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.


WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Even China has not campaigned the way Canada, Mexico and British, American media have against DJT Tariffs because China knows it is basically about getting an even playing field when it is the only country with $1 trillion in trade in its favor in 2024, 12 times the Japanese high of $82 billion trade surplus in 2007. But why should China campaign when the American and British, German media are going to do the job for China? A simple quiz to K-12 would ask school children when is the last time a country has a $1 trillion trade surplus? Answer: Never. Greg Ip has written a few years back that the devastation of China outshoring of American factories and jobs was unlike the 1980's Japan trade invasion because of first China's size, second by the speed with which it happened at 10-14% Chinese GDP growth. There is a third Japan was an ally needing US for security and backed down, China's case is different it is challenging the US for control of the world economy and will fight this one over the long haul. Greg Ip of WSJ on the 53 countries asking to negotiate US Liberation Day April 2, 2025 Tariffs. These countries include Allies of the US in full support asking to negotiate Israel, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, India Allies of the US in partial support asking to negotiate Britain Allies of the US not in full support asking to negotiate Germany, France Allies of the US in the past campaigning against the US, asking to negotiate Canada, Mexico Not Allies of the US, not in full support, not campaigning against the US China A look at his list tells one only one thing, mostly all trading partners except for the $146 billion exports of the US which represents exports to China are the exports that are at risk if things don't work out on tariffs. This is what the media today WSJ added this last week to the NYT, Wash. Post and the BBC, Guardian of UK, German media will not tell the reader.  The DJT Tariffs and Tariff negotiations are Lighthizer Tariff negotiations which won the fight with Japan in the 1980's over unfair trade and gaining a level playing field. Lighthizer as Deputy US Trade Representative conducted the tough negotiations with Japan. He was USTR in 2016-2020 and his Deputy Jamieson is now USTR in 2025       ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Political ads in the 2010 election campaign that point to the loss of jobs to China. A big shift in public opinion on the subject of US-China trade and jobs at home. This will increase pressure on the Obama administration for serious results in the negotiations for the appreciation of the yuan.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Gerlad Seib points out that one should look less at what president Trump accomplished in the first 100 days and more at how he operated and learned during this initial period. This is certainly true because much of what happened in the first 100 days contradicts some of the tone that Trump setup during the campaign. When it comes to governing Trump has made an effort to learn and adapt and show resilience in the face of early setbacks on the travel ban and the health care bill, the Flynn episode. After this early period Trump took on a more disciplined approach, gave more room to and listened to more respected advisors- Tillerson on foreign affairs in shaping policy with Russia leading to Tillerson's presence at Lucca massacre memorial in Italy sending a clear signal about U.S. policies in line with its role in the past century in world affairs, Gary Cohn and Ross on economic policy and seeking Cohn's advice on tax plan, Ross's on NAFTA negotiations with Mexico. As a result the NAFTA fears were calmed down with statements by Wilbur Ross, the Commerce Secretary, that the goal was a win-win relationship with Mexico. Trump worked with his party in Congress to have the Supreme Court nomination of Gorsuch approved. Meetings with Merkel of Germany and Jinping of China were carefully planned and new relationships established as Seib points out, without ruffling trade relations. The appointment of Robert Lighthizer, as Trade Representative, also shows that efforts to give the U.S. a more level playing field in trade will be resolutely pursued in the win-win context. Lyrarc has profiled Lighthizer earlier in this decade after his op-eds in the media as he correctly anticipated the changing public mood on the need for fairness in trade relations. On relations with China and South Korea, Jim Mattis has taken the lead, and Pence's visit to South Korea also show deftness in handling what is one of the most difficult issues in foreign affairs. Mattis and Tillerson also have helped reinforce the Republican party policies on NATO and Europe, with the visit of NATO secretary general Stoltenberg to the White House. In the end it is how much you can learn in the first year, how much you listen, and the courage to act in difficult situations, the willingness to act contrary to one's instincts and self interest where necessary, that matters. This is especially true in an environment where as Seib points out the Democratic Party stands opposed to the Trump administration following a bitter election campaign.   ...
