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.


The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The world today is in a much better position to complete the transition to zero dependence on the volatile Middle East for oil. Today in 2026 the world's largest nations 1. US   2. China  3. India  4. Germany are all free of Middle East oil (India through waivers for Russian sources). European Union and UK is at about 12% which can be quickly substituted from the US+ Venezuela and other sources. US is self sufficient in oil and gas and exports oil to the UK, India, Germany and the European Union. Canada is self sufficient. Germany gets only 6% of its oil from the Middle East, the UK 12%, Spain 13% and Italy 14%. The Iran war is likely to shift more of the needs of UK, Spain and Italy to other more stable sources including oil from the US and Venezuela managed by the US, and other sources. This means that US policymakers can act in the best interests of all the nations of the world for preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and long range ballistic missiles. Germany is moving rapidly to renewable energy and this could bring its dependence on the Middle East to zero. India will meet its needs from Russia for the time being till it also shifts to oil from US+ Venezuela. India get 55% of its oil from the Middle East or about 2.7 million b/d. Russia was an important source of oil for India till the US trade agreement called for it to shift- a 30 day waiver and extension means India can get this oil from Russia without sanctions for the duration of the war. Reducing European demand and Indian demand frees up oil for Japan and South Korea on the world market the other 2 countries dependent on Middle East oil- Japan importing 95% of its oil consumption with imports of 2.5 million b/d and South Korea importing about 2 million b/d or 70% of its consumption. This means Japan and South Korea need a new strategy as they are overexposed to one source just as Germany was and learned a difficult lesson to diversify its sources. Japan has learned to reduce consumption for the same level of GDP and some of this can be through conservation, also tried in Germany in the last 4 years. During the 4 years. of Ukraine war Germany had to find ways to diversify sources Japan and South Korea will need rapidly to do the same in the Iran War. This means that only Japan and South Korea because of their lack of policy direction and vigilance have allowed this overdependence on the Gulf region,  (even as Germany diversified its sources, DJT and Israel were firm on nuclear weapons policy) they failed to see signs that they should diversify. Today in 2026 the world's largest nations 1. US 2. China 3. India 4. Germany are all free of Middle East oil (Indi through waivers for Russian sources), European Union and UK is at about 12% which can be quickly substituted from the US+ Venezuela and other sources.    ...
Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
BBC's Mark Tullly reflects on the period of coverage from 1962-1994 of South Asia. He says of Indira Gandhi that she took the democratic process out of the Indian National Congress party, and set up her sons as future leaders that was undemocratic. Here he reflects on that period in an intervew with the BBC after he left the BBC.  He has deep connections to the Indian period after 1800 as his great grand father on his mothers side was around 1840 in a part of Uttar Pradesh where British planters had farmers plant opium that would later be bought by planters for export. This coincides with the period when Britain in Hong Kong traded in opium as part of British trading in the emerging colonial culture British Empire. There is mixed legacy for Britain in India and China. The history of the Opium Wars in the 1850's and opening up of colonial ports ended with the 1900's revolution and the emergence of the CCP in China by 1950. In India the legacy was mixed bringing together this part of Asia into a new nation and bringing parliamentary traditions of Britain that provided the basis for good governance.  Tully is a softspoken thoughtful Englishman who revolted against British classical education in his youth and studied history and religion at Cambridge, made friends with the future bishops of Canterbury and Lincoln at Cambridge. He is not the Englishman of the Empire as his fondest memories are of the servants verandahs on the bungalows of Britishers and the smoke from their quarters, and the language. So it is a thoughtful view that he gives of the undemocratic nature of Indira Gandhi and mismanagement of the economy that could have changed if India had gone in a different direction under other leaders in the the 1990's. Why is this significant? China's modernization drive started in the 1990's. India's by the undemocratic nature and mismanagement under Indira Gandhi did not start its modernization till 2010, about 20 years after China, opening up a huge gap that is only now being corrected leading to problems for world security, US security, European security and Indian security. And delaying the aspirations of development of 1.4 billion people for 2 decades. Vikshit Bharat cannot come fast enough for both Merz in Germany and Leyen at the European Union, who last week and this week visit Ahmedabad and India for the Kite festival and for Republic Day 2026. ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China is slowing infrastructure projects after loaning $30 billion to Venezuela. As Venezuela's economy declined under Maduro Venezuela is paying this off with oil exports in what is called a creditor trap. Both Russia and China are intent on trade with the US, Russia to open up business and trade and China to preserve it's trading and business relationship for its exports at a difficult time for it's economy. This tacitly preserves the idea of US direction in a beneficial way for the western hemisphere that was part of the message in 1823 by president Monroe to Congress. In the Mexican War, through Manifest Destiny during the administration of James Polk in 1843 this was still the accepted idea when Ulysses Grant a future president and civil war general on the side of Lincoln fought in that war. This brought slavery free, Spanish feudalism free, democratic processes and modernized economies to California, New Mexico, Utah and Colorado, much of the West and the Pacific shoreline. Russia hopes to get the US to accept it's aspirations to be a modern Northern power in Europe. The US DJT Republican administration has shown it's respect for Russia in its zone of influence, with it's main objection to Russia in Ukraine being the massive invasion of a neighboring country. When compared to Mexico it was the US replacing the Spanish who had invaded the Aztec tribes in Mexico setting up feudal regimes, not the US invading a neighboring country. The European Union and Germany now bear the burden of defending Western Europe as a European power. The situation is similar in Asia where China has it's area of influence and India, Japan, Australia as Asian powers sharing zones of influence in Asia with China, so that the US can maintain good relations with China including fair trade that brings back it's manufacturing. The US would continue to support Taiwan as an independent country. This balance can ensure peace in the Americas, Europe and Asia as nations modernize and choose better governance under governments that relate to their history and geography, as opposed to Communist and anti-communist or democratic or anti-democratic, when they meet the aspirations of their people.   ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US president tells the King it was special that all members of Congress stood up for a standing ovation many times- something that in recent years rarely happens. The King "has shown his class" in the last 24 hours says BBC, it is now up to Starmer and the British government, DJT and the Americans to make it count. Notable DJT sharing that the King agreed with him that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon. The King also talked about the NATO alliance and its role in keeping the peace for 80 years in the world. In the King's words-  "the international rules that have allowed us to trade and have kept power in balance for 80 years." Adding that the US should not go it alone- "The challenges we face are too great for any one nation to bear alone." However the King is only doing what his is role as monarch to present British interests, and it is important to recall that Britain's interests were once colonial interests around the world, that opposition to these colonial interests led to the Declaration of Independence by Jefferson and Washington in 1776. And caution in Washington's advice to America in Annual messages when it comes to these Empires. Right after 1945 when NATO was created- as it was throughout its Empire in Asia  in 1750-1950- Britain opposed Russia and was the most vocal opponent of Soviet Russia in 1950's and saw NATO in this mission. Times have changed with the emergence of Russia after 1990, China in 1950 and again in 1990's, and America as a world power is best following Washington's advice not to get involved in or inherit the British anti-Russian attitude as it has interests in the Western hemisphere and around the world that require cooperation with other world powers such as Russia, China, India, and Germany to create a peaceful world  and not the kind we have today that puts Russia and China on the wrong side just for opposition, as no powers have any interest in drug and people trafficking in the western hemisphere form places like Mexico and Venezuela, or creating small wars in other parts of the world. A situation NATO as seen by Britain in 1950 as Anti-Russian creates for the US- Lord Hastings Ismay first Secretary General of NATO set British goal for NATO (not the US interests or consistent with George Washington's advice to distance from) in 1949 as "Keep the Russian Out, the US Involved, and the Germans Down." ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Germany holds the presidency of the G-20 in 2017. This provides chancellor Merkel an opportunity to provide German leadership on many issues. The ministerial conferences will lead to the summit in Hamburg in July 2017. Concern about the incoming Trump administration views on trade in international circles gives Germany and China a larger role in the meetings for 2017. Germany plans to put more focus on the real causes of migration and flight from poor countries and war zones.

