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.


New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In an overwhelming victory in Burma's 2015 general election Aung San Suu Kyi's party wins 80% of the vote, with the military backed party winning only 41 seats of 491 seats in parliament. The National League for Democracy wins 397 seats. Both sides underestimated their strength. Suu Kyi supporters estimated they would get 60% of the vote, and the military expected to win about 130 seats. The 1990 elections and Suu Kyi's victory were annulled by the military. This time Suu Kyi will appoint the president, as she is banned from taking office under the military drafted constitution. It has taken 25 years for the change in Burma. China and India supported the military rulers in Burma, while the U.S. and UK consistently opposed the military. India a regional democracy put regional considerations ahead of democratic process, showing how even democratic governments failed to respond, especially when the military cracked down on Buddhist temples in 2007. Mrs Bush, Hillary Clinton, and other Americans showed strong support for Suu Kyi throughout her house arrest following the 1990 election. Hillary Clinton visited Myanmar as U.S. Secretary of State in 2011 to show her support for Suu Kyi, which may have set the process in motion for the 2015 free election in Burma. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Steve Lee Myers reporting from Moscow and St. Petersburg, Jo Becker from Washington and London, and Jim Yardley from Nicosia, Cyprus, provide this extraordinary and exceptional report on the rise of a small group of friends, mostly from Mr. Putin's time in St. Petersburg, into a new sort of oligarchy replacing the old one under Mr. Yeltsin. This includes more familiar names such as Sechin at Rosneft, but also less familiar names such as Mr. Kovalchuk, chairman of Bank Rossiya, which owns major television and radio stations and newspapers in Russia. M. Kovalchuk is described as having acquired many of these media properties at a fraction of their real value. Bank Rossiya assumed management of assets of Gazprombank, and Gazprom bank purchased Gazprom Media with five television and a number of radio stations for $166 million, when Medvedev, a Putin associate put the value at $7.5 billion 2 years following the acquisition, according to this report. Other assets acquired in this manner include Channel 5 and Ren TV, giving Putin's inner circle control of the media and reducing any critical or different views on issues facing Russia. Many of Gazprom's assets were transferred to Bank Rossiya, say critics, including insurer Sogaz which was acquired for $100 million, later valued at $2 billion, says the report. Names on the this inner circle also include Yakunin, head of Russian Railways, also include names like Fursenko and Timchenko. Most of the people in this inner circle are now targets of western sanctions. Missing in this report is mention that that this inner circle of the second term as president replaces the larger circle of the first terms as president and prime minister, with Putin benefitting from experts and advisors in the first terms. That circle included Finance minister Kudrin known for his successful management of the economy, and others who left the administration after flawed parliamentary elections. Even prime minister Medvedev is not mentioned as part of this inner circle, suggesting a degree of isolation which could be perilous for the Russian economy as it deprives the Russian president of different opinion and useful advice. This is a pattern seen in many emerging market countries which experience corruption during the period of industrial development. A pattern seen also in China under the Communist Party. And in Venezuela where a new Bolivarist class was created. In emerging market democracies such as India and Turkey the problem is also present, except that in India the recent open election led to the ouster of the Congress led government with many cases of corruption in its second term. A similiar election led to a new government in Indonesia, showing that there is another way beyond the Putin Way. Behind the protests in Hong Kong and in Russia, as well as in India, were the huge gaps in wealth and the growing inequality, corruption, lack of responsiveness of ruling governments. In Russia this takes another dimension with efforts to control the internet and media, and efforts to spread this style of democracy. This has created problems in the Putin government's relations with western nations having open societies and free media, and unwilling to accept a distorted model of democracy. Another less noticed aspect of the evolution of these emerging markets is that upto a point development proceeds even accelerates even in the presence of corruption, and then reaches a point where development and growth slows with problems of corruption, mismanagement of resources, declining productivity, economic and political errors, or unfavorable external environment. India faced this problem in 2012-2013, Russia is likely to face this in 2015, and China faces the prospect of growth slowdown by 2016. This feature of emerging markets also reminds one of the frequently quoted old English saying by Lord Acton- "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." An idea also attributed to William Pitt the Elder who said- "unlimited power tends to corrupt the minds of those who possess it." ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Amy Chua talks about elites, ethnic minorities, and native peoples and and the conflicts that democratization and free markets can create in these countries, in her book "World on Fire." Malaysia, the Philippines and Indonesia have ethnic Chinese minorities and large native populations, and in India there are the Marwaris of Rajasthan and the commerical class among Gujaratis, the Parsees, and similarly in China. And in Bolivia, a white minority that is 3% of the population, and other white minorities in countries with large native or tribal populations like Ecuador, Peru, Columbia, or Jewish people in Latin American countries. In Africa you have a white minority in South Africa. In all these developing countries democracy empowers the native peoples, and free markets empowers these commercial minded elites. There is conflict and tension between the two and the question is how is one to look at this. If one sees it the way one ethnic Chinese person, Prof. Amy Chua -who has written a book on this subject and whose parents lived in the Philippines under Japanese occupation- the promotion of free markets and democracy is an American export leading to a lot of conflict. From Amy's perspective, there is the difficult tension for the Chinese minorities in Indonesia, Malaysia and Philippines. But are these countries better without democracy and free markets? And take Malaysia, did democracy and free markets come with an American export after the Reagan era promotion of free markets and democracy? In Malaysia native Malay peoples were empowered by democracy when the British left in the 1950's, long before the Reagan era. And somehow Malaysia has benefitted economically, even as there is tension between Malaysia's Malays, who run the democratic government, and the Chinese minority, which helps run the business sector with a rising Malay business community. With good sense prevailing all the people benefit even as the tension exists. The same is true in other countries mentioned here. Countries like Bolivia have to be seen as a legacy of long Spanish colonization and requires one to look at it differently, taking into account history, culture and place. empowers the ...
