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.


Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This interview with Donald Trump by the publisher, editors and columnists of The Washington Post, Ryan Jr., Hiatt, Lane, Marcus, Diehl, Armai, Attiah, provides an exceptional insight into the views of Donald Trump on domestic and foreign policy, on his campaign for president. It is the result of an effort to get Trump to state his policies on different issues without the fuzziness in which Trump has carried out his campaign, often taking different sides of the same issue. In some situations Trump is pressed hard on his positions or controversial statements, to clarify what he has not clarified in the burst of media attention Trump received in the past 6 months, especially on television media. First some myths and realities. A recent March 19, 2016, issue of the Economist cites the Pew Trust in showing that only about 17% of eligible Republican voters voted in the primaries. A person watching television news media coverage on Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC, would get the impression that the voter turnout was tremendous- this is not confirmed by the Pew Trust survey. The Economist points out that had the other eligible voters cast their ballots and even if Trump had a share of these votes, the results might look different. With a highly fragmented vote in the Republican primaries, and about half of the vote going to candidates other than Trump, Trump's voter support would add up to about 8-9% of eligible Republican voters based on the Pew Survey results. The question here would be is this a representative sample of the U.S. or of the Republican Party. And is one likely to make false generalizations about the nature of the Republican party from such a limited sample of voter opinion. Is voter sentiment inadequately reflected, and results hopelessly skewed because of the lack of good candidates in the Republican Party, and Trump's tactical rhetoric appealing to a group of working class Americans left out in the technological progress of the last decade. In the process is the hard work of the founders of the Republic, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and the framers of the Constitution being undone by a minority of disaffected voters with legitimate grievances on distribution of economic benefits of the technological progress, trade and global manufacturing networks- with a level of divisive rhetoric and decline in levels of public debate rarely seen. These are the clarifications sought from Trump and his response. Attiah raises the question of divisive rhetoric on minorities Hispanics and Black people- Trump says he is only talking about people here illegally, that he gets support from Hispanics here legally. He turns the question to Muslims and says there is a serious problem there that means being careful about how people are being admitted into the U.S. Questions about Trump's controversial statements about a wall with Mexico are not raised. Ryan pushes hard on the question of the libel laws standard that Trump says he is going to change, asking whether this would happen if Trump thinks the reporting "is wrong" but there is no malice. Trump wants the reporting to be fair for him, that reporters call him to check if he did this or that and why, before writing stuff about him, and he sees the reporting from the Post as very bad about him. He says his lawyers would have to tell the media, that he believes he should loosen up the standards so that this kind of coverage does not continue. On ISIS Trump pulls back when asked by Diehl about statements that suggested he would send the number of troops the generals wanted on the ground- estimated at 20,000 to 30,000- saying he would find it very, very, difficult to do that. On a nuclear option for ISIS Trump says he does not favor that. Suggesting that Trump like the other candidates in the election know there are no easy ways to tackle ISIS. Trump would rely on other countries in the region for help with troops on the ground, something that president Obama also favors, with limited results. Diehl also pushes hard on NATO- Trump says hundreds of billions of dollars are going to NATO and the whole burden for defending South Korea falls on the U.S. when it is not now a rich country that it once was. Diehl corrects him by saying for the public record that its not hundreds of billions, and South Korea, Japan pay 50% of the cost for defending their region. Trump wants to see 100% for the Korean peninsula defense borne by the South Koreans and Japan. Trump seees NATO as a good concept but needing more help from Germany, Poland, Baltics. At one point the Washington Post journalists tell Trump this is a position he shares with president Obama. Trump responds to questions from Hiatt about how he would handle the situations in black communities such as Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland. Trump says he feels law enforcement is important and should play a big role in preventing the destruction of property from day one. He says jobs are what hurts inner cities but offers no solution about how to get the jobs lost in the steel industry for Baltimore, black neighborhoods sitting ironically next to the John Hopkins high technology university complex. Trump brings up the response that jobs could be created if the U.S. simply did not spend money on supporting nationbuilding overseas, a policy that president Obama has supported, and which the public has favored in the U.S. As Holman Jenkins brings up in a column on March 22, 2016 in the Wall Street Journal, these policies are being pursued today, and most of these jobs are not coming back so how would Trump bring them back or do anything about it, especially when Chinese workers in China's factories are being displaced by robotics in places such as Hon Hai factories. The more one thinks about it many of things Trump is saying are already being done, and there are no new solutions Mr. Trump has for today's problems of lack of upward mobility for the middle and working class- a priority for Sanders and Clinton also, not just for Trump. As a television personality and a candidate with a understanding of voter concerns, Trump artfully voices voter concerns of working class Americans for problems that defy easy solutions. Are there risks with Trump's approach that Trump has failed to think through or grasp? Does the unpredictable behaviour Trump suggests that would get allies thinking and trade partners responding lead to unpredictable consequences? Divisive rhetoric creates additional distractions in tackling the problems of the middle class and working class Americans. Divisive rhetoric within the NATO alliance would create additional distractions in tackling the problems of defending the European Union, such as using the very show of unpredictability. Diehl pushes Trump on this question. Would trade threats to China lead to a withdrawal from the Senkaku Islands by China? Trump says he thinks this would cause the Chinese to retreat . What if the Chinese see it differently, in their relations with Japan and South Korea, with a long difficult history, not necessarily in their relations with the U.S. Would a trade war hurt the global economy, and hurt confidence in U.S. fianncial markets just when the U.S. and European economies are staging a recovery, and when the economes of China, Japan and India are in a sensitive phase? These questions could not be raised because of time constraints, but must be on the minds of the editors of the Post and the WSJ, coming from different ends of the political spectrum. How would this help tackle the problem of upward mobility for working class Americans that all the candidates in the presidential election share? ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in WSJ says 4 months before becoming China's president in 2012 Xi Jinping issued a Communist party directive as head of the party committee overseeing the former British colony. The directive cautioned officials about a growing separatist sentiment in Hong Kong. It said "we must dare to struggle and be good at fighting," a retired official describes as Xi's approach. Another facet of Xi's views on Hong Kong are that his father as a party leader for the southern province of Guangdong in 1978 to 1980 near Hong Kong was the first after the Cultural Revolution to set up ties between the mainland and the British colony of Hong Kong. China was experimenting with a different model for the economy and Xi's father set up the early links with Hong Kong so that the flow of economic refugees from mainland China to Hong Kong could be reduced and the gap in living standards could be narrowed. He set up the first "Special Economic Zone" and met delegations to start the Sino-British talks on Hong Kong's future. Xi Jinping grew up in the turmoil of the Cultural Revolution. His father Xi Zhongzun, was jailed in 1962 in internal party struggles, and his family was persecuted during the Cultural Revolution that started in 1966. The Cultural Revolution that went on till 1976 ironically was an attempt to stamp out possible capitalist or imperialist influences from the colonial period and the opium wars with Britain. He was later rehabilitated under premier Deng. During the turmoil Xi with some difficulty was admitted to University after spending some years in the countryside. His father remained loyal to the ideals of the Chinese Revolution even though he had suffered from the internal party struggles, an experience remains a strong memory for Xi Jinping. It is as if the period is seen as a period of experimentation and failure for the party not for its ideals of China rising from the colonial period after its failure to engage with the world before the colonial period leading to backwardness. The unity of the country had to be maintained bringing Hong Kong and possibly Taiwan together with the mainland. Rejuvenation was happening and stability was essential for Chia to grow and emerge into the "China Dream" a word coined by Xi for its emergence in the community of nations as an equal to western powers after the colonial period of oppression and cultural backwardness. In this way he is different than other leaders before him who followed premier Deng who started the experimentation with markets and economic structures. The leader preceding him was party secretary in Tibet with a prime minister who was an engineer working on public projects, in sharp contrast to Xi who had the the sense of authority from seeing different phases of Communist party experimentation in his early years. The Bo Xi Lai incident during the transition before 2012 also influenced Xi. This was an attempt similar possibly to the attempt by Lin Piao under Mao to subvert Communist Party leadership into a new direction bringing China under Soviet influence after the break by Mao. Bo Xi Lai, a party secretary for an interior less developed region Chongqing, who rose from being Mayor of Dalien to governor of Liaoning province. Bo Xi Lai attempted to subvert the process operating since the Cultural Revolution of leadership by consensus within the party ensuring stability and continuity needed for development and pushing the trauma of the Cultural Revolution out of memory. He did this by seeking high party office for his own ambitions not for the party and China's interests that guided leaders after the Cultural Revolution. This incident and the period of two decades of growth of market economy had led to growing corruption and Xi was convinced that "corruption would doom the Communist Party and the State" and the resulting instability was bad for China. During this period in 2012 Xi Jinping said that it was necessary to remove "tigers and flies" who could endanger the party's ideals and the future growth and stability of the country.  About 10,000 party officials were removed for corruption, and the rule of Politburo Standing Committee immunity (PSC) of the party operating after the Cultural Revolution was removed. The PSC is the body that at the top of the organization structure that runs China. On Hong Kong Xi now believes that the problem is best tackled by the Hong Kong government not by intervening from Beijing. There is increasing perception in Beijing and Hong Kong that the local government, business leaders have messed things up, by getting into the habit of telling Beijing planners what they wanted to hear, and failing to communicate with the 7 million people of Hong Kong. These leaders are also in a bind because Xi believes that Beijing exercized "overall governance authority" over Hong Kong. A 2014 government white paper warns against "confused or lopsided perceptions" of Hong Kong's status, saying that its partial autonomy comes "solely from the authorization of the central leadership."     ...

The Latter

Foreign Affairs Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Is Ahmadinejad or Khamanei Iran's socalled supreme leader, the leader foreign leaders should be paying attention to in the final analysis? The openings in the Clinton administration under Khatami for a reconciliation of differences, Irans legitimate interests and aspirations in the shiite and Islamic world and how they can be reconciled with the American interests as in Iraq. How rhetoric of Ahmadinejad may have poisoned these possibilities and clouded the real nature of Iran as not a totalitarian state says Akbar Ganji but more of a Sultanate in the Islamic tradition with a heterogenity of views and interests under an Islamic banner and authority, as for instance liberalism, socialism and feminism all views that exist as currents in Iranian society and vie to replace the existing Islamic ideology or to supplement or modify it in a form of modernizing element. And in the final analysis its about the hope of democracy activists in Iran and activists for modernizing element, and moderating influences in Iran's heterogenous society and in its bazaars that emphasize commercial instincts and manner over ideology, which also have popular support as they did under Khatami, to come up with a government that is more likely to work with a range of countries from China and India in Asia to Europe and the United States. And its about how the US and Europe can work towards that outcome requiring less rhetoric and more patience, firmness, and perseverence. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Very little is known about executives in AI who were till 2018 unknowns. Murati is from Albania, went to high school in British Columbia and on to a bachelors degree in mechanical engineering at Thayer School of Dartmouth in 2012. She worked at Tesla and a startup on augmented reality before joining OpenAI in 2018, according to Wikipedia. Much controversy was generated in 2024 with ouster of Sam Altman and reinstatement generating concern how AI is being used for profit by individuals without a role for government and leaders of major world nations and setting rules and guidance. The world of AI pioneers is fragmented with different views and it is not clear if the US, Europe, India, China or other countries can delegate such important technologies to a few individuals with little experience. The recent AI conference chaired by Macron of France and Modi of India was intended to bring leadership of major countries in advanced technology to take the lead in managing AI instead of leaving the field to unknown individual players.  ...