The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Let sleeping tariffs lie is the approach of S. Korea, Taiwan, Japan, China, India, European Union, Germany, UK-  expect all trade agreements with the US to remain in place after Supreme Court decision as no country wants to go through the intensely difficult process of renegotiating on tariffs. It is also the case that DJT can replace these same tariffs using other tools and different legislation passed by Congress to stop unfair trading practices by other nations. The president is also appealing to the public, some of the tariffs are about fentanyl flows into the US, the unfair trade practices and subsidies were a problem for the Biden administration and rebuilding manufacturing was the goal of both DJT and Biden, and will be for future administrations.  When the media NYT, Washington Post respond they are following the editorial line taken that opposes the DJT administration on all issues, when WSJ respond it takes the textbook approach of economists and finance people that free markets are best without considering the real life issues. This is why the president said at his press conference after the Supreme Court decision that 22 Nobel Prize economists had said the economy could not be turned around for growth and low inflation in 1 year, and were proved wrong after the experience of 2025 with low inflation at 2.8%, low unemployment 4.3%, and growth of 2.2% in real GDP (with strong growth in quarters 2&3 of 3.8% and 4.4%). Expect all tariffs to be in place under other legislation to be in place in coming months. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump's willingness to use U.S. economic strength through tariffs, sanctions and other methods comes from the view that in the decade of the 1990s and 2000s U.S. worker and the U.S. was suckered by others. In this situation it was seen as acceptable to use U.S. tariffs and economic pressure to fix a global trading system and a China trade surplus with the U.S. exceeding $300 billion a year. Mr. Lighthizer it should be remembered, now the top trade negotiator with China was also the trade negotiator with Japan when it enjoyed a similar trade surplus with the U.S. during the Reagan administration. Economic pressure did not have to be ratcheted up to this level with Japan at the time. Japan was an ally at the time in the Cold War, Today China is seen as both a global competitor in world affairs and a technological competitor. Unlike the situation with Japan many Republican and Democratic administrations had failed to tackle the growing trade imbalance with China till it had become unsustainable. The views of Mr. Trump on trade were views articulated by Mr. Lighthizer for the last ten years resulting in a shift in opinion on trade in the U.S. by 2016 where a majority of people in the U.S. felt that globalization and world trade was working against American workers and industry. Mr. Trump as a Republican was both responding to the failure of others to tackle trade issues hurting the U.S. worker and business, as well as rallying support from workers, farmers and business to his party.   ...
dw.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
DW.com report by Mu Ciu shows a CATL(Contemporary Amperex Technology) plant in Arnstadt, Thuringia, in eastern Germany. It will not bridge Germany's technology gap. German and US consultants at the microeconomic level of the company and German and US economists at the macroeconomic level of the economy entirely fail to grasp the effectiveness of China's investment driven model. Of its joint partnering with European and American companies and China's single minded focus on technology access. This is why the DJT US administration has warned Europe that it is failing economically. China's macroeconomic and microeconomic model are run by the same authority by the state, and according to goals and plans (which in a socialist economy is weak at the microeconomic company level lacking the initiative and freedom of action). By combining its macreconomic framework run by the state with a micreconomic company level run by the state but on free market lines the Chinese investment driven model has dual advantages and operates at a speed that far surpasses the German and American model. It's society suffers as a consequence, but in few short decades 1990-2009/2020 this is all it could accomplish with a single focus on modernization for what was once a peasant agricultural economy. Where it lacks is in future technology access and as long as weak companies in the US and Germany partner with Chinese companies the technology access for Chinese companies give it the essential ingredient for its investment model to work, as American and European companies can waver in investment Chinese companies backed by the government will not waver in investment and have the clear advantage. DJT's approach is to give a big shock to the entire system of world trade now run by China, so that this is no longer going to work at the macroeconomic level and legislate huge investment incentives for one time depreciation and other moves to get American companies to invest. It wants Europe to do the same, including getting rid of the bureaucratic structures and regulations. German Chancellor Merz is getting the message and is acting quickly first with the trillion dollar investment plan, the meetings with Draghi and Meloni to get Italy and like minded nations on board, and internal efforts to get rid of regulations and bureaucratic structures, and building a new partnership with India to remove an error of Merkel/ Clinton+ Obama in excessive concentration and dependence on China. This requires a steady hand and steady governments, steady policy, and companies in America, Europe and India to work together for the long haul without wavering or delay, to rebuild the world economy along new lines and on a new path. ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Us continues to take strong action against drug trafficking. US Foreign Minister Rubio says this will continue as the US reasserts the Monroe Doctrine in this hemisphere after suffering staggering losses in the fentanyl trafficking to its territory of three times the 100,000 lives lost in the Korean and Vietnam Wars, more than World War I and 75% of the deaths in World War II on the front against the Nazis and the Imperial Japanese Army that invaded China. Today that fentanyl trafficking involves China and Mexico, two trade partners that depend on US trade for job and the economy. Yet politicians have failed the American people by not taking the action on the Monroe doctrine of no colonial powers in this hemisphere, and US ensuring good government in this hemisphere based on it's centuries traditions of the rule of law dating back to 1600 with the founding of these colonies under the British laws and institutions.