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. ...

India’s one-man band

Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the Economist points to the slow progress made in the first year of the Modi administration in India. Because the last years of the previous Manmohan Singh administration were a period of slowing economic growth and the built up expectations are high, there is a general sense that the Modi administration could have moved faster to make changes. As the Economist points out India is a large region with accumulated problems, and the Modi administration needs to have a good grip on the problems and how it plans to tackle them. Key bottlenecks such as energy will free up huge resources in the economy. How to tackle these individual problems with the most leverage for growth is critical to the approach to be taken, as all of the problems cannot be tackled at once. Coal India is an example of the government trying to find an approach that will work, following previous wholly unsuccessful efforts to overhaul the monopoly coal supplier. Modi also has to work within the framework of democracy, so the Indian experiment in change is likely to involve freeing up other energies for rapid development, unlike the Chinese experiment which was able to use the Communist party's total control of the country and top down direction. Under such a framework Modi will have to improvise and come up with a different framework for making rapid changes, that includes keeping the support of the farmers and working classes for a sustained 10 year effort. Moves such as the 150 million new bank accounts and the structure of providing relief to the poor in rural areas come from a good sensible approach, but also help the Modi administration completely change the way things are done, a cultural change which removes the old culture of support developed by Congress administrations since 1947. A similiar cultural approach is seen in the Clean India campaign, which is huge in cultural terms because in a democracy people have to change the way they think to keep their neighborhoods clean. In this sense the Modi administration as it studies and grapples with the problems to plan effective solutions to seemingly intractable problems in a vast region, is simply laying a strong groundwork for 2016-2018. Steps taken for the groundwork covered separately in the Economist report on India in the issue of May 23, 2016, are the efforts to get a goods and services tax implemented to improve the federal government's revenues, the shift of revenues so that about 62% of revenue goes to the states to promote development- which economic advisor, Arvind Subramanium, calls a big constructive change as states are better at competing for talent capital and investment, and the setting up of the think tank to replace the Soviet style Planning Commission of the Congress administrations since 1947....
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The 2022 industrial trade fair in Hanover, Hanover Messe, is covered here in DW.com with 2500 exhibitors showing how they are responding to a changed world after the pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine with support from China. Export oriented companies have to rethink their strategy says Thilo Brodtmann, the executive director of the German Engineering Federation, Supply chain disruptions and the pandemic have led to many German companies reexamining their reliance on Chinese suppliers. Human rights and democracy are now part of the reorienting of business in a new direction. The war in Ukraine is also having an impact. Reducing CO2 emissions is also a major part of the reexamination. Chancellor Scholz told the Hanover Fair at the opening ceremony -"We need to bring along with us emerging and developing countries, whose demographics and economic dynamics are turning them into new centers of power." Brodtmann says the solution is "to become independent and to have a completely different value chain." The head of the German Associaltion of Electrical and Electronics Industry Wolfgang Weber says "I'm quite sure that German companies are ready to invest in any of these countries in Asia, Latin America, and Africa to diversify their supply chains." However such new markets are not very well represented at the Hanover Fair, so that policymakers and German business have a lot of work to do to open up new markets across the world in Asia, Latin America and Africa. India, Indonesia and Vietnam are considered to offer good prospects for diversifying Germany's supply chain and a lot of work needs to be done. ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This obituary for FW De Klerk looks back at the dismantling of race based rule of Apartheid in South Africa in 1992, the release of Nelson Mandela, and elections in 1994 through universal franchise. This was done by the son of a schoolteacher in the Transvaal region who rose to the top through the provincial leadership. De Klerk took the actions to bring racial harmony after growing up as an Afrikkaner and working in the local politics of the National Party that introduced Apartheid rule. Before 1989 reforms in the Botha government left black people on 13% of the worst land in the country, tribal homelands in which they did not even live in, in a distorted form of representation. Limited representation was given to Indian ethnic minorities and colored people.  All this changed between 1992 and 1994 after De Klerk assumed leadership of the National Party and the government in 1989. This required great courage and statesmanship, and vision from De Klerk to set the foundations for a multiracial society that even Margaret Thatcher and Reagan failed to grasp and promote. De Klerk died in 2020. For Mandela the path was clear, for De Klerk the path had to be forged out of nothing and against the natural instincts of his own party. This saved south Africa to become a true multi racial society with respect for the rule of law and democracy. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Xi Jinping is seen in this WSJ report as putting China on a course as a competitor of the US compared to other leaders such as Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin, yet these prior leaders faced a enoromous gap in technology and capital to make it ludicrous. The shrinking of this gap is a result of free markets theory that took no account of the national interests of the US or of the European Union in shifting manufacturing lock stock and barrel to China.  A deeper look at China requires looking at it from putting oneself in China's situation since the period of the 1912 revolution and the 1919 May 4th movement for Science, Modernization and Democracy, to better understand its motives and realities. Jiang Zemin could not pose the question of competing with the US at the time because China's per capita GDP was less than $100 in 1990 and by 2000 during Hu Jintao's term still about a tenth of American per capita GDP.  Even today with population in North America of about 500 million in the economies of US, Canada and Mexico, China lags far behind in technology and capital resources. The Biden administration does not believe in this idea of free markets theory, wrong from the beginning that prevailed incredibly and puzzingly for too long, that it does not matter where you make as long as it is made at the least cost anywhere. It ignored what China and the US under Biden both believe for the US or China that the US is its people and the people is the country. For the US the Civil war itself as Lincoln said in rallying people to the Union, was fought because labor was more important than capital. When looked at the situation in China as stated by Xi at the party congress recently is for having made progress for the overriding goal of Modernization to build a moderately prosperous socialist economy. Huge problems in China remain hidden- ensuring self governance that is honest and accountable to the people, creating jobs and opportunities for hundreds of millions of young people even as supply chains shift after the pandemic in Europe and the US, India and other countries to their home countries for Made In USA, Made in Europe, and Made in India. China is not such a believer in the flawed free markets theory of the non existence of national interest to not grasp the natural aspects of the US and EU, India wanting to build their own manufacturing up again to the fullest. In this situation it also probably realizes the need for a pause to the rampant free markets type of growth that has damaged China's water, air and environment as much as it has damaged the world through climate change. Quality of growth is the new ethos and this gives the US and China, India, the EU and other countries a common frontier to shoot for. The nuclear aspect is also there and managing this well is a common interest for all countries exercizing responsible leadership. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What is the difference between South Korea and the U.S., Europe in the handling of coronavirus? It is tracking and testing.  President Trump and health adviser Dr. Fauci, see South Korea as the successful model to be followed in controlling the coronavirus. What has happened till now it is accepted with shortage of basic medical supplies and equipment, stress on hospital systems, are merely mitigation actions. South Korea was prepared for the coronavirus crisis because of the MERS and other epidemics, and failures resulting in corrective actions. Labs were centralized and better equipped for testing and tracking the infected. One of the key tools is testing. President Trump says the goal is for the U.S. to exceed and far surpass tests per capita in South Korea. Five million tests are planned by the end of April in the U.S. Where the U.S. falls short is in use of multipronged digital tracking using data from people's use of mobile phones, credit card usage, and use of apps designed to separate infected people from others. South Korea is a democracy with a population of 52 million people, about the size of France. People who were student activists in the democratization era in South Korea say the use of digital technology is a need today. We have to adapt in emergency situation they say. Ki Mo-ran, epidemiologist, and adviser to South Korean government says this is a key part lacking in the European and U.S. efforts to control coronavirus. She says in South Korea we know the patient's contacts, where he goes and stays, so we don't have to lock down everybody. Without digital tracking one cannot know which place is contaminated, which place is clean, so that there can be a lockdown of just that area and not the whole country, says Ki Mo-ran. She asks the question- is one person's privacy more important than the lives of a family or other people who are affected. Is it OK to lockdown every child in the country in a home as in Spain for over a month so that particular people's privacy is respected? These are serious questions for western society, are they exceptions or is democracy not just a western idea but equally cherished in Asian societies, people talk about Confucianism in China and the Asian culture forgetting that the biggest democracies are quite large and functioning well in India in addition to South Korea, Taiwan Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh and Japan, far larger in area and population than China. The French government has chosen the app TraceTogether as the least intrusive one adaptable to France for use there. The U.S. is having Google and Apple develop one of its own. India will be developing one of its own. The NYT raises the question will it be watered down so much in France or in the U.S. and UK to be less effective than the  dire need for an alternative to lockdowns? ...