ProPublica Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in ProPublica on October 13, 2020, by Lydia DePillis was written near the end of Robert Lighhizer's term as US Trade Representative.  Bottom Line: It is human behaviour that no country, no kingdom or group will give up its money advantages secured when the opposition was weak or disorganized till the last fight is fought. The British were not giving up India, a source of financing the war against Napoleon in 1800's and then the Industrial Revolution in 1850's, the Dutch were not giving up the financial advantages of their Spices Empire in Batavia (Indonesia). History has shown this. Once gained under a state capitalism Japan was not going to give up its financial advantages gained by the 1980's when the US was weak or disorganized, till the last battle was fought.  Lighthizer who for the relentless Japanese was equally relentless till the goal of fair and level playing field for America was secured. This is true for China today on Liberation Day. This entire report by De Pillis in 2020 shows the Chinese would be relentless in 2020 like the Japanese in the 1980's, the Dutch in Indonesia  in the 18th and 19th century and the British in India in the 19th century and 20th century. China turned Mexico and Vietnam into supply routes into the US market. It continued its efforts to gain US technology in other ways. USTR older officials from the Bush Obama years of failed negotiations with China and endless hours putting together minute details of agreements including the TransPacific Agreement of Obama were not going to like the new approach of Lighthizer so stuck were they with the old approach of no clear goal and not getting an even playing field from China. ...
France 24 Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The treaty of handover by Britain of Hong Kong under one country, two systems was flawed in the way it was negotiated. French commentators looking at the problem say the city is caught between its past in the British Empire and the new monolithic state that China represents. Under the British French visitors looked at the city and wondered how there was freedom but no democracy, people were just selfishly just interested in making money. Chris Patten, Britain's administrator of the territory tried but failed to get democratic process, During the negotiations in 1984 for handover the chief British negotiator, Percy Cradock, a former ambassador to China, tells the Australian Broadcasting Corporation that - In Hong Kong where there is such a disparity in strength between the two sides, you go for the best you can get, I take the simple view that half a loaf is better than no bread." Britain had very little leverage to secure a separate future for Hong Kong because it was small compared to much larger China resulting unequal negotiations. The same is true today as the best Britain could do is to get out a joint declaration with Australia and Canada saying that it did not approve the new security law, that it violated the treaty signed by Britain and China. The French view expressed by the editor of La Croix is that hasty poorly planned British exits- as happened in British India -have led to crises and conflicts for postcolonial generations, a legacy of British colonial rule. India and Pakistan still sorting out Kashmir, and India and China still fighting about the McMahon Line border area. The situation is very different for the U.S. which now has to respond in some way, and this comes as trade tensions and coronavirus tensions about its origins in China and the failure of Beijing to allow quick entry for an American team into Wuhan. This being for 7 weeks between Jan 6 request and February 16 permission. America sees this as losing 7 precious weeks to make up its own determination of the dangers when every week health experts say means saving or losing tens of thousands of lives. With loss of 100,000 lives the Trump administration has a sense of being misled. This French report in FR24 points out that the lack of a strong response from the U.S. would be something similar to letting the Berlin Wall happen without a response. Both sides in a situation where the territory of Hong Kong remained mostly about money and with a disproportionate influence of business interests similar to its founding under the unequal treaties of the 1850's. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Efforts to impeach two previous presidents including Democrat Clinton failed in the Senate where the vote requires a two thirds majority. The first impeachment vote against Mr. Trump failed in the Senate. In the House of Representatives only a simple majority is required. Majority Leader McConnell says he will not reconvene the Senate before president Biden takes office. Vice President Pence has refused to invoke the 25th Amendment. House Democrats have moved ahead to vote for impeachment of president Trump for the storming of the Capitol offices in Washington D.C. Their impeachment statement says president Trump's remarks that his supporters had to fight like hell or they would not have a country, constituted incitement of supporters. President Trump won 74 million votes in the last election more than in the 2016 election and lost with Mr. Biden winning 81 million votes after polarization of the country. With such a large portion of the country voting for Mr. Trump Mr. Biden risks his agenda of fighting the pandemic, and other parts of his program, becoming immersed in partisan infighting. This would also result in continuing the division of the country, and continue polarization.  