South China Morning Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This analysis in the South China Morning Post says the current phase of U.S. China trade relations is more than a trade war, it is about changing the whole economic and industrial approach of China. In the same way that Japan changed after the talks during the Reagan administration and moved in a new direction. Robert Lighthizer was Deputy Trade representative at that time, he is the U.S. Trade Representative today.

Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump escalates the trade battle with China by increasing tariffs on $200 billion Chinese goods from 10% to 25%. The U.S. says China went back on its commitments in a 150 page agreement at the 11th hour or last minute, by deleting these commitments in all 7 chapters of this agreement. These are firm commitments sought by the U.S. in a number of areas of deep concern to the U.S. and the U.S. Trade Representative Mr. Lighthizer had already conveyed the determination of the U.S. to not relent on this. In the past China was seen to go back on its commitments and the U.S. side now wanted to ensure promises were kept. The U.S. concerns cover- theft of intellectual property and trade secrets, forced technology transfers, competition policy, access to financial services and currency manipulation.  The situation has been building up fro a decade with the Trump campaign honing in on this issue of China stealing U.S. jobs, and factory closures in the U.S., because of unfair trading practices. It also led to Mr. Trump's winning election campaign in the American midwestern states. With China seen as gaining an unfair technological advantage over the U.S., most recently over 5G telecom networks, the U.S. is not likely to back down. The U.S. is less dependent on trade with China. China is more dependent on the U.S. and a lot of manufacturing jobs in China are affected by the U.S. tariffs. This is why president Trump has decided to take a strong stand, including putting on tariffs on and additional $300 billion of Chinese goods.   ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US DJT administration using Section 301 creates the tariffs the US Supreme Court struck down- the EU, Mexico, Canada at 10%, Japan,, India China at 12.5%- June 2 2026. These countries are not doing enough to control the importation of products made with forced labour. This only goes to show what was said at that time and which the SCOTUS itself said the DJT administration could do, find other laws by which the same tariffs could be imposed. By the time the US Supreme Court reviewed the case it was already clear that all these countries had accepted DJT tariffs, and most had negotiated fair deals with the US including making up for past abuses by these countries of the international trading system. The US Supreme Court its shortsightedness ignored this or did not quite grasp this as Justices legal knowledge of facts does not mean grasp of the facts of commerce, trade and business and the history underlying it. Jamieson Greer interviewed at the Council of Foreign Relations this week and Robert Lighhizer in Foreign Affairs (covered and summarized on these Lyrarc pages this week as found rarely in other places) have documented these abuses in detail leading to the US losing $20 trillion in wealth shifted to these countries and its manufacturing dependent communities devastated by loss of over 5 million jobs through the shortsightedness of Bush/Obama adminstrations who let this happen, and these countries that took advantage with reckless disregard for these communities in the US, on a scale unknown in history.  ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Cordoba and Gurman cover the Justice Department case against Raul Castro, 94 years, of Cuba who runs the country. Jim Ratcliffe of the US government visited Cuba recently to let the Cuban government know that it had to make changes and there was a limited window. Raul Castro was defense minister, and is brother of Fidel Castro, the revolutionary who fought to overthrow the government of dictator Batista, made some short term improvements, but failed badly for the Cuban people with a policy that confronted the US and brought foreign powers to the western hemisphere. China could remain communist, keep Mao's memory, and adopt the market system, to develop the modern economy it has because of adopting western ideas, science and technology. And build what is otherwise a free market economy, and became a key trade partner, briefly an ally of the US as the Soviet Union collapsed- nothing like this happened in Cuba. Tourism was used simply as a way to protect the rest of the completely centralized economy and a state within a state built through an elite that ran a separate section of the armed forces under Raul Castro, kept a regimented society. Even that has failed. Nowhere in Latin America is there so many signs of failure, and it has also brought down societies that copied the rhetoric and nationalist slogans such as Venezuela and Colombia. In some parts of Mexico the Cuban rhetoric still sounds good but the reality is starkly different, Mexico itself is run on a model closer to that in the US, and Mexico has serious problems in civil society relating to immigration and drugs in its relationship with the US. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump's statement calling for a list of goods for tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods leaves China without a clear response and facing new risks. The U.S. exports about $150 billion in goods to China so that China would have to impose penalties to respond at the same level. Placing restrictions on American firms on access to China's market, and imposing other penalties would have the effect of reinforcing the perception of unfair practices targeting American business and lead to hardening of U.S. response.  The U.S. sees itself as being in a better position with the U.S. economy experiencing a growth trend. China with large local government and bank debt faces a difficult situation. President Jinping's policy of reducing the risks of bad debt in the banking system involved sacrificing some growth to stabilize the system. China's GDP growth in 2017 was 6.9%, the target at 6.5%. Future targets and actual growth now look to be much lower.The trade war with the U.S. has the effect of dampening growth leading to calls for the central bank to loosen its monetary stance. In response to Trump's announcement the People's Bank of China pumped $31 billion into the nation's banks. China is studying Japan's response in the 1980's and 1990's when the U.S. took strong action against Japan's growing trade surplus. Japan responded by appreciating its currency and using stimulus to cushion the effect of lower exports on the economy. The stimulus led to the housing bubble and over time a period of low growth and stagnant economy. The large China stimulus in 2008-2009 has compounded the problems in the banking system. Not deleveraging and controlling financial risks in China's banking system because of the trade war would bring a new set of risks. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In this thoughtful essay Bob Davis of the WSJ asks whether the decision of the Clinton administration to admit China into the World Trade Organization was a bad one for the U.S.  Mr. Clinton in 2000 tried to persuade Congress citing words of president Woodrow Wilson that of a dream "of a world full of free markets, free elections, and free peoples working together."  Every year China would have its most favored nation status renewed with help from supporters in Congress. After WTO entry this was not necessary. Chinese leaders saw the entry into WTO as a way to knock down trade barriers, to act a wrecking ball for the planned economy, to give the economy a big boost.  In 1994 China was a relatively backward economy with 60% of the population living on less than $1.90 a day. Hard to imagine today.  Not everyone was convinced that it was good for the U.S. This included a trade attorney who had tackled a huge trade deficit with Japan in the Reagan period- Robert Lighthizer. Lighthizer was Deputy Trade Representative negotiating with the Japanese. His prediction was that no job in America would be safe once China entered the WTO, that China would become a dominant trading nation.  Robert Cassidy, 73, trade negotiator for president Clinton looks back on that time and says that he regrets what has happened, that all his work night and a day only benefited business and hurt workers. David Autor, MIT economist and his colleagues,  in a later study documented loss of 2.4 million jobs to Chinese competition between 1999 and 2011, in many manufacturing towns dotting the landscape of America, particularly in the midwestern states. And the expectation that the higher economic growth would lead to less political control did not turn out to be true.  In the process multinationals rushed to China after WTO entry and China became the world's manufacturing floor. By 2013 China's per capita income reached $7000, after years of fast GDP growth approaching 10% a year.  About 400 million Chinese were lifted out of poverty from living on less than $1.90 per day from 1999 to 2011, according to the World Bank. A big problem was that the U.S. did not plan for the change from WTO entry. No resources were allocated for the plan to let American workers adjust through worker retraining and special trade handicapped income support, to allow for a slow planned shift. Instead the pace of growth was faster than that which the U.S. faced with the Japanese export offensive in the eighties. China experienced double digit growth after 2000. The irony is that the Republican administrations that followed Clinton followed a policy of free trade to the advantage of China's state run economy when working class Americans voted mostly for the Democratic Party. Little was done and little said in the media from Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the establishment during this time even after Mr. David Autor documented the effects of trade in the U.S.  