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The reasons for pessimism are the effect of the global credit decline which makes it harder for Indian business to get access to credit, and the impact of shrinking export markets overseas. The lower inflation and less need for oil subsidies with the fall in the oil price are positive factors. The biggest positive factors though are the fact that exports amount to a much smaller amount of GDP, about 22%, smaller than other Asian exporting countries, as the export markets shrink. The resilience of its democracy and the energy and dynamism of its young people, added to the demographics that show about half the population is below the age of 25, and 40% under the age of 18, so there will be more wage earners and savings to support growth for decades to come. What experts including at the Economist see as the major advantage is the high savings rate which has risen from 28% in 2003-2004 to 35.5% in 2007 according to the Economist statistics. With this the investment rate in India has grown from 25% in the 1990's to 35% in the last five years since 2003 with Indian manufacturing growing at arate of 12% in 2007. And the Indian investment rate has been covered mostly by domestic savings. The two areas that hobble growth are the education levels and the state of the infrastructure which are challenges for organizations inside and outside the government and for business and will remain so for many years. With the global financial crisis the Indian growth rate is expected to fall to somehwere in the range of 5-6% for 2009 by experts. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This op-ed in the WSJ calls for increased trade and investment and closer U.S. ties with Sri Lanka, an Indian Ocean island nation of 21 million people at the southernmost tip of India. This follows the election of Maithripala Sirisena as the new president in the recent election. Formerly called Ceylon, this nation and India share a long tradition of democratic processes and free press since independence for almost 7 decades. These are the only 6 nations with British influence that have preserved democratic processes and mutiparty systems, including a vibrant free press, gradually established during the period of British rule- the U.S., Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, and Ceylon or Sri Lanka as it is now called. These institutions were transferred to 2 nations during a short period of American rule- Japan and Germany. Western Europe, and Eastern European countries since the fall of the Berlin Wall have joined this core group of countries. All these countries have a common bond and interest in building and strengthening democratic institutions and shared prosperity in a larger global neighborhood. Other countries in the British Commonwealth have struggled to develop multiparty systems and free press such as Malaysia, Ghana and Kenya, or had periods of military rule as Nigeria. Indonesia and South Korea have emerged from periods of military rule and are developing effective democratic processes to join what is now a large community of nations with a common interest in democratic process, truly functioning democracy, respect for the opposition, and freedom of people to express their views to participate in the working of government....
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Scott Shane of the NYT provides this exceptional account of how the ideology of Wahhabism on which the Saudi monarchy is based has influenced the evolution of Islam, but not in the way other religions have evolved into more moderate and open religions. Christianity evolved from the period of religious conflict, and evolved to the point that the basis of progress was based on education and technology in most of northern and southern Europe. Where the evolution did not take place because of more intolerant behaviours such as in Spain with the Spanish Inquisition and ideas from the medieval period, this development based on education and technology lagged severely behind.  Wahhabism developed as a result of a sect started by a religious cleric Wahhab in a poor desert region around Mecca and Medina, now the Saudi Kingdom, who sought the help of a tribal chief Ibn Saud. They used the religious-political alliance to gain tribal dominance in the region. Wahhabism sought to change Islam by banning worship and religious rites at tombs common in that period. It also as Brookings scholar William McCants cited here says, drew "sharp lines" and intolerance between believers and non-believers- all non-believers including other sects of Islam, Shiites, Christians. The movement spread throughout the region, but was crushed by the Ottoman Empire based in Istanbul, Turkey, by the 1850's, only to be revived in the 1920's following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. A Norwegian expert Heggenhammer cited here says clearly Islam did not benefit from the evolution that other religions had, and Wahhabism has slowed this evolution into and open, tolerant religion because of its "sharp lines" and intolerance of other faiths and ideas with the Wahhabism from a medieval perod. In India the British rule brought enlightenment thinkers (John Stuart Mill for example was a clerk for the British East India company). But no such change happened under Ottoman rule to inspire leaders like Gandhi and Nehru to setup a new constitution that made changes from medieval Hindu beliefs such as caste and religious practices based on superstition.  The development of an oil rich state in Saudi Arabia with the discovery of oil, and the dependence from 1950-2010 of the global economy, has led say experts to the export of the Wahhabist kind of Islam to other countries in Middle East and South Asia. This they say made the evolution to democracy and peaceful coexistence difficult or impossible in the region. ...
The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A significant part of the haze and air pollution in New Delhi, India, comes from crop burning in the neighboring Punjab and Haryana region. Here the Hindu newspaper looks at the practice that has not changed even after a 2015 government and NGT order banning the practice. This report cites data from the state of Punjab showing 65% of the 1.85 million farming families in the Punjab are small and marginal farmers. The problem is that the rice paddy harvest leaves 19.7 million tons of paddy straw in the fields and the farmers see burning this as a quick way to avoid incurring the cost of machinery and labor. The Punjab government is required to provide machinery to farmers for preventing the burning. Farmers say it has not provided this. Punjab government seeks funding from the central government in Delhi for meeting the cost. Till then marginal farmers continue their old ways creating a thick haze over New Delhi. Solutions proposed are having more biomass plants to generate energy and use the paddy straw, a Happy Seeder variety that takes works with the straw, and shifting to Basmati rice instead of the common rice crop. The way Indian democracy works political parties have remained wary of collectively working out solutions, letting the problem continue.  ...

