, and building infrastructure. Sharif promised to pursue peaceful relations with India and Afghanistan, and keep the focus on the economy. Sharif and his advisers are bringing a new deftness in the dealings with the Army, the Pakistan Taliban, saying he would call for a halting of drone strikes, limiting the role the U.S. plays in the region, both positions popular in Pakistan, separating differences with former president Musharraf from the institutional role of the military. Small business owners and large business support Sharif's efforts to tackle electricity shortages, with an estimated loss of $12 billion in idled factories alone. The long period of political conflicts between the military, the judiciary and the political parties have led to neglect of Pakistan's economy, as neighboring countries in Asia surged ahead. The realization that popular pressure for improving standards of living and the economic opportunities are both huge has led to an extraordinary election, and put Sharif at the centre of an important new beginning for Pakistan. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial calls the ISI and Pakistan army's playing both sides of the game- acting as an ally of the U.S. and supporting the Taliban- unacceptable. The editorial points to the Taliban and its leader Mullah Omar running the operations out of Quetta, in Baluchistan. And the Taliban faction loyal to Jalaluddin Haqqani having sanctuaries in North Waziristan and the tribal regions of Pakistan. Al Quaeda's No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahiri, it says, could very well be in Pakistan in some compound in the manner of bin Laden.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist points out (in this cover issue on India-Pakistan relations) several fundamental facts. The first is that the current state of relations betweeen India and Pakistan hurts Pakistan the most. It makes a much smaller country and smaller economy bear the burden of defense against a large neighbor- defense takes up much needed allocation of funds for infrastructure and development, education and healthcare. It also weakens democratic institutions and their development by an overdependence on the military for governance. Poor India-Pakistan relations have significant adverse effects on the U.S. In fighting the Taliban U.S. forces are fighting a force that Pakistan's military helped create and support from its early beginnings as a way to counter Indian influence. With an Indian-Pakistani peace settlement of issues in Kashmir and other outstanding issues the U.S. would be in a significantly better position to disengage from the region, especially when the entire Middle East is moving in a new direction in 2011. Consider the difficulties in establishing peace in Northern Ireland, and between Turkey and Greece, and the difficulties of establishing peace between India and Pakistan cannot be considered even more difficult. Pakistan and India muddle along- neither side is doing much to take the initiative. For the U.S. disengagement from South Asia can be best achieved by pushing for a settlement between the two countries. Pakistan and India have much to gain from a settlement. Considering the progress made in Ireland, such places as Yugoslavia, and in Turkish-Greek relations, there is a lot more that can be done and should be done to bring India and Pakistan together. In Ireland diplomatic efforts were made by U.S. envoy George Mitchell, and in Yugoslavia U.S. envoy Holbrooke made diplomatic efforts towards the Dayton accords. Greek-Turkish relations have advanced to the point where Erdogan and Papandreou, the Greek and Turkish prime ministers, discuss solutions to the Greek debt crisis. This includes options to reduce Greece's defense expenditures in the light of Turkey's new foreign policies. The lack of such efforts to break the deadlock between India and Pakistan by the U.S,. the U.K. and other countries involved in the NATO mission in Afghanistan, the emphasis on a military solution supported first by Gen. McChrystal, and then by by Gen. Petraeus, all show a lack of understanding of the real issues that need to be tackled- issues relating to a peace settlement between India and Pakistan....

LyrArc Article Gist
Bruce Reidel, Obama administration advisor on the war in Afghanistan, conducted a policy review in 2009. He says a policy of engagement he advised in 2009 now needs reshaping. He points to recent events that show the Pakistani ISI and the military who run Pakistan are in direct conflict with U.S. policy in the region. Especially after the attacks on the U.S. embassy in Kabul and the killing of a former Afghan president who was expected to lead peace talks. Reidel says this requires a reshaping of U.S. policy and a policy of containment which would reduce military assistance to Pakistan, and at the same time shape policies that would help the people of Pakistan, such as reducing tariffs on textiles.

LyrArc Article Gist
The talks for a peace settlement with the Taliban hosted in London in Feb. 2013 by Britain's prime minister, David Cameron. The talks were between Cameron, Pakistan's president Asif Zardari, and Afghanistan president Karzai. The effort is designed to prevent a civil war after the NATO and U.S. withdrawal in 2013-2014.