Till Mr. Trump recognizing the alienation in communities hit by job losses from trade upended American politics, shifted this part of the electorate to the Republican base. Mr. Lighthizer's view is that complaints about China should be left out of WTO because it is naive to tackle it that way. With a $375 billion China trade deficit for 2017 the challenge has to be met in a different way, and the U.S. has to rely on regaining its economic strength within a fair trading framework. Having negotiated with the Japanese Mr. Lighthizer sees the approach adopted then as the one right for today. During the long negotiations Lighthizer is said to have received many negotiating positions of the Japanese signifying no change in long sessions. He once simply made a paper plane and sent it right back, in one of these sessions. He meant that the U.S. was serious about reversing the imbalance in trade. ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The role of Merz and Leyen of the CDU is bigger than is grasped in the trade deal with India and the change that Germany has made in shifting the gaze and engagement of the European community towards the 1.4 billion people of India for a new start after the disappointment of the relationship with China from the Merkel years. Merkel completely failed to understand China its history, and Asia and its history. India as the homeland of Buddhism is the source of the spiritual culture of China and Japan, Korea and Vietnam. The intervening period of invasions from north in the 15th to 17th century and British rule and the European early shift to science and industry in the 18th to 20th century has acted as a hazy atmosphere that clouds many perceptions of how Indian, Chinese, and Japanese history has evolved.  For Merkel there was the additional layer of misperceptions from the period growing up the GDR, or Communist East Germany in Soviet influence. This is why Merz completely fit into the Kite festival mood and atmosphere on the banks of the Sabarmati in Ahmedabad and at the Sabarmati Ashram of Gandhi in January 2026. Leyen also of the Christian Democrats could grasp the fact that German philosopher Schlegel translated the Bhagavad Gita from Sanskrit into German soon after Charles Wilkins did this in 1724. People to people ties have great potential to develop between Europe and India now that the engagement is set for the next 20 years at every level by Leyen, Merz and Modi, so that the world is completely transformed in ways that can never be imagined today.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The implications of China's support for Russia on Ukraine for Eastern European countries and for NATO. As the war drags on Eastern European countries say China's support of Russia in trade and commercial relations prolongs the war in Ukraine.

The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US- China trade relations 2025 and XI's rare earth minerals export restrictions response to US tariffs. DJT resonse was 100% tariff on China from 57%. After meeting Xi in Busan, South Korea, after the APEC meetings, US settled on 10% reduction in tariffs from the 57% tariffs on Chinese products down now to 47%. The 100% tariff was withdrawn by DJT and China's Xi settled on withdrawing restrictions on exports of rare earth minerals. The fentanyl tariffs are still in place and the WSJ editorial says not much is likely to happen on fentanyl action by China to stop exports of fentanyl that reach the US through Mexico. China says it will take in soyabeans exports. US signs agreement with Australia to develop alternative supplies of rare earth minerals. The WSJ says for tariffs action to work US should not tariff allies. Yet broad tariffs action was necessary as partners Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the EU, Canada and Mexico were also nations that created an unfair trade situation for the US. The US took action on all nations that take unfair advantage of free trade concepts to benefit them which also add to the credibility of tariffs as effort to restore fairness in world trade.  ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Keith Bradsher of the NYT points out that the tariffs war between China and the U.S. is not just about trade and competitive advantage. He says this marks a fundamental shift in the way China operates as the world's manufacturing floor. Gradually change is taking place as production moves out of China to places such as Vietnam, Indonesia, India, and other countries in Asia. The entire supply chain for manufacturing is affected in the tariffs war and the U.S. insistence on China changing its policies subsidizing manufacturing plants to maintain an export advantage in violation of WTO principles for fair trade.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