About 5 House Republicans are expected to support impeachment. In the Senate some Republicans say there are impeachable offenses yet only Mr. McConnell and the senator from Utah, Mr. Mitt Romney, favor impeachment.  Mr. Trump's style of governing was controversial from the beginning of his campaign in 2016, strident and taking on critics. He governed through relative moderation compared to his aggressive posture towards critics. For instance on Mexico his remarks offended critics, yet he negotiated a new trade agreement with Mexico replacing NAFTA to ensure worker protections in Mexico, and worker jobs and wages in the U.S. Negotiations with China on trade were conducted by a seasoned veteran, Mr Lighthizer,  who was deputy Trade Representative under Reagan, and negotiated the trade agreement with Japan that worked to reduce Japanese trade surplus in the eighties. On the economy before the pandemic hit in March president Trump made significant progress reducing unemployment.      ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) free trade pact led by Japan and the U.S. moves to the next stage with legislation introduced by Orrin Hatch and Ron Wyden in the U.S. Congress for granting trade promotion authority to the U.S. president. This would facilitate the negotiation of an agreement leading to concessions by different countries. Talks between Japan and the U.S. intensified with the U.S. president Obama saying in his 2015 State of the Union message that China wanted to write the rules for trade in Asia, and asking why the U.S. should not work to write its own rules. Defense Secretary, Aston Carter, called it more important than another aircraft carrier. Support from Europe, India and other countries for the China sponsored Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, as a rival to the U.S. dominated World Bank and IMF, also give urgency to the TPP. The TPP countries, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Peru and Chile, make up over $400 billion of about $4 trillion in U.S. trade, according to the Peterson Institute for International Economics. The TPP is now seen not just a free trade pact, but also as away to counter China's influence in Asia. Experts see the Obama administration as having bungled its handling of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank which the U.S. did not join, and its allies in Europe, other Asian countries including India, decided to join as founding members. Democrats in Congress led by Senator Schumer, Warren, oppose the legislation granting fast track for free trade pacts citing the loss of jobs and lowering of wages for workers in manufacturing in the U.S., with only about a dozen Democrats favoring the legislation, leading to a split in the party. Projections by Peter Petri, Michael Plummer, Fan Zhai, of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, show a net negative impact on depressed wage sectors such as U.S. manufacturing with additional $45 billion in U.S. imports and $35 billion in exports for heavy manufacturing from the TPP free trade pact, and additional $33 billion of U.S. imports and $10 billion exports in light manufacturing by 2025. Higher wage sectors such as U.S. Services including IT get a boost with additional $42 billion in exports and $ 8 billion imports. Agriculture shows insignificant gains with additional exports of $2 billion and imports of 0.5 billion. The auto and transport sector disproportionately favors Japan with $33 billion in additional U.S. imports and $8 billion in exports. ...
WSJ Original article ›
oUS China Policy FOundation Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Media accounts have given so much attention to the Nixon Feb. 1972 visit to China that most people may be unaware that this was just an important yet small beginning. The significance of what happened after 1972 is not fully understood. In 1973 the US liasion Office was setup in Beijing and China's liasion office in Washington DC.  Beyond this not much happened. Why? In 1972 election year the Watergate scandal started in June of that year only 4 months after the Nixon China visit. Nixon was too engaged with fighting impeachment that there was not much followup to the visit to China. In 1974 Nixon resigned and Gerald Ford became president. Till Carter became president in 1976 and in 1977 negotiations began to upgrade relations with premier Deng Xiaoping visiting the US in 1979. In China too a lot was happening. Mao was hospitalized in 1972 during Nixon's visit to China, the reason for the urgency on the Chinese side. In 1976 within a few months first premier Chou en lai and then chairman Mao passed away. A power struggle led to the head of the Military Commission Deng taking control. It was not till 1977 under Jimmy Carter 5 years after 1972 that China began full normalization, gained diplomatic recognition as the People's Republic of China and trade, cultural contacts were started.