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
Scott Shane of the NYT provides this exceptional account of how the ideology of Wahhabism on which the Saudi monarchy is based has influenced the evolution of Islam, but not in the way other religions have evolved into more moderate and open religions. Christianity evolved from the period of religious conflict, and evolved to the point that the basis of progress was based on education and technology in most of northern and southern Europe. Where the evolution did not take place because of more intolerant behaviours such as in Spain with the Spanish Inquisition and ideas from the medieval period, this development based on education and technology lagged severely behind.  Wahhabism developed as a result of a sect started by a religious cleric Wahhab in a poor desert region around Mecca and Medina, now the Saudi Kingdom, who sought the help of a tribal chief Ibn Saud. They used the religious-political alliance to gain tribal dominance in the region. Wahhabism sought to change Islam by banning worship and religious rites at tombs common in that period. It also as Brookings scholar William McCants cited here says, drew "sharp lines" and intolerance between believers and non-believers- all non-believers including other sects of Islam, Shiites, Christians. The movement spread throughout the region, but was crushed by the Ottoman Empire based in Istanbul, Turkey, by the 1850's, only to be revived in the 1920's following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. A Norwegian expert Heggenhammer cited here says clearly Islam did not benefit from the evolution that other religions had, and Wahhabism has slowed this evolution into and open, tolerant religion because of its "sharp lines" and intolerance of other faiths and ideas with the Wahhabism from a medieval perod. In India the British rule brought enlightenment thinkers (John Stuart Mill for example was a clerk for the British East India company). But no such change happened under Ottoman rule to inspire leaders like Gandhi and Nehru to setup a new constitution that made changes from medieval Hindu beliefs such as caste and religious practices based on superstition.  The development of an oil rich state in Saudi Arabia with the discovery of oil, and the dependence from 1950-2010 of the global economy, has led say experts to the export of the Wahhabist kind of Islam to other countries in Middle East and South Asia. This they say made the evolution to democracy and peaceful coexistence difficult or impossible in the region. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Much of what is written here about Xi Jinping pursuing Chinese socialist vision was known since he became president in 2013 when China's Communist party was losing its appeal, and efforts were made to seize power within the communist party by a leader in the western province of Chongqing. Bo Xi Lai attempted to take advantage of the situation with appeals to the working class and without any genuine commitment beyond a power grab. It was well known that Xi Jinping is a son of one of the veterans of the Communist party under Mao, Xi Zhongxun, unlike leaders who followed premier Deng Xiaoping such as Jiang Zemin. Zemin was a relatively unknown figure who was in university during the crucial period of 1947-49 when Mao came to power in mainland China. It would not be correct to say that little was known about Xi's own ideas about socialism as the long term answer to China's problems. Xi also came in as president at a time when the Communist party was losing its appeal to working class people after three administrations that followed premier Den Xiaoping. These three administrations followed a form of state capitalism that allowed companies to pollute the environment, compete without any regulations, and allowed to operate without any controls as long as they pursued growth aggressively and expanded the economy.There was an effort by Communist party regional leader in western Chinese province of Chongqing, Bo Xi Lai, to use this as an opportunity to grab power in China. During his first year as president Xi had to resolve this issue by having a court trial after revelations of corruption and misuse of power by Bo Xi Lai.  Xi's father Zhongxun's role in the revolutionary movement offers clues to Xi's own convictions and faith in the party. Zhongxun was a communist soldier who set up the revolutionary base areas in Shanxi-Gansu northwest border region of China that provided a refuge for Mao's army following the Long March. Other clues come from Zhongxun's role as head of propaganda during the period after 1944 and in 1952. Xi's family background particularly on his mother's side shows a fervent commitment to Chinese socialist vision during the chaotic years when the Japanese invaded China and Chiang Kai-Shek's nationalist forces failed to defend China's sovereignty. One reason Xi has been less understood is that little attention is paid to Xi's mother, Qi Xin who was highly educated and fervently believed in Chinese socialism and nationalist spirit during the Japanese invasion in 1938. In fact Qi Xin had to leave middle school after the Japanese took over Beijing. She joined the Counter Japanese Political and Military University to continue education and in 1941 attended the Central Party school. She met Xi's father Zhongxun in 1944. In 1953 she enrolled in the Marx School of Communism, and it was her position at the school that offered her husband added protection during the Cultural Revolution that affected Deng Xiaoping and others. With such a history in the 1930's, 1940's, and 1950's it is likely that Xi was profoundly influenced by his father's role in the revolutionary movement, and his mother's faith in socialism with national spirit as the way to protect against the foreign invasions. It would now appear that by the time Xi joined the Politburo in 2003 there was no question about the future course China would take given the role of his parents, and the events of 1938 the fall of Beijing, his mother having to flee, and the events that followed. Xi showed resilience during the