The Financial Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
There is a sense of cognitive dissonance in the states of former East Germany, known as the GDR or German Democratic Republic in the Soviet Union period from 1950's to 1990. The 5 states that formed the GDR continued to build close ties with Russia after the fall of the Berlin Wall, in the perception that this would build good long term relations. The crisis in Ukraine with border states of the Soviet Union opting in favor of close ties with the European Union and not Russia have disrupted the economic relations between the Federal Republic of Germany and Russia. As long as Russia needed the economic ties to build its economy and standard of living the political issues posed by NATO expansion and EU expansion were set aside by Putin and political parties within Russia. The very ties that were supposed to usher in an era of peace in Europe helped strengthen the Russian and Chinese economies. Leading to a point where these two economies were strong enough by 2021 in the midst of the waning pandemic to  assert themselves on political issues where serious differences existed such as expansion of NATO and Taiwan. When the economic relations such as making China a manufacturing powerhouse  was the path taken by American and European business in 1990's, business interests were focused on the declining quality and high wages demanded by unions and workers in the US and Germany. This could be personally witnessed at Apple's factory in Colorado Springs where quality was failing badly in the 1990's. Apple when Steve Jobs returned in 1997 adopted a China manufacturing strategy when its manufacturing operations in the US failed to deliver the quality and cost structure needed for it to expand. The high margins with low costs of manufacturing in China was the strategy adopted by Steve Jobs to compete with Microsoft and turbocharge its expansion. Soon other companies followed. A similar process happened in economic ties with Russia on a smaller scale. Two decades of such expansion whittled down American manufacturing, hurt American workers, hurt European manufacturing and European workers.  This process could not continue- yellow vest protests in France, the protest vote in US midwestern states in recent elections, the protest votes in German elections and fragmentation of parties, made this clear. The US imposed trade tariffs on Chinese products and moved to restrict flow of technologies to China under the Trump administration, accelerated by the Biden administration. President Xi was once of the view that China's ties with the US were important "thousand fold" in the period as late as 2010. Yet this lopsided trade relationship was not beneficial to American workers or American interests as a technologically advanced leader. It is true that American workers and engineers at Apple had failed to ensure American quality competitiveness in the 1980's into 1990's, yet no advanced country or its business can come up with a false narrative that cedes its manufacturing leadership and jobs for the working class of its country. That false narrative is being challenged today by Mr. Biden, Mr. Scholz, and all American and German political parties, and by Mr. Modi with Atman Nirbhar Bharat for local manufacturing. The integration one sees of the port of Hamburg as Chinese export hub with China's economy is one aspect of what has happened. A new leadership is taking its place in Europe and in America that sees clearly the false narrative. The visit of the new Danish prime minister to India is the beginning of the effort to set up a new logistics relationship with South and South East Asia, as Denmark's Maersk is a world leader in shipping logistics for exports and manufacturing. The planned Noida logistics center outside of New Delhi under Gati Shakti integrated development is part of the change happening today as a new supply chain is being built. The unwinding of the one sided trade relationship with China, and its related relationship on energy with Russia, led to the changing perception in Russia and China of the value of the relationship. Political relations superseded economic and cultural relations during Putin's second phase and Xi's second phase with assertive attitudes on NATO, and on Hong Kong, Taiwan under Xi and Putin 2.0. As could be expected Germany and the US were caught flat footed as leaders who were cast in the mold of Putin as a Soviet representative in Dresden, and Xi with his father leading the Communist struggle in the 1930's and 1940's against Chiangkaishek, acted in ways that reflected the Soviet period. Chiang left for Taiwan in 1948 when Mao-tse-tung setup the People's Republic of China. Taiwan and Hong Kong remained important in the perceptions of Xi 2.0, in the effort to build "China Dream" and erase last vestiges of what in Soviet times were seen as western colonialism. US and EU particularly Business and the new IT telecom Business failed to grasp these matters, and historical events such as the opium wars of the 1850's. Business and cultural interests lacked both the inclination to learn and the knowledge of these events in Chinese history and its relations with colonial powers Britain and Japan, and also Russia. In 1900 the Boxer rebellion against ceding Chinese ports to colonial powers Britain, Japan, Russia, ended with permanent colonial settlements in Hong Kong, Shanghai, Tsingtao, other Chinese ports. Chinese rejuvenation in the mind of leaders such as Xi from the second generation of Communist leadership, means putting this behind, leading to the action taken in Hong Kong. In some ways as some observers have commented it is as much a problem of the sluggishness of American and European thinking, particularly business interests including in Taiwan, post British Hong Kong, and ignorance of recent Chinese history which was mistakenly thought not to exist or forgotten. This is as much of a problem as the action taken by Putin and moves by Xi Jinping. The great democracies such as India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, were ignored as American and European business interests integrated the American and German economies with China's. In terms of population the population of these regions and related parts of South East Asia such as Malaysia and Vietnam which have a shared cultural history is about 1.5 times the population of China. Travelling through the parts of India's largest state Uttar Pradesh, an Madhya Pradesh one finds how much American and European business interests have failed both their own interests, their own workers and failed the great democracies of the world, by not only not investing in the democracies of Asia, and also of Africa and Latin America and bought into a narrative of China which no longer holds true and may never have been true all along. This is starkly evident in a once in a century pandemic in these great democracies of the world. These democracies have been left to fend for themselves during the pandemic and their leaders facing false narratives in the media such as the BBC and American media outlets even on issues such as vaccination of the largest part of the world's people.           ...