David Autor at MIT authored some of the first detailed studies about the severe disruption in U.S. communities from the trade with China following China's entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001. The sheer size of the impact now appears to have been underestimated by economists and other experts. It was believed says Hilsenrath and Davis, that the U.S. having absorbed the impact of trade with Japan in the seventies and eighties, and with Mexico following NAFTA, could do the same with China. That turns out to be false. Much of 2016 election season has been spent seeing the rise of anti-trade movements led by Trump and Sanders, and reveals a deep discontent with job shifting overseas, and disruption of communities across America by trade patterns. What happened? In 2015 China's exports to the U.S. reached 2.7% of U.S. GDP. Hilsenrath and Davis say it was about 1% less with Japan and Mexico when their exports surged. The rapidity of the impact is another problem. It took 12 years following Japan's emergence as a major supplier, to reach the same level of impact that China had only 4 years after China's entry into the WTO in 2001. A similiar situation of 12 years happened with Mexico after NAFTA. Another problem is that Japan's exports impacted mostly steel and autos, China's exports impacted a whole range of industries. The speed with which China's planners sought to change and modernize their manufacturing  base is unprecedented in history, and has an impact not only on the U.S. as a recipient of low cost exports, but also on China as it struggles with bad debts and job losses today, that are a legacy of that too rapid move. This was part of the drive to urbanize China rapidly by shifting agricultural workers to factories in the cities, at a pace unprecedented in history. Another factor not mentioned is the global financial crisis of 2008-2009 that hurt U.S. manufacturing in the auto and other industries, and the wide impact this had in loss of jobs and decline in wages. By 2010 the tide of public opinion had shifted. The WSJ/NBC poll of September 2010, cited in detail in WSJ 10/2/2010 under "Americans Sour on Foreign Trade" shows over 80% consistently for all levels of income, over $75,000 and under $75,000, Republicans and Democrats, working class Americans or well educated Americans, saying that Americans were struggling and there was less hiring, because of how trade had impacted their communities. Lyrarc covered this in considerable detail since 2006. All political parties, business leaders, ignored the implications of this huge change, the media covered it but assumed it would take care of itself as trade with Japan had done previously, and it was left to Trump and Sanders as outsiders to call it like they saw it 5 years later.  Economic inequality has widened in China to the point of it becoming unrecognizable as a former socialist economy. Now both countries are faced with the job of picking up, chastened by the experience, and hoping to limit the political fallout to achieve economic recovery. The very open trading system that had generated prosperity since World War II was being put at risk by a lack of awareness that trade brings with it changes, winners and losers, and manufacturing jobs moving overseas on a scale and speed unprecedented in history, was something that no one could cope with. ...
POLITICO Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer says this is not chaos in tariff policy because you don't change 70 years of policy overnight. He says China's is highest because it has the highest trade deficit, then EU, Japan, South Korea at 15% because of the smaller deficits with these nations, Vietnam because it is used  by China to send products to the US, India because of geopolitical reasons buying Russian oil. See Dasha Burns, Politico White House Bureau Chief's  interview with USTR Jamieson Greer.  He says about India- Jamieson USTR calls India "an outlier" and says "I'm confident we will get a deal with India in the near future." India he says has largely corrected its imports of Russian oil and negotiations are underway for a deal.  ON USMCA Greer says of the $31 trillion in trade with Canada and Mexico $29 trillion is us right. trade between Canda and Mexico is small. So he says it makes sense to negotiate separately with Canada and separately with Mexico. This suggests that there doesnt need to be a USMCA- separate deals are just fine says Greer. Mexico has gained much in automobiles under USMCA- US wants to make more in the US including auto parts which it can do by negotiating this with Mexico. It does not make a ton of economic sense to marry the three economies together, says Greer, as the import export profiles, lab,or situations are all different. Are Tariffs good for the economy and do they lead to higher prices? Greer says inflation was down in the first DJT term in trade with China and tariffs. Greer says there is never a 1 to 1 with tariffs. It tariffs become a kind of leveage in getting agreements. That is the style of these tariffs. You tell Ecuador or Brazil we don't make these here so there will be no tariffs on bananas and on coffee. Says Greer- we have seen inflation in check, imported goods relatively low priced. We have seen that we can have growth and higher wages with tariffs at the same time. The growth in 2025 third quarter at 3.8% annual growth, and Atlanta Fed predicting 4.2% growth in 2026. And tariff money can be used for paying down the debt and financing America's reindustrialization, Greer says members of Congress are asking about this.When a new administration comes tariffs will still be part of the playbook. ...