period of the Great Proletarian Revolution when he was sent to the villages at a time when he would be studying in school and college. He was sent to an agricultural commune in largely rural Shanxi province where he worked as a manual laborer alongside other people and developed a relationship with the local farmers. Unlike other leaders during that period which could even be said about premier Deng Xiaoping in 1989, Xi took a different lesson from this experience largely because his father and mother were committed to the socialist vision for the long run. His father was still not fully rehabilitated by premier Chou en-lai when Xi was allowed to enter Beijing's Tsinghua University in 1975. He studied chemical engineering at Tsinghua graduating in 1979. Upon graduation he worked as a assistant for 3 years to a vice premier who was minister of defense. He then left Beijing for Hebei province to work as a deputy secretary of the provincial CCP. He was made Mayor of Xiamen, then governor of Fujian province in 1999 where he tackled environmental conservation before moving to Zheziang province. His father passed away in 2002 and it would appear that he was carefully trained in different provinces instead of staying in Beijing, for a position of national leadership. Xi got his break in 2007 when the upper leadership of Shanghai city was tainted in a wide ranging pension fund scheme. He was made party secretary for Shanghai. This was the position Jiang Zemin had held before he succeeded premier Deng Xiaoping. In only a few months in October 2007 Xi was made one of the 8 Politburo members, ready to succeed Hu Jintao as president. Xi's perception of being sent to the villages and making it to university education was that it was part of the long run socialist struggle, with pain that his father had also endured as simply a phase in which things would be right in the end. Xi's mother comes across as a resilient figure and one who had herself gone through the struggles of the 1930's and aided her husband on one occasion. Some of this resilience could have been passed on to the son. Xi's wife is a zealous participant in Chinese dance and music performances that created enthusiasm for the Chinese socialist revolution from the 1930's period. In his conversations  with colleagues in the party, in culture and temperament, Xi has been forthright about this background and his style of work.  Xi is unlike premier Deng and the presidents who succeeded him such as Hu Jintao mentored by a former mayor of Shanghai Jiang Zemin who came to power in 1989. Xi is more in line with the leaders around Mao like his father in his outlook and thinking, with a cautious temperament that comes from years going through ups and downs of political struggles. He is once said to have responded with dismay about being in a top position in the government knowing how precarious this had been for his father. The education at Tsinghua, his engineering background, and his easy familiarity with farmers in the provinces, mean that he understands China and its history well enough to have the confidence to shape Chinese policies in a way that none of his predecessors had except Mao, premier Chou-en-lai, Liu Shao Chi and a few veterans from that time in the 1930's. That Xi waited patiently for so long to gradually assert his ideas about socialist vision for China may be the surprising part of his behaviour till 2021.  It may be that he wanted to make the changes only after he could persuade party leaders and colleagues of his vision and long run goals. And because the Chinese economy had grown so large that it would take time to steer the ship in a different direction for the long term. In most of the negotiations with president Trump he cautiously let trade negotiators handle the situation, all the time learning about how to tackle problems of China's relationship with US and Europe. US president Biden also has a vision that is veering towards a socialist perspective in terms of bringing gains of progress to workers and families. So does Mr. Trump, Mr. Boris Johnson in UK, and Social Democrat's Scholz in Germany. It is both economic and political as Mr. Xi is quoted as saying in this WSJ report. The necessities of such action are both economic, social and politically driven as capitalism has veered way off course.  In this report it is mentioned that Soho China 40% stake was taken by a large capital markets firm in New York in the hope of large gains, as Soho China developer was a tycoon who wanted to leave China. Seeing it as not favorable to his company following events in Hong Kong. This behaviour of capital markets groups in New York and tech companies in Silicon Valley, driven by profits and not aware of the social and economic problems of working class American families is a problem in the US and in Europe. It is also what has driven so many large tech companies to expand manufacturing operations in China, that hurt US manufacturing capabilities and American workers jobs- an issue raised by president Trump and taken up by president Biden. Biden has already moved to make Intel Corporation change its plans and invest in American manufacturing technologies in a quietly implemented U turn. US president Biden is left with the unenviable job of solving this huge problem during the pandemic. He has also committed to a somewhat socialistic vision with a $3.5 trillion plan for workers and families, as has vice chancellor Scholz in Germany with his own version of programs, after the failures of unregulated forms of capitalism. Scholz goes so far as to say his mission is to show that there is really no such thing as a self-made man, that it is help from society, his fellow citizens, and government, that makes it possible for him to do his work. In a sense the world is shifting away from Reagan forms of capitalism without regulation after seeing disastrous results during the pandemic. Not just China. Some form of government guidance and regulations are now seen as essential in China, the US, UK, Germany and India for a better society and a better, healthier life, and for opportunity for all in each country.   ...

