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 ›
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
If Morse's thinking holds and crude prices drop to $90 range per barrel (see the link to Morse) then we have another major problem on our hands as the incentives for conservation diminish and there is less money invested in energy conservation, and investment, effort and enthusiasm for new technologies for conservation also diminishes. This risks the environment and carbon dioxide emissions and keeps sending money on expensive oil imports to Saudis, Russia and the middle east which could be better invested in the US for innovation and R&D or returned tothe public. For energy saving conservation technology investors the drop in incentive through a return to cheap oil or expectations of prices that are below $100 for instance can be the worst of both worlds high prices and low investment says Vinod Khosla. He advocates a floor on the price of oil. Stanford Professor Hillard Huntington, executive director of the Energy Modeling Forum, a group of energy experts, says energy saving initiatives could easily take 4 million to 5 million barrels a day of demand off the market in 10 years from the 20 million barrels a day that the USA uses to heat homes, power industry, and fuel cars, trucks and planes. It would be a huge loss for that not to happen. And this has happened before as the oil crisis in the 1980's became a dim memory once oil prices hit a low of $11 in the mid 1980's after conservation kicked in at the time. The idea then is to have some sort of gasoline tax that would keep a floor on the price of oil that Europe already has. And British Columbia has shown how by having a small tax and returning money to the taxpayers with a $100 check refund and in other ways to small business and other txpayers....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In response to bellicose speeches by Republican presidential candidates Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference on March 6, 2012, President Obama stated at a press conference: "This is not a game..The one thing we have not done is we have not launched a war.. If some of these folks think we should launch a war, let them say so, and explain to the American people." The U.S. president, advisors and intelligence officials believe that Iran has yet to acquire a nuclear weapon, that there is time for sanctions to work and make the Iranian government give up any weapons programs it is working on. Their view as stated by the U.S. President is that this time cannot be measured in two days or two months. Recent elections in Iran show divisions in the government between the Ayatollah Khamanei and premier Ahmadinejad, with the elections favoring candidates supporting Khamanei. There is also the dynamic of changing relations in the Middle East- between Iran and other countries such as Iraq, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, India- which have strong ties to the U.S., and Iran's relations with China and other countries which have close economic ties to the U.S. In addition in a country with a demographic skewed heavily towards younger people and a third of the people under 15, the democracy protests in 2011 about a flawed election in 2009 are supported largely by university and college students. That election may actually have been stolen by Ahmadinejad from Mr. Moussavi, who in an election eve television debate accused Ahmadinejad of "adventurism, illusionism, exhibitionism, extremism, and superficiality," (Nazila Fathi, NYT 6/4/2009). These factors are likely to be behind the Obama administration's sense of a "window of opportunity," to use Mr. Obama's words. Recent polls by the University of Maryland's Prof. Telhami show only 19% of Israelis favored a military strike without U.S. backing in Feb. 2012, and Israeli public opinion experts see Obama's position as reflecting a sound judgement. Research by Citigroup shows that at a price for Brent crude of $120 with an escalation in Iran, it would take 9% of the world's GDP to support the higher energy costs, hitting Europe especially hard (Liam Denning, WSJ 1/6/2012)....