Foreign Affairs Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Lighthizer, U.S. Trade Representative, makes a passionate plea for the dignity of work in America, the founding principle for the society of opportunity that America has been and the reason it was settled by immigrants from Europe over 200 years. He points out that trade policy is not about geopolitics or about efficiency as others perceive, it is about what kind of society we want to live in. Is it about a society of opportunity? This is the foundation on which this American continent was settled by settlers from Britain and Europe, and the basis of the growth over two hundred years till the last four decades. From 2000 and China's entry into the World Trade Organization under president Clinton to 2016 the U.S. manufacturing base has shrunk with the loss of five million jobs, two million jobs lost to China in the period 1999-2011 alone. And 350,000 automobile manufacturing jobs to Mexico since 1994, one third of all U.S. automobile jobs. Without the initiative and hard work of Mr. Lighthizer both American workers and Mexican workers would be stuck in low paying jobs. The USMCA he negotiated changed all that by giving Mexican workers fair wages and American workers and manufacturing the opportunity for revival.  This view was also expressed by Intel founder Andy Grove, a founder of one of the first pioneer companies in Silicon Valley. Grove asked the question after seeing the outsourcing of production out of America and the condition of the American worker- he said for him it was about what kind of society he wanted to live in. It was all about the dignity of the American worker long ignored by economists who live in a world of theory and the elite that has lived for so long apart from the places where the fabric of American workers and working life was torn apart. It was a question that touched Andy Grove's heart just as it does for Robert Lighthizer and others who are fighting to make America a society of opportunity for the American worker and opportunity for the American people, for dignity in America. It also charts a new course for the French worker, the British worker, the Indian worker, as other countries learn from the American experience. We have covered Grove and Lighthizer from the early days of their leadership and wise reminders to the people of what America is and stands for. Lighthizer points out one huge error that makes the thinking of these economists and elite that have not listened for so long, more than a bit crazy, reckless and callous. He says there about half of 250 million adults who lack a college diploma in America. Historically manufacturing has provided stable well paying employment. Even if with investment in education they were taught to write software code, there aren't enough jobs for them. The combined total of jobs at Apple Google, Facebook and Netflix is 300,000 jobs. Never has so much been at stake for so many and defended by so few. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A video view of the damaged oil facilities of Aramco in Saudi Arabia. A proxy war waged between Saudis and Iran with Houthi rebels in Yemen have worsened the situation in the Straits of Hormuz. Tensions were high, an attack on oil facilities was not expected. About half of Saudi oil production was put out of use in the attack by low flying missiles that evaded radar defenses. Saudis plan to meet oil export commitments by importing oil. President Trump imposed sanctions on the Iranian central bank, and at the same time said he would meet with Iran's president Rouhani for talks if arranged.  The European Union called for talks to renegotiate the Iran nuclear deal considering all issues nuclear, oil, and political issues in the region. The effect of Trump administration sanctions on Iran's economy have led to worsening relations. Japan, South Korea, India and China are affected by the U.S. effort to limit imports of Iranian oil. As tensions rose Japan with limited reserves made efforts to reduce tensions and bring the parties together. Mr. Trump fired his National Security Adviser in an effort to open up ideas for a renegotiation of the Iran nuclear deal on a comprehensive basis including oil and political issues in the region. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This self portrait by Vladimir Putin about his growing up years in Leningrad and the life of his father and mother during the siege of Leningrad by Germans may offer a better sense of the mind and thinking of the Russian president than the Dresden years when he was a junior Russian official in Communist East Germany (the GDR). It is an interview of the Russian president in 2000 by Nataliya Gevorkyan, Natalya Timakova, and Andrei Kolesnikov over twenty years back. Putin's father suffered severe injuries during the war in the fighting around Leningrad, twice being given up for dead and being dragged wounded across the frozen Neva river to a hospital by a neighbor. His mother was half dead from starvation and his father passed on his food given to him at the hospital. Having gone through the memories of this period affected Vladimir Putin's view of the world and no amount of US or German assurance about NATO's intentions may have erased these memories from childhood. The long period in power and the Covid isolation may have led to  perceptions that were less likely to change so that Putin did his own research and wrote a long paper on Ukraine in 2021 that reflected Russia and Ukraine's long history but did not reflect the changing national aspirations of Ukraine's people in 2022. This may have led to the miscalculation and the errors by both Putin and the leaders Merkel-Bush-Obama that the detailed WSJ report of 20 years of events show to have happened. The WSJ report of April 1, 2022, was titled "Vladimir Putin's 20 Year March to War in Ukraine and How the West Mishandled It." The Social Democrats in Germany under Schroeder and Steinmeier mishandled it by deepening economic integration with Russia as a way to make up for what had happened in the German invasion of Russia, and the Christian Democrats under Merkel with business interests never really grasped the different thinking of the Russian president relying solely on deep economic integration of the EU and Germany with Russia as well as China as an answer. Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama from a distance even less so.  This has led to the miscalculation by Russia under Putin leading to invasion of Ukraine, and the US and Germany being unprepared about taking action to prevent it.  