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Trade economists from Ivy League universities, are still peddling the old theories on trade from textbooks that make no sense and have got America in this huge mess that it is in where other countries are ripping America off with unfair trade practices. These economists have turned a blind eye, turned their backs to the great damage done to industrial towns and communities across America for two decades with the loss of manufacturing. Take Irwin's point that the US would have to monitor rates on 13000 tariff line items. This is ridiculous because the US simply needs to monitor the key products such as semiconductors, oil and gas, LNG. In just one negotiation with India the US having a trade deficit DJT states of $100 billion with India- terrible trade. By opening up supply of LNG and oil US can fill India's needs for Oil and LNG and cut the deficit to zero. Who came up with this idea. Indian PM Modi and his trade team. Once it was known that the status quo was unacceptable India came up with its own ideas lets import what we get from Russia from the US. Yes we had discounts from Russia but that was when oil prices were high. DJT's effort to get oil prices down by increasing US production will make it possible for India to get this oil at similar prices. India is a much bigger economy now than during Covid 5 years back India can do this. US and India win-win by doing joint aviation production deals and US gains with sale of F-35 stealth fighters. It is just common sense. Sadly, much of this is common sense that is beyond Ivy League Economics departments at American universities.  Reciprocal Tariffs make a lot of sense because this is how fairness is done- for China, for India. In the case of Mexico, Canada, China, on stopping flow of fentanyl- this reciprocal tariff is not a tariff it is as Commerce Secretarty Luttnick pointed out domestic policy of the United States. Which country would tolerate 490,000 deaths from fentanyl over 12 years and not take domesti policy action. It is not that the policy actions are taken it is that these action should have been taken a long time back. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The rise of Japan was a major challenge for president Reagan in the 1980's in the way president Trump is confronting the rise of China. The Reagan administration obtained the concessions it needed from Japan. The negotiator for the U.S. side during the Reagan years - Robert Lighthizer. Lighthizer is using his experience in winning concessions from Japan in his role as top trade negotiator with China.  As the WSJ points out Japan ceased to be a threat to the U.S. faster than anyone thought possible. 

But there is one problem even if this happens the warning is that the imbalances with Japan simply transferred over time to China. The warning is for America's tendency to spend money it does not have, and for how long.

DW.COM Original article ›
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In a first at Davos World Economic Forum, China's president Xi Jinping uses the 2017 meeting to give a one hour long spirited defense of the world trading system, critical of U.S. president elect Trump's protectionist views without naming him. Xi pointed out that "no one will be winners in a trade war." And went on to add that restricting world trade was like "locking oneself in a dark room, keeping out wind and rain from outside but also light and air." For the first time Jinping stated that China would take the U.S. role of defending the world trading system from attack as needed. On climate change Xi defended the Paris accords, and gave China's commitment to pursue changes regardless of what the U.S. under president Trump does. This follows Chancellor Merkel of Germany's statements on the issue critical of the views of president elect Trump, and taking the lead to defend the world trading system. Xi also pointed out that many of the ills that led to voter discontent in the West were not really from the freeing up of trade but from the pursuit of excessive profit with the financial crisis of 2008.   ...
South China Morning Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in The South China Morning Post in Hong Kong, gives insights into the Chinese position in trade war with the U.S.  China has its own internal groups which support China being able to take a leadership role in world affairs. Xi Jinping made giving China a prominent role in the world a feature of his presidency. China  has this internal audience and its own sense that China's resurgence was won with hard work and cooperation, plus dedication of the Chinese people. In the past Japan and South Korea also used state subsidized industries, and subsidies to gain leadership in key business sectors involving high technology. China would see this state subsidies model as its own model of development. From this standpoint the U.S. demands on subsidies as unfair competition could be seen as changing a key part of its economic model.  Asking China to put everything in writing and show tangible proof of enforcement as the U.S. insisted in talks, was too much for the Chinese side. China said trust us to do this, and lift the tariffs based on our verbal assurances. The U.S. having seen decades of no progress on this point, wanted tangible proof before tariffs were lifted. Added to the demands on subsidies were the demands for no more of what the U.S. calls stealing of U.S. technology through forced transfer of technology by U.S. firms as a condition to operate in Chinese markets. With the U.S. lagging in 5G technology and Huawei ahead the issue resonates on the U.S. side. Add to this Mr. Trump's key voter base includes the former Democratic party supporting workers who have shifted to him because of trade agreements and policies of Clinton and Obama that hurt American workers through seemingly endless closure of manufacturing plants from Chinese competition.