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Russians vote in 2021 parliamentary elections. With 30% of votes cast the United Russia party of Mr. Putin wins 45% of votes cast, followed by the Communist party of the Russian Federation with 22%, and the Liberal Democratic party getting 8%. Russia has mixed voting system with half the seats directly elected from party lists, and the other half assigned to individual candidates. United Russia had 334 seats out of total 450 seats in the outgoing parliament. Putin will need over 300 seats in the new parliament to get the two thirds majority to enact changes to the constitution. Putin needs this to extend his current term which ends in 2024.  Putin draws most of his support from the older part of the population that has seen the hardships imposed following the collapse of Communism around 1990. This led to collapse of the ruble currency, increase in poverty, an effort by oligarchs to capture state enterprises, and a chaotic period for law and order. Shockingly during that period even life spans of Russians declined as reported in the WSJ. Liberals who supported the shift to democracy had not anticipated all the ill effects of introducing capitalist free market systems in such a sudden and free fall way. Such sudden shifts to free markets are now better understood and seen as the wrong way, as western capital markets fail without inbuilt protections, safety net for workers and retired people, and are subject to serious distortions if no vigilant authority exists. This is in reality not a free market but a market captured by the few, in the interests of the few. Once this was clear retired people, pensioners, military, law enforcement, and liberals realizing what had happened shifted support to United Russia founded by Mr. Putin. Mr. Putin faces the typical situation faced by incumbents over long periods where there is a sense of the need for change. Yet the pandemic and other economic crises that could happen in the event of mismanaged economy are never really too distant for countries such as Russia, China, India that are developed but yet have not the strong industrial base of US, Germany, France. Such economic crises including the ruble currency and Russian energy companies were better managed under Putin than under the chaotic period following the collapse of communism and the introduction of so called "free markets" that were anything but. During the recentfree fall in oil prices Putin was able to manage a transition period with the help of president Trump who negotiated a price for oil with the Saudis to protect US shale oil workers and companies, as well as Russian workers and oil companies. As a result Russians particularly young people look for alternative places to vote for opposition parties such as Liberals, Communist party, and other parties. But the majority of Russians including those working for state energy and other state companies tend to stay with Putin's choices for state, regional and federal administration and for parliament. Nationalist spirit also provides additional support as Putin has restored Russia's status as one of the important nations in the world. Some missteps such as interference in US elections have led to a loss of some of this international influence, yet even president Biden understands the situation in Russia and is willing to work with Putin with new rules of conduct Under the Russian system about 70% of the laws are not made by parliament but are done by the government and the administration of the president and then go through parliament. In addition to parliamentary vote there are 6 governor races and three races for heads of regional republics. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
It makes for good political rhetoric, but in reality the flow of money goes both ways. A lot of investments are made by American companies overseas. This time the flow of oil money because of high oil prices, from the USA and Europe to the Middle East is being recycled back to the USA in the form of investments in the US through small equity stakes in companies and more so through purchases of capital equipment and services to build Saudi infrastructure projects. The $500 billion investment plan over several years in Saudi Arabia is to build everything from new cities, aluminium plants, electricity generation plants and chemicals and plastics plants. The fears and rhetoric are overblown, as the USA also invests overseas with holdings according to the Treasury department of $6 trillion of foreign stock and debt. The acceleration of foreign investment in the US is to be seen in the numbers, as the dollar gets weaker, and its more advantageous for Canadians and Euuropeans to invest here. Last year $414 billion of foreign investors money went into buying stakes in American companies and building factories and purchasing stock, according to Thomson Financial. Thats up 90% from 2006 and represented one fourth of all announced deals. This year in just 2 weeks foreign investors poured $22.6 billion in just the first 2 weeks of January, and that represents one half of all deals. Shows how quickly the picture is changing. One way of looking at it is that Americans buy a lot of foreign goods and the money Americans use to pay for a lot of imports is now being returned to the USA in the form of foreign investments. Note that foreign investment is desirable because it brings new ideas and technology and new management methods to the host country from other countries. These foreign investors in many cases are able to make these investments overseas because they are good at what they do, having them in the host country benefits the host country and shakes up competition in the particular industry in the host country that is receiving the investment. This is why economies once relatively unfavorable to foreign investors like Japan and S. Korea are now passionately seeking foreign investment to make their economies thrive through the exchange and inflow of new ideas and ways of doing things. The same can be and is true for the USA. The other aspect is that most of the investment is still from countries like Canada, Germany, Japan, S. Korea which are big free trade partners of the USA. Manufacturing investment is heavily skewed to European and Japanese companies. Foreign multinational investment (Sony, Toyota etc) grew to $43.3 billion in 2007 