POLITICO Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
If the trade war escalates to the point at which president Trump imposes tariffs on all Chinese goods imported into the U.S. on Jan. 1, 2019, China could retaliate with its own tariffs and this might affect Boeing aircraft as well. The results would be to tip the economies of both countries into a recession, and affect Mr. Trump's best chances for reelection in 2020. This can happen as Mr. Trump has a great deal of confidence in his negotiating style. The negotiations so far have shown China misread the U.S. and Mr. Trump leading to a strong U.S. response.  There is also the importance of not losing face, Mr. Xi's domestic audience, Chinese industry that sees a fundamental change from state subsidies model as eroding its position and offering resistance, patriotic sentiment making it harder to meet U.S. demands. Fundamentally for Mr. Trump it is about U.S. trade deficit and changing the huge trade surplus of almost $1 trillion that China enjoys each year with the U.S. which has been and is no longer sustainable. Mr. Trump also has the backing of Republicans on this issue and Democrats cannot afford to be soft on this issue as it involves American workers and jobs are at stake. Both sides could be in for a protracted negotiation as Mr. Trump feels it is right for Americans to expect fair trade and technology transfer that respects American concerns. In addition the U.S. could sense that it exports less to China, is less dependent on exports than China, and as the party that is hurt by unfair practices insist on its position. After Japan agreed to U.S. demands that it reverse a huge trade surplus in the seventies in which Mr. Lighthizer was the negotiator its growth declined sharply and is economy stagnated. China may sense inside that this could happen to its economy. Today Lighthizer the U.S. negotiator and Trade Representative could also push hard because of he was able to convince Japan to change its course. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. trade deficit with China was declining till the coronavirus hit in February. Now it is back on the way up, a warning signal for the Trump administration as it seeks to stop sending American wealth out of the country in an utterly disproportionate way of $346 billion in just 2019 after taking action on tariffs and renegotiating trade agreements.  Imports grew 11% in July to $231 billion. While exports increased but not as much by 8.1% to $168 billion in July, still well below February/s $209 billion. That leaves a trade gap of $63 billion. This is the largest trade deficit since July 2008. The U.S. trade deficit is a major issue and is watched carefully as the Trump administration sets a goal of rebalancing world trade so that the U.S. no longer runs such large trade deficits with China, and Germany, and does not shift wealth overseas. The U.S. trade deficit with China in 2019 was $346 billion, with Japan and Germany it is much smaller close to $70 billion for each country. The Trump administration goal is to all out reduce this deficit through trade agreements and other actions that stop the current outflow of U.S. wealth overseas by $1 billion a day to just one country. For this it seek a level playing field which means other countries have to face tariffs if they unfairly subsidize their industries or violate labor rights for unfair competition, or in other ways seek to unfairly gain an advantage over the U.S. including through transfer of technologies from the U.S. ...
Le Monde.fr Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US trade with Germany now exceeds China's trade with Germany. With the change in supply chains, slower German economy leading to lower imports and a slowing Chinese economy, this is likely to lead to US and Germany having increasing trade relations and two way trade from now on.

The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China, Japan and South Korea routinely provide assistance to their companies and through this to the workforce.  Economists who lacked understanding of business stuck to an ideological idea that the capitalist system of Adam Smith was built on fair competition. What they did not understand was what was meant by fair and what capitalism prevailed since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in the 1750's and Adam Smith's days. Much of the British business was based on its own version of fairness and trade which meant whatever worked for British domination of trade, the oceans, and markets. These economists missed this completely. Now the US shows it is able to do what Britain of Smith's days and Japan, China in the post 1950's and 1990's have done to dominate world trade and world shipping and logistics, and has the funds to provide assistance to American companies for world markets. $550 Billion from standard 10-15% tariffs charge for all nations to access US market as a fund to finance US Manufacturing.  ...

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