Beyond the key participants and the war damage, there is the enormous damage that is taking place in the mental health around the world after Covid with constant barrage of images of war and refugees streaming into Poland. There is the problem of food imports, of food scarcity in the Middle East, and inflation in food prices for Africa and the Middle East. As Brendan Simms, a Cambridge historian has shown in his book "Europe The Struggle of Supremacy 1453 to the Present," which is now being read by German chancellor Scholz, this has happened before with the UK, Netherlands, Spain, Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Russia engaging in these conflicts that led to prolonged wars and eventually to only small shifts in power. Yet with huge effects for ordinary people caught in the wars such as today's refugees and people struggling to feed their families in Africa and Asia after the effects of Covid on income. Food prices have gone up by 50% to almost double in these countries.   ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How will posterity view Angela Merkel. As she ends a fourth term this BBC News report says it will remain a contested legacy. Much of what went right has already been written. A woman, a pragmatic scientist who hewed to the center not just as a scientist but with a knack for politics. Much of her early period in office was one in which she had to tackle the eurozone crisis. The euro's weakness had its roots in the way Mr Kohl allowed eurozone membership for countries such as Greece without adequate entry requirements. Some of the other problems were also left behind by an overzealous mentor Helmut Kohl who pushed for German reunification that never really happened in terms of bringing all east Germans into the idea of the Federal Republic. These problems in a neglected eastern part of Germany around Dresden were never tackled by Merkel. They were social issues that Merkel's pragmatic thinking failed to grasp. Letting in migrants from Arab and African countries was a move that Merkel made without realizing the full implications. This policy was reversed but led to the emergence of extreme right wing sentiment in parts of the country. It is left to a future German leader to tackle the social and economic disparities that affect Germany today. As time passes people reflect and a more careful view prevails. Dr Rudiger Schmitt-Beck reflects this when he says that the Merkel years were about  a bizarre mix of modernization and backwardness. Merkel rejected nuclear energy after the events at Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan. As a scientist she was able to tackle such issues. Yet on the major social issues of the day Prof. Schmitt-Beck of the University of Mannheim, says she left Germany "grotesquely behind"- on child care, climate policy, digitization, infrastructure building, on demographic change. These are the issues that the Social Democrats and the Greens are standing up for today. Ironically Merkel may be remembered more for something that is not even mentioned in this BBC report. This is the European solidarity shown by action to financially support all EU countries including Italy with EU funding during the coronavirus pandemic.  This may be her biggest achievement because it will be lasting. Without it Europe would not be the better place it is today, resilient in the face of the pandemic.  Seen from outside Merkel will be seen as a German leader who failed to see the potential for India and other Asian countries with almost twice the population of China. Fascinated with 13 visits to China she studied Chinese history, politics and economics, says the WSJ. And did too little to balance Germany's close business and trade ties with China, with efforts in India and other countries. Seen from America as pointed out in the WSJ front page on September 23, Merkel made no effort to rebuild US relations with the Biden administration after the tumultuous period under presidents Obama with spying on her phone and with Mr. Trump over the EU's participation in NATO defense. She seemed resigned to a view that America had seen her best years, a belief that today does not exist anywhere in America. US president Biden's first phone call to Merkel was put off for a few days says the WSJ, and Merkel continued to build close ties with China, ignoring the fact that this was a new administration closer to that of presidents FDR and Harry Truman who did so much for Germany. And a president very different than any of Biden's five predecessors. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The UN badge and logo for sustainable development goals is becoming highly popular in Japan. It has 17 colors for the 17 Sustainable Development goals set by the UN- ending poverty, reducing inequality, improving education, other aspirations of the people of the world. It is something India, the US, Canada, Britain ,Germany, France and other nations should adopt in the way Japan has done. India has taken up specific goals, clean India, clean water, electrification, and made it available to all 1.2 billion people, in its own version of SDG. Introduced into Japan by 2016, this badge is now so popular that there it is everywhere says this report in NYT. In children's playgrounds, in comic books, on NHK broadcaster's video with about 1 million views, on Buddhist temple websites, and used by businesses. In 2016 it was made official national policy by Mr Abe's government and a task force established on them by the government. In 2017 it was adopted to its charter by Keidanren, the business federation.  In the US very few know about S.D.G.'s but in community oriented Japan it has been taken up with zeal. It is part of the conversation and one survey shows 40% of Japanese business were working towards the goals in 2021. It has been adopted by Education Canada Network and it is a good way to bring this idea in education to schools and colleges in North America, Britain, EU, India and China, as well as Africa and Latin America, other parts of Asia. In India some of the SDG's are already the focus of campaigns by the Modi government Goal 0  Clean Nation one that has not been coined yet one that is called Clean India or Swacch Bharat Goal 1 Zero Hunger was taken up during the vaccination for covid campaign to get free foodgrains and vegetables to all 1.2 billion people. Goal 2  Clean Water and Sanitation or Har Ghar Jal getting clean tap water to all rural homes by 2024. Goal 3 Infrastructure, Industry, Exports Goal 4 Renewable Energy The sequence is different from the UN SDG's. The difference is it is a goal set for universal meaning everyone and delivery meaning by a specific date, and the priorities are set in the numbering. The Indian SDG campaigns under the Modi government and at federal and state levels are unprecedented in history for a population of this size, and now present a model for all nations in Asia, Africa, Latin America on how to go about doing the SDG's in practice. ...