from $39.2 billion in 2006 according to OCO Monitor, and will accelerate significantly as companies like VW and other German companies find it cheaper to build in the USA and shift more manufacturing here. To get an idea why the rhetoric is overblown Canada spent the most in buying American companies, $65 billion in 2007, according to Thomson Financial. Russia spent $572 million and India $3.3 billion. How will this improve the chances of the USA making it out of this recession? Five million American work for foreign companies in the USA. Of these one third are manufacturing jobs. These jobs pay about 30% more than jobs in American owned companies. Figures from Treasury Department. There will be more of these jobs as companies like VW build plants here. Roubini Economics estimates that an infusion of about $300-400 billion is needed for the USA to overcome the effects of the current mortgage and credit crisis. $414 billion was invested in the USA by foreign investors according to Thomson Financial in 2007, going up from something like $200 billion in 2006. If this pace continues becasue of some of the same underlying reasons as the weaker dollar, stronger economies overseas, then $200 billion additional investments this year would add that much to a stimulus package of $150 billion by one estimate, to provide a boost of somewhere around $350 billion. In the range of the needed boost. Companies like IBM and GE which have significant investments in India and China and investments in software or infrastructure industries that are growing rapidly or Caterpillar with growth in construction overseas, may keep growing through this downturn. This recession may hit selectively and differently, not be a complete hit to the USA economy, and could prevent it from going beyond 2009 with recovery in 2010. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The language and tone of the leaders says something about what is likely to be the outcome of the G20 summit. Its a first for significant participation, as countries as diverse as Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and the Netherlands are represented. The credible positions of both sides, the US, UK and Japan, and the European side of France, Germany and the Czech Republic, well presented, provide for some serious discussion and negotiations. France's Sarkozy and Germany's Merkel want to see a global regulator that would reach inside the borders of the US with stricter regulation. Sarkozy calls this "nonnegotiable." And he said that he would reject an agreement that puts off stringent new regulations on banks, tax havens, and hedge funds. He said "the compromise has to come from all countries around the world." US President Obama said that if there is going to be renewed growth it can't just be the US as the engine, everybody is going to have to pick up the pace," at the same time saying that the US had to be concerned about its own deficits. The fact is that the US stimulus will mostly help a severely impacted domestic economy recover with social safey net payments to local and state governments and unemployment insurance, as well as targeted investments in infrastructure, education, energy and health care. It will not mean anywhere near the kinds of imports the US made from other countries, especially China. And Obama made that clear when he said the US will never return to that situation, where the US had become a "voracious consumer market." For the Germans the major market for their middle companies is China, and China has its own stimulus spending on infrastructure spending, which should provide for continued imports of machinery from Germany at a much lower level. Thus Germany and France see a strong tendency to call the source of the crisis and repeat that call till the US listens, and refer to the failure of free market capitalism in its unregulated form. And to insist on fixing it through a global regulator with strict and systemwide rules. So you hear this in Merkel's words, "the foundation for this finacial architecture must be laid now, that is why we seem to be so tough." While the vivacious Sarkozy talks of compromise, and a US gesture in regulation in return for Franc's gesture of joining NATO, the mild mannered Merkel is clear and focussed about her concern. She rejects the idea of linking stimulus spending demands of the Anglo-Americans with the Franco-German demands for global systemwide regulation. "This is not a bargaining chip," she says. The media may mistakenly report lack of consensus as a failure of the summit. But in the long run in the presence of good positions on both sides, it could lead to some tough negotiations even if continued at another meeting. And result in something serious, credible and lasting in its impact, rather than something that was easy and did not in Andy Grove's useful words involve "constructive confrontation." ...
DW.COM Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mark Landler describes the situation on the Syria-Turkey border and Turkey's position. On the same day U.S. Senate leaders McCain and Graham pointed to the contradictions in U.S. president Obama's policies in Syria and Iraq leading to the serious problems in the Middle East. Turkey says the U.S. needs to resolve the contradictions before it can actively commit its forces especially asking the U.S. to establish a no-fly zone in Syria.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A leader of the Syrian moderate democratic opposition to the Assad regime calls for help from the Obama administration for the moderates and Free Syrian Army. The request for Manpads to counteract Assad's air attacks and the deteriorating situation around the city of Aleppo and in Northern Syrian areas controlled by the Free Syrian Army. The collaboration between the Hezbollah, Assad's forces, and the ISIS as each attempt to increase the areas under their control pushing out the Free Syrian Army and moderate forces fighting the Assad regime. Hillary Clinton comes out against the Obama administration's policies in August 2014, saying "don't do stupid stuff" basis of Obama policies is not the basis for a sound foreign policy. Obama comes out with a $500 million aid plan for the Free Syrian Army but the approach is vacillating and slow, leading to a rapidly deteriorating situation, and a complete breakdown of what was a period of hope called the Arab Spring.