Indian Lessons

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Insights from Jagdish Bhagwati- 1) Poverty actually declined under the previous government, it was displaced by the Congress not because poverty had increased but by the revolution of rising expectations and the democratic processes functioning in India. 2) The pressure cooker democratization in a place like Iraq is different from democracy in India, because India had democratic processes and rule of law under the British, which was followed by democratic processes functioning under the Nehru years and right upto to the present day. This is almost over 100 years of democratic practice. 3) Minority rights were respected by the post independence governments. 4) In China the government thinks riots are caused by inequality and rural-urban prosperity divide. Actually it is more because of the lack of democratic processes functioning in China to accomodate the revolution in rising expectations. 5) From a perspective of longterm sustainable growth this makes India's democratic functioning a better approach. Bhagawati does not mention the advantages in terms of private initiative that are fostered in a system of private capital and private companies. This dates back to the Tata enterprises under the British going back a hundred years....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Privileged minorities ethnic or white among large native populations. Amy Chua argues that free markets that empower the white minority giving it special privileged status, and democracy that empowers the native peoples, leads to conflict and exacerbates tensions. She talks about the Venezuelan experience with Chavez. Before Chavez Venezuela had free markets and elections in which two parties alternately controlled the government. Even before Reagan era and post Reagan era promotion of free markets and democracy this existed. However people were fed up with corruption and the native peoples did not see their lives improve. They tried a populist politician in Chavez who redistributes petroleum wealth to the poorer classes. Some of this tension is inevitable, but if all sides use good sense and understanding, and manage this tension constructively there still exists a better situation than there was before- when looking at overall public welfare and considering the welfare of the people and the educated professional classes. When there is a failure to work together it shows the shortsightedness of both sides, the poor understanding and lack of joint effort for mutual benefits, and not the shortsightedness of free markets and democracy. And one is not talking of free markets as American type, but free markets as crafted for each individual country based on its own history, culture, time and place, as free markets are not the same in America, Britain, Germany, France, Japan and South Korea, China and India in the post war period. China is not even a democracy and has practiced one of the wildest kind of free market economy based on its own unique situation, calculated consensus to use exports, foreign investment, and domestic investment in infrastructure as engines of development- its own peculiar use of free market ideas for its own situation. If it works, for as long as it works its good. Now as the situation changes with loss of export markets expected in 2009, China is changing to another kind of use of free market ideas tailored to its idea of free markets for development of the Chinese economy and distribution of benefits to urban and rural areas. ...
France 24 Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The treaty of handover by Britain of Hong Kong under one country, two systems was flawed in the way it was negotiated. French commentators looking at the problem say the city is caught between its past in the British Empire and the new monolithic state that China represents. Under the British French visitors looked at the city and wondered how there was freedom but no democracy, people were just selfishly just interested in making money. Chris Patten, Britain's administrator of the territory tried but failed to get democratic process, During the negotiations in 1984 for handover the chief British negotiator, Percy Cradock, a former ambassador to China, tells the Australian Broadcasting Corporation that - In Hong Kong where there is such a disparity in strength between the two sides, you go for the best you can get, I take the simple view that half a loaf is better than no bread." Britain had very little leverage to secure a separate future for Hong Kong because it was small compared to much larger China resulting unequal negotiations. The same is true today as the best Britain could do is to get out a joint declaration with Australia and Canada saying that it did not approve the new security law, that it violated the treaty signed by Britain and China. The French view expressed by the editor of La Croix is that hasty poorly planned British exits- as happened in British India -have led to crises and conflicts for postcolonial generations, a legacy of British colonial rule. India and Pakistan still sorting out Kashmir, and India and China still fighting about the McMahon Line border area. The situation is very different for the U.S. which now has to respond in some way, and this comes as trade tensions and coronavirus tensions about its origins in China and the failure of Beijing to allow quick entry for an American team into Wuhan. This being for 7 weeks between Jan 6 request and February 16 permission. America sees this as losing 7 precious weeks to make up its own determination of the dangers when every week health experts say means saving or losing tens of thousands of lives. With loss of 100,000 lives the Trump administration has a sense of being misled. This French report in FR24 points out that the lack of a strong response from the U.S. would be something similar to letting the Berlin Wall happen without a response. Both sides in a situation where the territory of Hong Kong remained mostly about money and with a disproportionate influence of business interests similar to its founding under the unequal treaties of the 1850's. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ looks at the 75 years of the US Saudi Arabia relationship that started when US president Franklin Delano Roosevelt met Saudi king Ibn Saud at Bitter Creek, Egypt, on a US Navy destroyer ship in 1945. It has gone through many phases over this period and mainly involved the Saudi kingdom maintaining its supply of oil to the US and Western Europe. This relationship went through an oil embargo during tense periods of Israeli Palestine conflict as in 1983 with an oil embargo that pushed up oil prices. What is different this time is the situation in Yemen where Iranian supported Houthi rebels near the border with Saudi Arabia are engaged in a conflict with the Saudis. Democratic administrations under first Obama and Biden today support reaching a deal with Iran on nuclear weapons development and limit US military support for the war in Yemen. The Saudis for their part are not keen on a regional war and turned down efforts by president Trump to respond to attacks from Yemen. Mr. Biden's envoy has arranged for a deal to reduce tensions between the Houthis in Yemen and Saudis. The diplomatic impasse in relations stems from the Kashoggi incident and president Biden's concern for the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia. Other factors making relations difficult are the economic interests of the two countries diverging. The relationship Roosevelt started in 1945 has changed in its fundamental character. Oil supplies for imports into the US is no longer a factor for the US which was the original interest of president Roosevelt in Saudi Arabia. This changed by 2015 as the US fracking industry enabled US to become self sufficient in oil and able to supply LNG to western Europe. Instead of the US Saudi oil now goes to China. Russian oil also goes to China as its industry expanded with American investment. This has led to a new Saudi relationship with China which has changed the dynamic of the American Saudi relationship. Some of the new aspects of this can also be seen in Saudi relationship with South Asia. Saudi ties have increased with India and India in 2021 was the first country to provide vaccine supplies to Saudi Arabia. Saudis, Qatar, United Arab Emirates are building relationships with India as a close neighbor in the region. Relationships are in some ways improving in the Asian region compared to the period when oil was simply exchanged as a commodity for defense supplies from the US without regard to cultural, educational and other changes in Saudi society. In a sense US and Western Europe paid little attention to the huge democracy of over 1 billion people right in the middle of Asia and followed policies that led to major investments in China and little or no investment in India, and without realizing it followed a policy that the British had pursued in the British Empire of treating different communities and religions as separate as opposed to one community of people in South Asia that were engaged in modernizing, building infrastructure and changing centuries old ways of living. The British Empire was sustained by this kind of thinking, and as long as Indians were complacent and lacked the will to make their aspirations for a better life and infrastructure for modernization this kind of thinking prevailed. The economic crises in Asia have reinforced the idea that there is one community entirely focused on development and modernization in South Asia. The people in South Asia care most about the cost of living and the infrastructure and services for the quality of life they live and their children can aspire for- same in European Union that chose the Greens and chancellor Scholz, and same in the US that chose president Biden to invest infrastructure and people, the same in China and the same in India and the rest of Asia. This is the situation that the US and Britain, and the European Union are now beginning to learn and adapt to that is a constructive aspect of these changes to rebuild the connections and supply chains that were sorely neglected before now. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
About 2.6 million eligible to vote people in Michigan and 3.5 million in Pennsylvania, and 1.3 million in Wisconsin did not vote in the 2016 election. The critical states this time are also Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, and these three states went to the winner by less than 10,000 in Michigan, 20,000 in Wisconsin and 50,000 in Pennsylvania.  A NYT analysis of Census Bureau data for 2016 election reveals that most of these people who are eligible but do not vote have lost interest in both parties that show little interest in delivering for them. Many of them are shown to be lower income voters, voters doing 2 jobs, or voters struggling financially. Some are single child parents in today's social structures. Getting a small portion of this vote can make a difference in a close election.  From 1840 to 1900 the percent of voting age population that voted has been between 70 to 80%. By the 1920's this dropped to about 50%. And it has been around 55% since the period of the Great Depression except for elections in 1952 and 56 for General Eisenhower and 1960 for John Kennedy. Even Harry Truman's whistlestop train campaign in 1948 got only 51% out to vote. Even the Roosevelt FDR three campaigns in 1932, 1936 and 1940 got 52-58% of voting age population to vote. The highest of any election was the election that led to the Civil War in which Lincoln won where 81% of the voting age population voted. Is it possible that America was a relatively much more prosperous country in the period 1840-1900 before large scale immigration from poorer parts of Europe and then poorer parts of Latin America and Asia, and large scale urbanization. With ample land and independent farmers in the nineteenth century leaving less scope for the poverty that exists in urban areas and social decay in rural areas and small towns that is seen today. Resulting in a much more civic consciousness and awareness of America's future and destiny than exists today. By comparison voter turnout in India has increased to 66% in 2014 election and 67% in 2018 after alternating high and low between 50-60% since 1947. Some forecasts are for a high turnout in the U.S. in 2020 to exceed 60%. The bright side for democracy is shown by the 911 million people who voted in the last Indian election of 2018. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Greece's New Democracy party and Mr. Mitsotakis wins about 41% of the vote in Greece's elections. Syriza come is second with 21% and Pasok left party at 12%. Mitsotakis has increased Greece's growth to twice the eurozone rate, and cut migrants by 90% in line with EU policy. New Democracy party gets 145 seats in a 300 member parliament. The first round was conducted under proportional representation, only 60% of voters cast their vote. Mitsotakis will go for another election by July because in a second round the winner gets additional seats and this could let it form its own government. It sees this as needed to maintain policies of economic growth that have led to GDP growth at twice the rate of the eurozone. A surveillance scandal appears not to have affected the election results as Greeks opted for stability and growth. Mitsokatis himself put it this way- "This is not the time for experiments that lead nowhere." Greece was almost out of the eurozone when Syriza conducted referendums on the debt repayment that led to a chaotic situation, and then moved in the opposite direction in callous implementation when the Eurozone held firm. Mitsotakis said Greece needs to achieve an investment grade rating to lower borrowing costs. Worldwide the policy of delivering on growth is key to success in elections in democracies and in countries that are catching up after the colonialist phase. This is true for delivery of infrastructure and public services such as water and electricity, modern rail in India. It is true also for winning enough public support in countries like China that run parliamentary representation under one party the CCP. Strict immigration controls since 2015 reflect a similar policy pursued recently by Italy. Migrants have dropped by 90%. This is popular among Greeks. Looking back Merkel made a serious error in letting in migrants coming in from Hungary and Austria at the beginning of the migration inflows into the EU in 2015. Merkel came from former East Germany, the communist led GDR, and had no understanding of how harmful this would be for the European Union. In just one year by 2016 the misguided open migration policies of Merkel had led to her CDU party getting less votes than an anti immigration AfD party in her home state of Meckenburg. It led to anti-immigration movements in Europe that were used by parties in a self-serving way including in Britain that led to exit of Britain from the EU. It also led to a decade of austerity and a lost decade for the European Union as it permanently sidelined parties to the left such as Social Democrats that unknowingly or unwittingly ended up with the blame for the public's discomfort with lack of borders and migrants upsetting borders. In balance the right way to tackle this was to build stronger economies that supported workers and families in the EU, that then invested significantly in developing countries of Africa and Asia to help them catch up with modernization. Another failure in policy was the Bush-Obama Merkel policies in failed states such as Iraq and Afghanistan. There it was fundamentally important not to get involved in any way that committed US or EU's precious resources.  ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A professor at Georgetown University on why it takes time to build democratic institutions, with one important omission- the military in Muslim countries such as Egypt have no intention of building these institutions and have undermined the development of these institutions for decades. A bigger omission lies in inability of the military in the most populous Muslim countries with horrendous gaps in development in basic welfare indices such as education, infrastructure and services, that have put these countries decades behind developing Asia and even Latin America which also had a past of military rule. In countries such as Pakistan and Egypt the military simply lacked the skillset and abilities to deliver in economic terms. Therein lies the biggest failure. In China and Russia the governments have popular support because of their capability to deliver economic growth that has transformed both countries and improved the lives of the people in the region. These crucial omissions explain why Republicans such as Senator John McCain and Lindsey see the need for the U.S. to be on the right side for change. Latin America shook off its history of military rule or one party rule and Brazil, Chile, Mexico are part of two free trade regions in Latin America, supporting the free trade system and economic growth in this hemisphere. The issue ultimately rests with the people of Pakistan, Egypt, and other Muslim countries, and a process of learning, compromise, healing and reconciliation that ocurred in Latin America is likely to follow in the Muslim world. It has already begun in Pakistan which like India has a independent judiciary and lively press, and some of the institutions for a functioning demcoracy. The worst omission is unmentionable because it is so obvious - that of firing live ammunition into protesters for democracy. Years after this happened in S. Korea, Mexico and other countries the day is remembered in a certain way. The important point is that when it comes to this there is no exception to the pattern. ...
The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The 14th edition of Aero India from Feb 13-17, 2023 with 80 countries participating. India has increased defense exports 8 times over 5 years. During G-20 meetings in India the country will showcase 3 D's - Democracy, Development and Diversity, says Rajnath Singh.

NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman in the NYT describes the dangers of plutocratic power to American democracy. When exercized by the Murdochs, the Elon Musks, the Harlan Crows of this world. He cites presidents who are Republican and broke up the large oil companies in the 1900's, Theodore Roosevelt (1901-1909) who warned about "a small class of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men, whose chief object is to hold and increase their power." This is happening with the power of the so called Tech companies today and both parties seeking to break  up the Tech companies.  Then there is a Democratic president from this period Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921) who followed Theodore Roosevelt. Wilson says- "If there are men in this country who are big enough to own the government of the United States, they are going to own it." Theodore Roosevelt fought political machines such as Tammany Hall in New York as well as Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company. Wilson, a professor from Princeton, continued this tradition by protecting the working class of that time through his New Freedom campaign in 1913.  As a professor Wilson wrote the textbook The State used in colleges of that period, which set forth for the first time the basic idea of the state that we see today- "that forbids child labor, supervises the sanitary condition of factories, limits employment of women in occupations hurtful to their health, institutes official tests for the purity or quality of goods sold, that limits the hours of work in certain trades, and by a hundred and one limitations the power of unscrupulous or heartless men to outdo the scrupulous or merciful in trade or industry." Both were progressive Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. Wilson under his New Freedom platform for the 1913 election, asserted that it was the task of government "to make those adjustments of life that will put every man in a position to claim his rights as a normal human being." What president Biden is doing today is closest to what Wilson and Roosevelt were trying to achieve, and what Modi is doing today in India is also closest to what Wilson and Roosevelt were trying to achieve. In 1913 Wilson won 42% of the vote, Roosevelt 27% because of a split within the Republican party with Robert Taft. Wilson proposed breakup of oil companies to provide a level playing field for all companies. Similar decisions are being considered by president Biden today for Tech Companies. The future of both the US and India is being decided in these difficult times after a pandemic and in the middle of a European war, and a supply chain overconcentrated in one country in Asia. Wilson's idea "to put every man in a position to claim his rights as a normal human being," is being set forth by president Biden through the word "dignity," by Modi in India as "sab ka vikas, sab ke sath" (development for all, with all). The Greens and SPD's Scholz also set forth this idea as "dignity" for the worker for Germany.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
First disrupt the young people's attention and create effects on mental health of long hours spent on social media such as Tik Tok. This results in a loss of literacy on basic knowledge of civics and American history to lower and lower levels. Then let these young people decide who should run the country and its government for the next 4-8 years. The founders never intended this and never anticipated this threat. Congressmen Republican Gallagher of Wisconsin and Democrat Krisnamoorthi of Illinois introduced a bipartisan bill to ban TikTok in the US considering that it was foreign adversary application when its literacy effects are even more a concern. Byte Dance has appealed the law that goes into effect Jan 19, 2025. The appeal is now before a 3 person panel of the Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals of Sri Srinivasan, Neomi Rao, and Douglas Ginsburg. Does Byte Dance have recourse to the First Amendment rights in the US Constitution when the US sees Byte Dance as a foreign adversary controlled internet social media service, is the question before the Appeals Court and next before the US Supreme Court. The US government has shown the judges confidential classified data that shows why it thinks there is foreign adversary influence of some sort.  It is interesting to note that national literacy standards and the ability of average American young people to know enough about American history and civics that is in a dire state today and a key vulnerability for US democracy. This is gravely harmed by social media influence. Only negative effects on mental health of children and young girls has been put forward. Too many hours spent on social media is a negative influence which is why China and now Australia and UK have put restrictions on is use. US has none. India has banned Tik Tok for security reasons. In all situations there are negatives here yet it is an appalling thing that literacy is not the biggest one put forward when it should be for this Nation. ...

How to run a continent

Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This article in the Economist Report on India focusses on politics, and the implementation of a state devolution of powers and finances. This is the big idea referred to by the prime minister's Economic Advisor, Arvind Subramanium. The Modi administration is providing the direction at the federal level for a development push at the state level. The states will now get 42% of federal tax revenus and with state revenues this increases to 62% of total revenues, giving the states leverage to compete for talent, capital, and investment for economic growth. This element of competition will be strong to attract different industries and foreign investment similiar to the experience of Gujarat and now pushed at all levels of government. It also introduces the idea of "competitive federalism" as India is a country with states at various stages of development from Gujarat to Punjab and Bihar. The new NITI Aayog replaces the old command economy Planning Commission from the Congress administrations since 1947, and supports "competitive federalism" as a think tank that provides advice and help to the centre and states. Rising aspirations in India helps the Modi government with voters who are incresingly urban and better educated, looking for jobs. The election in Delhi suggests voters will always be open to new ideas to fight corruption and bring better delivery of public services, and wins by parties offering positive change for improvement will always be a part of India's democracy, introducing competition in politics for who can do a better job at the regional level. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This opinion piece in DW.com says India's prime minister should not isolate prime minister Sharif of Pakistan, as he had no part in the escalation of tensions in Kashmir. Foreign and military affairs are now run by the Pakistan Army, and isolating Sharif only entrenches the Army it says, which has kept up tensions similar to the situation in 1999 with the Kargil crisis when the Pakistan Army initiated a conflict in Kargil region. At that time Indian premier Vajpayee and Pakistan premier Sharif were improving relations. 


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