WSJ Original article ›
Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Financial Stability FOrum will be renamed the Financial Stability Board and include 10 additional members, These additional members are from developing countries or emerging markets, including Argentina, Brazil, South Africa, and China. This forum which currently brings together regulators, central bankers and finance ministers from a few wealthy nations, will now reflect the views of emerging countries. It previously only served as aforum for exchanging ideas. Now it will be given the task of drafting the detailsfor global standards for financial institutions, including benchmarks for executive pay and how much risk that financial firms can take on. But there is still some resistance to the idea of getting ideas from different sources and including the benefit of a diversity of experiences and backgrounds, even though some of these countries, have borne the brunt of these recurring economic crises in the past, as have Argentina, Brazil and Mexico. Howard Davies, director of the London School of Economics says that you have to hear out China but objects to taking advice from Argentina, a comment which reveals the insular nature of these forums and boards in the past, with little or no representation from places where a majority of the word's peoples live. As would be expected in the light of that comment, there is resistance to giving China, India, Brazil, Russia, and other large developing countries like Mexico, South Korea, and Saudi Arabia proper representation in the IMF's governing bodies, and having the rules changed so that the head of the IMF and other important staff members could be selected from emerging countries. Each of these countries can bring adifferent perspective to the decisions made at the IMF, as most of them have suffered from these recurring economic crises in the postwar period. South Korea's experience with the IMF is the most recent and is covered in the link to S. Korea and the IMF, and if reflected in the policy making at IMF could help it perform a more constructive role in this crisis. This is also the case with some of the other countries....
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US view of the response by India to a terrorist attack in Phalgam, Kashmir, Indian Union territory with strikes on terrorist camps. J.D. Vance US vice president says- “Our hope here is that India responds to this terrorist attack in a way that doesn’t lead to a broader regional conflict.” “And we hope, frankly, that Pakistan to the extent that they’re responsible, cooperates with India to make sure that the terrorists sometimes operating in their territory are hunted down and dealt with.” Vance was forced to cut short his visit to India after visiting Jaipur, Rajasthan in India when the terrorists with a history of aid from Pakistan killed 31 tourists in Phalgam, Kashmir. A long history of terrorist or militia trained in Pakistan has led to  terrorist incidents all over the world for the last three decades including the Kashmir and Afghanistan conflicts, the last having drawn Russia and the US into long wars which depleted their resources and led to loss of many lives. Yet much of the media remains oblivious of this in the US and Europe, and how it has led to the rise of China using this period of conflict under Bush and Obama since 2000, and the access to US, EU technologies and assistance. ...
WSJ Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Dow Chemical CEO, Anthony Liveris, is co-chair of the Advanced Manufacturing Partnership, an effort to bring together federal government, industry, universities and other groups to invest in new technologies that would generate good-quality jobs and increase U.S. competitiveness. He writes this letter in the Wall Street Journal to correct two misperceptions. The first, is that government has no significant role in nurturing an environment that is good for business and manufacturing industry. Because other countries, including China, are now operating like companies, it is important not to let the U.S. be in a disadvantageous position. Government has always been involved in its writing of tax and incentive policies, regulations, trade agreements, and creating a climate of certainty. The second, is that the loss of manufacturing capacity and job losses in the last 10 years are different from the job losses in the 1980's. These are not the low tech and less efficient manufacturing job losses of the 1980's, but job losses as a result of moving advanced manufacturing capacity and research and development centers to outside of the U.S. Of the 8 million jobs lost in the last recession, he says two million manufacturing jobs of higher pay and supporting employment in other sectors were lost. His point: its time to focus on expanding manufacturing in the U.S. because manufacturing is the sector with the highest multiplier effect on other sectors. Public-private partnerships are critical to this effort for increasing technology development and increasing investment. This view is supported by other experts....