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Russian oil policy at work in towns like Kalyazin, 100 miles north of Moscow, and across Russia. Gasification program is being extended, plan is to increase coverage from 53% to 60% of the people in Russia in the 2005-2007 program. Increase prices to discourage wasteful use and promote energy saving technologies in cooperation with German companies so that more gas is available for export at higher world market prices, especially to the European market. Use profits to promote exploration and increase exports. Germany gets 45% of its gas from Russia and has built close relationships with Gazprom. See the article in BW, July 31, 2006, Jack Ewing, "The Lines that Bind" and references to German-Russian ties: 1) Gerhard Schroeder, former Chancellor, as managing director of the pipeline joint venture, the $5.7 billion North European Gas pipeline formed by partners Ruhrgas, BASF and Gazprom. Ruhrgas owns 6.4% of Gazprom, and its CEO Burckhard Bergmann sits on Gazprom's Board. 2) The survey by Berlin pollster Forsa shows that 75% of Germans support the pipeline project, 45% consider Gazprom a reliable energy supplier vs. the 26% who consider Saudi Arabia as dependable. 3) At an industrial fair in Hanover German business leaders supportive of Gazprom as follows. Klaus Mangold for Daimler management board member considers it " a totally normal market economic process" for Russia to have threatended to supply China with the same gas if European countries cultivate other sources of energy supply. Michael Gloss, German Minister of Economics and Technology, says its good thing to have a neighbor close to home as a supplier. Ruhrgas, Essen based, is a subsidiary of Dusseldorf company E.O.N., and Wintershall, Kassel based, is a subsidiary of BASF. Wintershall management Board member Rainer Seele, speaks of not just partnerships but friendships. 4) Interlocking ownership of assets between Gazprom and the German companies. Gazprom 35% ownership of the assets in the WinGas Joint Venture, Wintershall gets 35% of the equity and 25% of voting shares in the gas field that supports the pipeline. Ruhrgas traded assets in Hungary for 25% ownership of the same gas field. 5) The German relationship under Merkel changes little because she has no options, German suppliers have long term contracts with Gazprom. This article shows how the Russian policy is being shaped on the ground in small towwns like Kalyazin. The one on Gazprom about "The Lines that Bind," shows how the policy is to build relationships with German suppliers, interlocking ownership of assets, increasing the supplies to Germany from the current 45% to over 50 %. Using German investment in joint venture with Gazprom for exploration and development and building pipelines and securing long term contracts at higher prices. Note the reference in article "Can Gazprom Keep the Gas On?" by BW's Moscow Bureau Chief, Jason Bush, BW July 31, 2006- ironically the policy that caused a lot of controversy between Russia and Ukraine about Russian energy prices will actually provide Gazprom with more profits to put into exploration. Forecasts referred to by Bush show that it is expected to earn $20 billion on $62 billion in revenues. ...