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Jacobs and Richtel of the NYT give this exceptional story of how Mexico changed between 1980 and 2016. Following the joining of NAFTA free trade zone the Mexican diet and food ecosystem began to more closely resemble the food diet system in the U.S. bringing with it severe health consequences. Soda and coke are now more entrenched in Mexico, as are fast food outlets. In 1980 only 7% of Mexicans were obese, compared to 20% in 2016, according to Institute for Health Metrics at the University of Washington. And diabetes kills 80,000 people a year, becoming the top killer according to the World Health Organization. A trade expert at Tufts University, Timothy Wise, says Mexico took on the worst aspects of a first world country like the U.S., with few protections. A similar problem is taking place in India and China as obesity grows, according to the T.H. Chan School of Public Health at Harvard, as low nutrient highly processed foods of large food companies with huge advertising budgets take a prominent place in diets. This is a growing problem for countries from Colombia to Ghana and Nigeria. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Russia invades Ukraine on multiple fronts, across Belarus, across its western border with Ukraine, on the pre dawn hours of February 24, 2022. Russian foreign minister Lavrov says "tense and detailed discussions" with US and NATO are still taking place. In talks with the US, president Putin of Russia had demanded that Ukraine commit to not joining NATO. The US insisted that this was upto Ukraine and that the territorial integrity of Ukraine had to be respected. Interventions by Macron of France and other leaders failed to bring the two sides closer. The US and Europe with a reluctant Germany looked at sanctions as a deterrent. This proved to be wrong. Mr. Putin has a passionate view of Ukraine and Kviv's historical role in the formation of the Russian state, evident in his televised address only 48 hours before the actual invasion. Ukraine has shifted between Poland and the Baltic states, Germany on one side and Russia on the other in its thousand year old history. The shift away from Bolsheviks and Communists under the Soviet Union after 1990 changed the relationship of Ukraine with its neighbors once again as Ukraine became closer to Poland and the Baltics, and Germany. Germany remains reluctant to revert to the relationship with Russia that led to 2 World Wars. During the leadership of Willy Brandt and successive German SPD leaders, as well as with Konrad Adenauer and CDU leaders, the goal was to build a good relationship with Russia. Merkel of the CDU went as far as accepting dependence on Russia for 40% of its gas supplies, after shifted out of nuclear energy and supporting a new Nordstream undersea pipeline for gas supplies.  The early reaction on DW.com and German television was one of shock as no one really expected that this would lead to a full scale invasion. Scholz of the SPD the new chancellor in 2022 was not active in forging anew consensus allowing NATO's Stoltenberg who is a former Norwegian prime minister 2005-2013 to frame the response of Europe. Norway's role in European security was marginal for most of the twentieth century. Other events had detracted from bringing active German and American participation in coming up with a framework of dialogue to address concerns of both sides and still build a common ground for peace- Afghanistan, the pandemic in its third year, China's deteriorating one sided trade relationship with America that hurt American workers and manufacturing. As a result China and Germany were essentially absent in building the framework for peace. Afghanistan hasty withdrawal made it harder for president Biden to come up with new approaches to build a common framework. President Macron made some faltering efforts on the fringes even as president Putin focused on the US response and its intentions with NATO on European soil, and declared that it was directly US Russia negotiations that needed to work. With this the whole framework of relations since the presidency of Reagan and the relations with Russia and China come to a close. And a new framework needs to be constructed that draws in India already or soon to be the most populous nation in the world, in an effort to build an enduring new framework. The voices of Eastern Europe need to be heard, yet balanced with the voices from India, China, Germany, Russia, and other countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa that are affected by world events. ...
Original article ›
POLITICO Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Comments on X that cause difficulty for DJT chief of staff Susie Wiles to keep a clear narrative and the loss in the Wisconsin SC election are leading to a sense that Elon Musk could be a political liability. DJT focus is on the midterms and keeping the majority in the House, which is also why Elise Stefanik was asked to not accept the job of UN Representative and remain in the US Congress. The immediate focus is on tackling the Tariffs Liberation Day action April 2, 2025 so that followup negotiations with about 50 countries including major ones with Japan, Taiwan, Israel, Britain followed by European Union, South Korea and other nations. This would reassure markets as country after country is developing a new trade relationship that respects US manufacturing goals. China could then be tackled as a special case with America limited to loss of $146 billion in energy and grain sales which would be diverted to Europe's energy needs and farmers could be given a $50-100 billion support package. China would then have to find a way to preserve its $1 trillion surplus without the American market  which would require it to find other markets, and create a domestic market, if it chose not to negotiate and accept American manufacturing goals. ...
The Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Comment by a former Tory leader, Sir Ian Duncan Smith, on negotiations with the European Union's Ursula Leyen, show how much the term sovereignty has become the word on which everything depends. Smith said on December 10 about the EU demands that Britain adhere to EU environmental and other rules after leaving the EU, "either Britain is sovereign, or it is not."  The word sovereign is discussed in this context in this Times analysis. The word comes from the old French word "sovereinete" during the period when the King's authority was being contested by feudal lords in 16th century France. The Oxford dictionary defines it as the authority of a state to govern itself, and to do this without outside interference. Tory leaders such as David Davis and others including Smith see this as meaning making your own laws. For the European Union to insist on its laws being primary and British law asked to conform with EU law making it secondary, would not only be outside interference, but also divided authority. Older French and British political philosophers Hobbes and Rousseau see this as divided authority. Even though the meaning has changed in modern times, the essential definition in the Oxford Dictionary remains undivided authority. Which is why these Tory leaders insist on the original definition as the right one. Behind the wrangling there is the sense among Leavers that Britain could do better in economic terms by setting its own direction, and doing business its way. How would a new economic power in India by 2030 affect Britain, would it create many more opportunities for Britain to grow because of its history and cultural ties. Could the relationship with the U.S. provide more opportunities for growth? What about French indifference and even disdain of Britain, does Britain have other options? Isn't the European Union merely a Franco-German alliance led politically by France and economically by Germany, and propelled by their three wars since 1871, with a bunch of European countries added in, and what has Britain got to do with it? Closer to the negotiations with Leyen there is also the question - isn't France trying to make certain with its demand that Britain not violate EU law, that Britain's ingenuity and free wheeling spirit outside the European Union does not let it grow faster than France? Where one gets Boris Johnson's immediate reply that Britain is better off not being stuck inside "EU's regulatory orbit."   At the other end of the world you have India with "Atman Nirbhar Bharat" calling for a self-reliant economy and taking the time for transitioning out of the trade relationship with China, at short term cost and long term advantage. Britain is closely watching India as it makes big strides in developing infrastructure, in renewable energy, and setting a bold vision for the future. Even France is mapping out a pathway to self-reliant economy as it looks at ways to bring production home after the pandemic. The pandemic has only reinforced the drive to be self-reliant. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Investment in fixed assets of urban areas in China declined from 8.3% to 5.5%, for the first seven months of 2018, according to the Bureau of Statistics. Investment provides a third of GDP growth. The trade dispute with the U.S. has added to concern about the slowing economy. Some analysts are calling for a non-confrontational approach in negotiations.

WSJ Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WTO Trade talks and the negotiations between EU, US, Brazil, India, China, Japan, and Canada continue with difficulties in getting India's agreement. Mr Nath of India has come to speak for all the world's poorest countries in Africa and Asia and also the growing emerging economies like S. Korea and India. THe EU and the USA are keen on access to India's growing market. And India and Brazil want to see concessions from the EU and the USA that will help the poorer countries especially promises made at the Doha round that were to ease global poverty that have not been fulfilled. With the difficult economic situation in the EU and the USA there is less give on their side and the Indians and the Brazilians are insistent.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Trump administration's early proposal for NAFTA moves away from campaign pledges to completely renegotiate the treaty, instead taking the approach of working to improve the U.S. trade position in relation to Mexico and Canada. It includes seven objectives for tougher rules for labor and the environment favored by Democrats in Congress, and it also has support from Republicans with its effort to update NAFTA for changes in technology and in other areas since the accord was signed during the Clinton administration. The area in which U.S. and Mexican business are wary is one in which the Trump administration still seeks to keep the option of imposing protective tariffs, and a border-adjusted tax to level playing field for differences in taxes, as well as other measures to protect American jobs and interests. Because any renegotiated NAFTA also has to pass both houses of Congress this proposal took into account the different constituencies and interests for this issue. Robert Lighthizer, trade representative under president Reagan is likely to become the next U.S. Trade Representative and lead negotiator. We first profiled Lighthizer in a group in Lyrarc for pointing to the need for a level playing field in trade. As early as 2010 Lighthizer argued in op-ed articles that globalization and trade practices should ensure a level playing field for the U.S., and was covered in Lyrarc. ...
WSJ Original article ›

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