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
The BJP Party wins 25 seats in the Kasmir legislative assembly, and the Kashmir People's Democratic Party led by Mufti Mohammad Sayeed wins 28 seats. Mr. Sayeed becomes the new chief minister in a coalition government formed with the BJP. Sayeed says about the election and the future- "History has given us a big opportunity, and we want to make this alliance the turning point for Kashmir." After years of conflict a new election provides an opportunity to turn the page for Kashmir and South Asia, and shift the focus to the economy and infrastructure.

LyrArc Article Gist
Chandrasekeran looks back on the troop surge ordered by President Obama on the advice of General Petraeus and General McChrystal in Afghanistan, and the results in Afghanistan as the U.S. withdraws troops in 2012-2013.

LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama ordered the surge in 2010 for 30,000 additional troops in Afghanistan. There are now 150,000 NATO troops in Afghanistan. Of these two thirds are Americans. The goal of the surge was set by President Obama as " disrupting, dismantling, and defeating al Quaeda and its extremist allies" in Afghanistan. Yet the fact remains that official estimates on the coallition side are for only about 100 or so al Quaeda militants operating in Afghanistan. The war in Afghanistan is being fought with Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan who also live in the mountainous region that comprises Pakistan and Afghanistan, and has some form of clandestine support from sections of the Pakistani military and intelligence services- the Pakistani military having played a critical role in the formation of the Taliban from its inception to act as Pakistan's proxy in that region. With the democracy protests in the Arab world in 2011, al Quaeda does not fit into the existing mood in the Middle East and the Muslim world. Considering these facts- and the mood favoring American disengagement on the part of America's allies in the Afghan government and Pakistan's military, and the American public mood favoring disengagement, the Taliban seeing their conflict as purely domestic and little to do with al Quaeda- the situation is likely to move in the direction of phased American withdrawal. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Bill Keller of the NYT points out that getting Syria right means getting over the obsession over what went wrong in Iraq and looking objectively at the situation in Syria. He points to the failure of president Obama in grasping what the Assad regime has done to Syria, the refugees in Jordan, the use of artillery and air raids on civilian population, and inviting the support by fundmentalist Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia in the absence of U.S. and European support, making delay after delay by president Obama leading to a paralysis in response. Leaving the question for the future which was a worse U.S. response- the hasty action in Iraq or the paralysis in Syria?

LyrArc Article Gist
Maleeha Lodhi, a former Pakistani ambassador to the U.S. and Britain, has edited a collection of essays in a new book titled- Pakistan: Beyond the "Crisis State." It tries to form a new construct to move the debate on Pakistan into a future in which Pakistan can exist as a "normal country" free of a paranoia about India that affects its outlook, and free from the military connections that have shifted the focus from development that a friendly neighborly coexistence with India would provide. Intriguing essays include one by Saadat Hasa Manto who goes back to 1951, when the Cold War was at its peak and the U.S. formed a relationship with Pakistan based on military assistance, with only small fraction of aid going into development programs. Syed Rifaat Hussain, professor of strategic studies at Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad puts it directly: Pakistan needs to become a normal state and the only way to to do this is for the rivalry and obsession with India to be resolved and put behind it. As it now stands the U.S., India and Pakistan all stand to gain tremendously in such an outcome- the U.S. disengagement from Afghanistan and the Taliban because at its core the Taliban issue goes back to the Pakistan rivalry with India, Pakistan and India because it puts the focus on development, infrastructure building, and economic gains....

LyrArc Article Gist
Aghhanistan peace talks with the Taliban in Kyoto, Japan in June 2012.