The Duel of Despots

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Pierre Razoux, a French historian provides this account of the Iran-Iraq war that lasted from 1980 to 1988, at a cost of 680,000 people killed and $1.1 trillion in war destruction and money diverted from the economy. In 1980 Saddam Hussein of Iraq launched the war by attacking Iran which had just come under the Ayatollah Khomeini with the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1979. The war dragged on for 8 years with Khomeini persisting in the war. With U.S. and Saudi policy to increase production bringing the price of oil down from $30 to $10 designed to bring Iran and Iraq to the peace talks, as well as the Soviet Union to withdraw from Afghanistan, all three being major oil producers. The dollar also weakened by 37% during this period. The diplomatic isolation of the Khomeini regime made it more difficult for Iran to buy arms on credit than Iraq could, leading to the war ending with Iran finding it no longer possible to continue the human losses. The Carter administration, particularly with National Security Advisor Brzezinski, tilted towards Iraq to oppose Soviets in Afghanistan, and the Saudis also supported Iraq during the early period. Under president Reagan the U.S. began covert and direct assistance to Iraq to prevent an Iraqi defeat early in the war. Rumsfeld visited Baghdad in December 1983 and March 1984 to organize the U.S. effort to oppose Iran. This may have laid the seeds for future conflicts that lasted through the administrations of the elder and junior Bush. As Razoux points out the Revolutionary Guards became entrenched from this period in Iran's history, making it difficult for election process to work or elected governments to operate. 23 months following the end of that war in 1988 Saddam Hussein launched a war on Kuwait, leading to the U.S. led Gulf war and the entry of the U.S. into a ground combat role, which was followed by the invasion of Iraq under George Bush after 9/11 attacks. The twin wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are estimated to have cost the U.S. over 1 trillion dollars. The result today is largely the division on the ground into Shia regions under the Revolutionary Guards and the Shiite government in Baghdad, and Sunni regions led by Islamic State and autonomous Iraqi Sunni tribes, ignoring the Iran-Iraq boundaries set in the colonial period by the French and the British. In all the amount spent in the Khomeini-Saddam war of $ 1 trillion being about $2 trillion in today's money, and the $1 trillion spent by the U.S., means about $3 trillion has gone into the wars in this region. This comes at a time of deficits in government budgets in the U.S. and a deep recession in the U.S. and Europe. It also explains why the U.S. public is reluctant to take even the minor action such as giving a standoff "no-fly zone" protection to the rebels in Syria, and supported the Obama administration in its reluctance to keep even the basic military force in place to protect its diplomatic mission in Libya, where the cost would be small relative to earlier enlarged military missions under the two elder and junior Bush administrations. The result is that refugees are pouring into Europe from Syria and Libya, through Turkey. Turkey itself is host to millions of refugees in camps along its border. The vacuum and the withdrawal of the Obama administration from the region has led to the rise of Islamic State with covert assistance from Sunni regimes in the region to counteract the growing influence of Shiite Iran. It also may explain the Iranian people's support for the nuclear weapons effort through years of sanctions, leading finally to an agreement with the Obama administration that relaxes sanctions in exchange for a future possibility of acquiring nuclear weapons. Lost in the conflict is the Arab Spring of 2012-2013, with the Tunisian democracy the only surviving result of that movement for democracy and awakening among Arab peoples. The Reagan administration in its aggressive anti-Soviet position made large errors- including ignoring human rights abuses and use of chemical weapons in the Iran-Iraq war, by supporting Iraq and reversing position after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, having a disastrous effect on the entire region decades later. Much of the Obama administration's reluctance for any action may stem from the U.S. role in this period and its consequences of protracted conflict. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Trofimov provides a much needed perspective to the situation in the Middle East in 2015. The title about redrawing borders on ethnic lines is misleading, as the essay's conclusions point to the need for various communities to find a way to live together without ethnic cleansing and intolerance in attitudes. With modernization different communities, Sunni and Shiite, already live together in the larger cities in the Middle East. Trofimov points out that the original intentions of U.S. president Woodrow Wilson were for diversity, and building modern institutions of government as the best way forward. This was not carried out by British and French rulers following struggles for independence against the colonial authorites. Following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in 1918, Britain and France were the dominant powers, and the boundaries were drawn up for Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Palestine, Saudi Arabia and other states, under the British-French Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916. Britain and France increased the role of minority groups to maintain their control following independence struggles in Iraq and Syria, a situation which helped