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. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Even though U.S. president Trump has singled out countries such as Mexico, South Korea and China for trade practices, the U.S. today faces stronger competition in trade from Germany. The trade surplus with Germany for 2016 was $297 billion for Germany compared to $245 billion for China, according to Ifo economic institute. China's trade surplus according to the World Bank was down from 10% of gross domestic product or GDP in 2007 to 3% in 2016, while Germany's has gone up to 8.5%. The Chinese currency is seen as not being undervalued by some experts, while the euro has lost a quarter of its value in the last 3 years, giving Geman exporters an edge. The U.S. also competes with Germany in nine of the 10 export categories such as machinery and electronic equipment, according to the Peterson Institute. Then why is the focus under U.S. president Trump not including Germany? One reason is that China's products have put a downward pressure on U.S. manufacturing wages, and the the speed with the Chinese manufacturing has grown in certain industries. Germany has very few of the manufacturing subsidies that China provides to its industries. And the depreciation in the euro is not favored by the German government as it opposes the policies of the European Central Bank. Germany also has a higher propensity to save about 10% of GDP compared to about 3% for the U.S., according to OECD. As a result Germany is accumulating foreign assets at a faster rate than any other nation, while the U.S. is borrowing capital from overseas. Ways to change this are minimum wage regulations introduced by the government, but larger measures such as increasing government investment in the economy are not supported as the country prepares for the future with an aging population.   ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
900 million eligible voters in India means this is the largest election ever. The election will take place in 7 phases in April and May from April 11 to May 19. Votes will be counted on May 23. The election is for 543 seats in parliament, the Lok Sabha. Turnouts are high with 66% turning out in the last election that brought Mr. Modi and the BJP to power.  Unlike elections in Britain a lot is spent in each election, about $5 billion in the last election and double that this time. The U.S. elections in 2016 had spending of $6.5 billion as a comparison. Women vote at about the same rate as men and more women than men are expected to vote this time. Prime minister Modi won the last election with promises of development and infrastructure. He is delivering on infrastructure but building manufacturing and generating jobs in the formal sector remains a tougher task for any administration in 4 years. During the first term Mr. Modi made needed changes including introducing the GST tax to integrate India's fragmented market and get rid of a patchwork of regional state taxes. He introduced a whole range of projects and yojanas which are setting the stage for widening the middle class, and improving living conditions. Some of the problems such as the bad loans in the banking system date back to previous administrations and the government has taken steps to clean up this problem by refinancing banks and introducing a bankruptcy law. This has slowed GDP growth to about 7%. However this would have happened under any administration.  The brief war with Pakistan in February 2019 has added another dimension to this election with questions about whether this may help Mr. Modi because of his strong stand against terrorism camps in Pakistan.  In the end it all comes down to whether the public still believes the BJP party under Modi is best qualified to develop the infrastructure to modernize the country and improve services, and whether it can create enough of the manufacturing capabilities to generate jobs needed. It may not be that the BJP under Modi has  not made mistakes in the process of learning how best to tackle development, but whether a patchwork of regional parties led by the opposition Congress party is in a position to provide the strong decisive direction to make quick decisions on development. Getting the agreement of a number of regional parties such as the party in West Bengal state or the Uttar Pradesh state when it was under a previous administration of Mrs Mayawati means an even slower rate of decision making as it leads to lack of speedy decision making. Whether voters have short memories and forget the slow rate of infrastructure development under previous administrations or have a willingness to give the BJP a chance to show what it can do under Modi for development can eventually decide this election. An example of what this means is in how the Mumbai Metro is being pushed through to timely delivery- Metro Rail's head Mrs. Ashwini Bhide simply says she feels for the people of Mumbai who have suffered from delays in development of needed infrastructure for so long, with millions doing appalling rides in a creaky old rail system. In her view it should have been done yesterday. It is this attitude that can make or break the current administration, and whether it can get this message through to voters one more time. Most who have this attitude are aware that China is now laying enough concrete every two years than America did in the whole 20th century, as reported in the Guardian newspaper, and are equally passionate about delivery of services and rapid development of badly needed infrastructure.         ...
WSJ Original article ›
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The reckless behaviour of German elites in pursuing increased dependence on Russian oil and gas and ignoring American warnings is shown in this report in The Guardian. The first links to Russian oil and gas were started under chancellor Brandt in 1970. At that time the dependency on oil and gas supplies was much less than 10%. Dependence increased during the Schroeder and Merkel years to the extremes that exist today. Not much more even in the year of the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. It was the misconception of chancellor Schmidt of the SPD in his differences of opinion with presidents Carter and Reagan on the risks of increasing dependence on Russian energy that marked this period. Schmidt believed Germany was right in its conviction that increased trade would bring peaceful cooperation without realizing that economic dependency is never a good thing. Poland had a skeptical view- German elites including business elites were being corrupted. Cheap Russian energy was being used in the Schroeder and Merkel years as a competitive business advantage without considering the risks involved and the admonitions of American presidents of the dangers. With Steinmeier of the SPD there was the immense guilt of the millions of war dead from the German invasion of Russia in 1941 that acted as a brake on evaluating the increasing dependency for energy that reached over 35% by the time he was foreign minister. The fall of the Berlin Wall was seen not as a result of multiple factors including the positions taken by Carter and Reagan, the losses to the Russian economy from the war in Afghanistan, and the general decline of the Russian economy. German leaders saw this as coming from the new relationship being built with Russia. German business and Schroeder- Merkel even allowed not just new Nordstream pipelines under the Baltic Sea but also transferred ownership of reserves, the gas and oil storage inside Germany to Russia's Gazprom. German Economy minister Habeck says the storage tanks were emptied so that there would be added surge for oil and gas prices after the attacks on Ukraine. This Guardian report ends by saying that Mr. Steinmeier still needs to show why he pursued policy of cooperation with Russia with increasing dependency to the point that a cut off of Russian oil and gas supplies would lead to gas rationing in Germany in the event of a sudden cutoff. Was it a form of sensible cooperation taking dependency to such extremes. Similar questions remain for chancellor Merkel. With the added question for Merkel about the increase in trading ties with China even after the Trump administration had warned of the serious risks to US and European competitive advantage in technology and manufacturing, and the increased dependence on a supply chain that was fundamentally weak as shown clearly by the pandemic.     ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Entergy is one of the largest energy companies. Its CEO for nine years, Wayne Leonard, talks to Joseph Rago of the Wall Street Journal. Its the No.2 generator of nuclear power in the USA, and uses coal for only 7% of its energy. He has made his name in nuclear energy, and here he talks about the government's cap and trade program and nuclear energy. He points to today's technology as far superior to the technology that was used in the Failed Three Mile plant, that put back nuclear energy plants in the USA for decades. He believes that price signals are needed for CO2, and the cap and trade program helps to do this, so he supports the cap and trade program. He admits that self interest colors perception of Entergy, compared to coal using utility producers like Duke Energy and American Electric Power. With coal only 7% in its portfolio of plants, and big in nuclear energy, it stands to gains from a cap and trade program, whereby Congress will set a ceiling on emissions, then allows businesses to sell any of its extra allowances that stand for the right to make emissions. And in doing so creating the largest commodity market, in carbon backed securiites. He and the government agree on the point that the allowances should be auctioned off, rather than given away as the companies with many coal plants believe. And the billions in new revenue from these allowances would be returned to the public. He understands that the view of companies like Duke and AEP, that use coal and would have to increase rates, and face the anger of ratepayers as they pay more for the allowances. He also thinks the bill should be written with a fine pen, so that if Congress mandates 20% of energy come from renewables. That it should specify replacing coal not natural gas as what this replaces, to get rid of the most polluting sources. He points to the real need for looking at things globally, as doing things locally, even to show responsible leadership in the world community, can lead to no progress in the global picture. The reason is that China is going ahead with the rapid construction of conventional coal plants. It has surpassed USA coal capacity, and is on track to double it sometime in the next decade. If the USA closed down every single coal plant, and all the time new coal plants are going up in China and India, then we would have ruined our economy, and it was'nt making much difference globally. And he says, if we just say lets lead and people will follow us, "its silly", because China isn't going to follow us, especially when they have $2 trillion invested in their coal plants, and they still aren't feeding feeding all their people. So how to deal with this? Develop the new technology for carbon capture for existing conventional coal plants, and help the Chinese with retrofit technology to curb emissions in a realistic manner. At this time most current funding is devoted to technology for second generation systems, that are still 10-20 years away....
The Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Following Brexit on January 31, 2020, Britain's government led by Boris Johnson prepares to negotiate new trade deals with the U.S. and other countries. The freedom to negotiate these trade deals was a key part of the plan of Brexit supporters and Mr. Johnson. The Times, Britain's leading newspaper, looks at the prospects of trade deals with each country- the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, Japan. Facing re-election Mr. Trump is seen as favorably inclined to work out a trade deal that he can show during the campaign. Trade discussions have taken place between the UK and Australia, Japan. Mr. Morrison in Australia and Mr. Shinzo Abe want to see strong trading ties and investment with Britain. Japan or Australia could be the first countries that work out a trade deal with Britain as discussions are at an advanced stage.  Britain has a small deficit with Japan in trade. It has a small dollar surplus in trade with the Australia and New Zealand. With the U.S Britain has a large surplus, it exports 121 billion pounds and imports 76 billion pounds. The prospects of trade deals are enhanced by the similarity in outlook of the governments of the U.S., Australia, and Japan, which share views on jobs expansion, economic growth and are centre right in economic philosophy. They also share a strong connection with working class voters under Johnson,Trump and Morrison. Mr. Trump is seen as a strong deal maker so that any deal would involve some concessions from Britain that increase U.S exports, including farm exports. Difficult issues with the U.S. are -pharmaceutical drug imports that could increase Britain's NHS cost for drugs, the digital services tax from Britain on U.S.  companies such as Google and the Trump retaliatory threat to impose tariffs beyond the current 2.5% on car imports of $11 billion from Britain. On agricultural imports Britain's natural foods preference conflicts with imports of genetically modified (GMO) foods from the U.S. Experts say this could lead to a partial or Phase 1 deal that does not need approval from the U.S. Congress, similar to the Phase 1 trade deal with China which sidestepped the thorny issues on trade. This is something both sides can show their support base as a win. ...
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Andy Grove makes this passionate plea for the dignity of workers in America in 2010. It is worth reading in 2020 what this founder of Intel Corp and pioneering spirit of Silicon Valley has to say. Andy Grove of Intel says there is something seriously wrong when the unemployment rate in the Bay Area is higher than the 9.7% national average for the USA. American companies have added jobs like crazy in Asia, but things are sputtering back home. Hon Hai has 800,000 employees and makes most of the electronic and computer products for American companies. Grove says startups are not the answer, unless they scale up and create jobs the way Intel did starting back in 1968, with a $3 million capital infusion by investors. The move from the first production model to mass production is critical, as companies hire thousands of people. Innovation and scaling up have to go together. He makes his point clearly by pointing out that Apple has 25,000 employees. For every Apple employee there are 10 employees in China working on Apple iMacs, iPods, iPhones. And he adds that the same 10 to 1 relationship applies to other U.S. tech companies. And here Grove asks the tough question by first posing an answer. He says it sounds like- no big deal, we keep the high paying jobs, we keep most of the profits, but what kind of society are we going to have with highly paid professional workers and lots of people unemployed? And he doesn't mention that there are a lot more young people unemployed. He says the US has become very inefficient at creating tech jobs, and it would be a great mistake not to act decisively early on. And adds that the investments in such areas as solar power and electric car batteries have to be made early on to maintain leadership in these areas. Grove faults academics like Alan Blinder and others who say loss of manufacturing jobs and whole industries was no big deal. The U.S. has forgotten the value of manufacturing jobs. He wants to see America focus on jobs and rebuild its industrial base. And less of transferring engineering knowhow and new technologies overseas, technology that can help bring innovation and scaling up of factories at home. In his view individual companies doing their own thing, in a misguided fashion that jobs don't matter, is not the answer to the situation we face. The industrial economies of Asia, China at the present day, have focussed on jobs and technology, and scaled up. Grove reminds readers of the situation in America in 1932, when jobless veterans demonstrating outside the White House in large numbers were dispersed by soldiers with live ammunition and fixed bayonets. This makes him shudder at the very thought of it, and brings back memories of his early years in Hungary, as a young man in 1956. Are we listening? ...
New York Times 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