Alawites gain control in Syria and Sunnis in Iraq. Shiite rule in todays Iraq has not lessened tensions, and intolerance only creates tensions in the broader region. Which makes redrawing boundaries around ethnic lines in a defacto acceptance of the current situation, not the lasting road to peace in the Middle East. In Iran, Russia with Britain was involved in the partition of parts of Iran into three zones, a Russian zone including Isfahan in the north, a British zone in the south east and a neutral zone in the middle. This happened in 1907 soon after a independence movement helped write a constitution in the 1901-1907 period, showing that many foreign powers were involved in the region, not just Britain and France. The discovery of oil in 1908 by a British company created the question of how to distribute the profits, which led to 70 years of disagreement and tensions in Iran. The resulting tensions exacerbated the conflict between religious authorites and Mossadegh in the early fifties with the fear of Communism, and exacerbated the conflict between the religious authorites and the government under the Shah by 1979 with misuse of oil wealth, ending with his overthrow and the supreme authority of the Ayatollah. Oil has proved to be as divisive, and wasteful of development opportunities, in Iran as it has been in Nigeria and other oil dependent nations. Multiple issues exist in the Middle East, not just the artificial redrawing of boundaries by the French and British, which makes the defacto redrawing of boundaries along ethnic divisions, not the answer but another step with its own dangers, along the path towards peace and economic development in the region. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
During the campaign and in the crucial Iowa primary Obama used newspapers, small and large, to get his ideas across. At one point he gave six interviews to one columnist for the Daily Times Herald of Carroll, Iowa, (circulation: 6,000). He chatted with reporters from papers like the Mason City Globe Gazette, Fort Dodge Messenger, and met with editorial boards of papers throughout Iowa. Some of these media may just be curious to hear a new kind of message, and Obama could use the communication skills developed in years of writing to express his ideas and his vision all in a casual setting, seeing faces, expressions, feeling the way the way people responded, and all the time listening to what they had to say. Now the same approach is to take world newspapers as another outlet through the Tribune Media Services which enables him to run an oped column in 30 papers around the globe. Here is the list: Arab papers are Al Wataan (Gulf States) Asharq Al Aswat (regional paper in Arabic), Gulf News (Gulf States), Saudi Gazette. European papers are: Corriere della Sera of Italy, Die Welt of Germany, International Herald Tribune of Paris, Eleftyropiea (Greece), Kristeligt Dagblad of Denmark, Le Monde of France, Lidove Noviny of Czechoslovakia, NRC Handelsblad of Netherlands, Svenska Dagbladet of Sweden, WPRost of Poland. South American papers: El Mercurio of Chile, Estado Sao Paulo of Brazil, Clarin of Argentina. South Asian and Asian papers: Hindusthan Times/ The Hindu of India, The News of Pakistan, South China Morning Post of HongKong, Straits Times of Singapore, Yomiuri Shimbun of Japan, Bangkok Post of Thailand. In South Africa the Sunday TImes, in Australia the Sydney Morning Herald, and The Australian, and in the USA, the Tribune papers which are Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, Baltimore Sun. These are all distributed through the connection and means of the Tribune Media Services. The key point inthis communication effort is to signal something that may not have sunk in, in many parts of the world. A deep and all pervasive truth that is emerging from this crisis. We are all in this together in ways you can't imagine, as were in one boat and we float or sink in it together. Leave language, culture, borders aside, its aprofoundly new world in which the Obama story itself of multiculturalism may just be scratching the surface of really deep pervasive changes that are happening. Obama may actually not have hit this point hard enough. "Once and for all, we have learned that the success of the American economy is inextricably linked to the global economy.There is no line between action that restores growth within our borders and action that supports it beyond. If people in other countries cannot spend, markets dry up- already we have seen the biggest drop in American exports in nearly four decades, which has led directly to American job losses." This is dramatically proven by the latest Commerzbank estimates that show the 2 largest export based economies, Germany and Japan will see a contraction of GDP of 7%, USA 4% contraction and China, Eastern Europe and other parts of Asia and Latin America will also be impacted severely by the same phenomenon of markets drying up around the globe. And Obama offers the simple message that the United States is ready to lead, and asks its partners in the G20 to join with a sense of urgency and common purpose. Obama goes on to say that " we need not choose between a chaotic and unforgiving capitalism and an oppressive government-run economy. That is a false choice that will not serve our people or any people." ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Alawite sect in Syria, a sect of Islam different from Sunnis and Shiites, consitutes only 12.5% of the 22.5 million population of Syria. Alawites live mostly in the mountainous coastal region near the Mediterranean. Under the French the Alawites who are open to foreign influences and western education, were used as a buffer against the majority Sunni population, with many Alawites joining the government and army. One of the Alawite military officers, Hafez Assad, took over Syria in 1971.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Hamas moves closer to the Sunni alliance of Turkey-Egypt-Quatar as it accepts a ceasefire with Israel. Other Arab nations including Tunisia move closer to this alliance. A fall of the Assad regime in Syria is increasingly likely and would lead to Syria joining this group of Sunni nations that stand apart from Shiite Iran.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial says the Corker-Cardin compromise that requires the U.S. president to submit any nuclear deal with Iran to the U.S. Congress for debate, is the best option for both Democrats and Republicans who are skeptical of such a deal. It says amendments by senators Cruz and Rubio will not be effective. What the Corker-Cardin compromise developed by senators Corker and Cardin of the Foreign Relations Committee accomplishes, is letting the American people through their elected representatives get a full and complete debate on the merits and demerits of the deal. Democrats in the Senate are also concerned about their election chances after Mr. Obama leaves office, and will want to have a fair debate of the pros and cons before voting, says the Journal. This debate will bring more light to the questions that worry critics the most- how will compliance by Iran be secured, and can snapback sanctions work if China, Russia and other European nations go the other way. Congressional review puts a higher level of scrutiny for any agreement before it moves forward. A requirement that the government submit a review every 90 days on compliance to Congress also gives president Obama's successor a chance to reassess the situation....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A slight shift in American opinion favoring a deal with Iran is shown in a WSJ/NBC poll in July 2015 compared to the poll in April 2015. Support for reaching a nuclear deal with Iran remains stable at 36% in both polls, the opposed drops by 6 percentage points to 17% from 23%, and the percentage of people who say they do not know enough to formulate an opinion goes up to 46% from 40%. The intricacies of a nuclear technology deal and the sites involved lead to a high percentage of don't know enough to give an opinion. Factors hindering a deal include inspection of military sites, and Iranian intentions. Factors favoring reaching a deal now is the risk that this would mean Iran would go back into isolation and the opportunity to work with moderates might be lost. The Rouhani administration was an effort by voters to elect a government that could ease or remove sanctions to improve the economy and living conditions- its failure would lead to Iran losing an opportunity to open up to the world. The pressure from the U.S. Congress and Israel served to push for a verifiable and effective agreement to control development of nuclear technology for weapons systems. Behavioural factors involved are the very young population in Iran which has no memories about the period before the revolution in 1979- 70% of the population of 74 million are people under the age of 35. This group is eager for ties to the outside and could change Iran's outlook and policies int the future towards moderation. Risks in not reaching a deal also include the possibility of the Saudis developing nuclear technology and nuclear proliferation. Winners from a deal because of the flow of Iranian oil to world markets and a period of extended low oil prices are the U.S., Europe, China and India. Germany gains new markets to replace the growth in the Russian market after sanctions. Lifting of an arms embargo, an added risk in the last days of the talks, would be mitigated by making the lifting of that embargo very gradual....
ZEIT ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Von Mark Schieritz of Germany's Zeit Online describes the changes underway following the election campaigns in the U.S., and France, and the Brexit vote in Britain, all signalling the discontent of people left behind by the tech, capitalism, trade and globalization changes of the last two decades. The appeal of one time fringe politicians using racist slogans and divisive rhetoric to appeal to those left behind, appealing to people lacking intergenerational mobility, and without much hope for a better future, is a serious concern. People who are gullible enough, lack college education, or racially isolated so that they are not likely to look carefully at what is being offered in terms of programs and change of competing parties, and likely to overlook the hard and difficult road for corrective course of action, because of anger and pentup fears. Schieritz cites as part of this change the unanimously approved conclusion in its final declaration at the G-20 meeting in Chengdu, China- "The benefits of growth need to be shared more broadly within and among countries to promote inclusiveness." Yet this can be a sort of "too little, too late."  Bankers who are cited in an email going around Wall Street lack credibility with groups on Main Street, to people adversely affected by tech, trade and globalization changes that have been persistently ignored for over a decade, close to two decades. More convincing is the tone of Theresa May, the British prime minister's first statement outside 10 Downing Street- who spoke of the "burning injustices" and her determination to make this a top priority of her government. Still more convincing are the programs to invest $275 billion over 10 years in infrastructure put forward by the leading candidate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016, to provide easier access to public universities and colleges to those left behind, as a sure way to create new jobs and address intergenerational mobility. In fact every leading candidate had made the loss of upward mobility their central plank already in 2015, long before Trump and Sanders started their campaign. The real hope lies in western leaders Merkel, May, and Clinton, all keenly aware students of changes, all women by the way who have sensed the injustice and have the ability to come up with something new and promising for the future, after learning the lessons of the past. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A UN Report shows that opium poopy cultivation is growing in Afghanistan and an enormous crop close to last year's record harvest is expected this year. 90% of the world's opium is grown in Afghanistan but it gets so little media attention compared to daily reports of injuries in the war such as on CBC for Canadian soldiers in the war zones and in other reports in American media. Of this about 52% of Afghan opium is grown in Helmand province which is largely controlled by the Taliban who finance their war with tax revenues from the opium farmers. The UN report also shows that most of the increased cultivation is happening in the south and west of the country worst hit by the insurgents. Areas where there is poor security or where there is not much help with seeds irrigation and other help for farming, are the ones that are mostly engaged in increased opium cultivation and areas where there is security and help with seeds and irrigation are the ones that don't cultivate opium. Looking at this state of affairs one would think that Western Europe and the USA which the UN report says must brace themselves for huge influx of this stuff, would rather than families and schools dealing with the problem at home in very difficult circumstances with high teenage use, would find it easier to finance seeds, fertilizer and irrigation and building of infrastructure in the country. However this shift to other farming would be possible if there is security and this requires a new policy in South Asia which reverses decades of policy that aggravated tensions in the region by not having a clear unambiguous direction of supporting peaceful economic development in the region which includes Pakistan and India and Afghanistan and Iran. Policy changed somewhat but a definite steering moving decisively in that direction needed to take place as first British policy in the pre1947 era and then American and British policy in the post 1947 period supported increased tensions in the area. Afghanistan thus ceased to exist as a country devoted to its own economic development but a place where the western powers engaged the soviet union, and then a place where Pakistan's military's policy of strategic depth against India led to the creation and support of the Taliban. By reversing this policy decisively and with direction as clear as daylight the western countries would instead of fighting these insurgents have Indians and Pakistanis work together alongside western country economic experts and agricultural experts to bring the infrastructure, electricity, irrigation, seeds, and fertilizer to these farmers across the whole of Afghanistan. Security would be mainly the responsibility of Indians, Pakistanis and Afghanis, and local leaders and people from the villages as westerners are easy targets of hostile action in a country used to fighting foreigners especially Europeans. That this may ventually happen but is slow to happen today can be attributed to how slow the process of sensible change is, how most people accept the way things are, which itself is a result of earlier policies which are themselves a result of still earlier policies. Thus pre-1947 British policy for Hindu and Muslim areas, is followed by America's Dulles policies turning India and Pakistan into aspects of the Cold War, followed by Reagan policy turning Afghanistan into aspects of the Cold War in reaction to Brezhnev's soviet policy in Kabuli affairs as a tit for tat, and this followed by the Bush policy reacting to the emergence of Saudi discontented volunteers in the Reagan supported Afghan war after Bin Laden's 9/11 attack in New York City. In the background a series of Indian leaders and Pakistan military leaders gave up any sensible steering in the direction of economic development by falling into the Cold war between 2 western factions or into a religious Hindu-Muslim strife war legacy from the earlier periods. What it means is that its hard in the human world we live in to to do anything but react, or be caught in a trap of thinking just the way we have been taught to think, or have accepted things as they are without thinking, with its resultant misery and ignorance and for south asia entrenched poverty. Its only with some grace and the right conditions and after a great deal of suffering which is true for Afghanistan war ruined countryside, Pakistan's poor economic conditions, and India's huge number of poor and economically depressed majority of the population and true also for westerners facing failed policy and failure of vision as economic conditions deteriorate at home....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman describes how the farmers who left the rural areas in search of work and settled outside Aleppo and other towns after a severe drought were radicalized by the lack of help from the Assad regime. About 800,000 people migrated from their farms in the countryside to cities in Syria, and settled outside the cities without help and basic services from the Assad regime. When the call for democracy came they were the first to join the protests.
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal 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