World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip tells India's story, piped water for hundreds of millions of Indians, massive increases in road and rail, rapid development of infrastructure, aviation, ports logistics. WSJ graph shows country growth of economies for Japan, China, India, Germany in 2000 and 2020. By 2000 Japan had grown its economy to become about half the size of the US economy with two decades of rapid growth since 1980. China repeated this process with two decades of hyper growth since 2000 to become about 75% of the US economy by 2020. The graphs also show Japanese growth tailing off so rapidly after 2000 in relation to the US economy that it is now only about 25% of the US economy. China is likely to follow the same path as growth slows and with an aging population to become about 35-40% of the US economy by 2040 from 75%. India following the process that happened in Japan and in China is likely to become close to 35-40% of the US economy by 2040 from about 18% today, with the fastest growth over the next two decades for the most populous country in the world. Greg Ip points out what has been achieved since 2014 with the Modi government. Good governance without leakages of public funds dedicated to infrastructure, ease of living, GST one India one tax so that growing pool of funds from taxes fund rapid development with no leakages to corrupt officials,  Swacch Bharat or Clean India, clean water from taps, electricity and cooking gas for the whole population of India with dates for completion. All this Ip calls removal of the shackles that existed for far too long even past 2000 and 2010 when China had vastly surpassed India from its low point in 1980 after Mao and the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. India today is in as much a pace of development as China in the 1990's and Japan in the 1960's, except that it now has the benefit of grasping how development can be done in a way that does not affect climate and health in adverse ways as happened with China's hyper growth -which also led to the tragic loss of manufacturing for workers and communities in the US and Europe due to the economic theories of laissez faire of the Reagan era. Reagan theory for governments not working with industry that were applied indiscriminately during the Clinton, Bush, Obama and Trump presidencies for three decades led to shipping manufacturing overseas with no regard for the risks and dangers. What Greg Ip fails to mention is the uniqueness of India that is united by Vedanta, Hinduism and Buddhism for thousands of years, and which keeps the fabric of society together when it is divided by 13 language groups. These 13 language groups are: Hindi 43% of the population, Bengali 8%, Marathi 7%, Telugu 7%, Tamil 6%, Gujarati 5%, Urdu 4%, Kannada 4%, Odia 3%, Malayalam 3%, Punjabi 3%, Assamese 1%, English 1%. It was the vision of the early leaders Vivekananda, Gokhale, Mohandas Gandhi, Nehru, Sardar Patel, that united a diverse country with many languages and cultural variation. And it is this vision of Vivekananda that is creating the Good Governance under Sab ka Vikas, Sab ka Viswas, Sab ke Saath, Sab ka Prayas of today- development for all, with the confidence of all, with the support of all, the efforts of all. Without a disciplined direction based on hard work India could not make it this far or fulfill the aspirations of its youthful population by 2040. ...
The White House Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
"To Invest (at home), To Align (with allies), To Compete (with the world)" sums up the approach of president Biden with China. It also sums up the approach at home and overseas. Biden senior adviser, Jake Sullivan at Council of Foreign Relations sets out the framework and path for managing US-China relations into the future for many decades. Here at the Council of Foreign Relations he shows how- through careful study of the relationship's history, the changes in the relationship, and where it is today in 2024. Having participated in previous administrations Jake understood how it has evolved, where mistakes were made by both China and the US, where misperceptions took hold and need for clarification, for action. The old Strategic Dialogue followed by Paulsen under Bush 2000-2008 allowed the relationship to be guided by business interests, -without any clear strategy or idea where it was going except maximizing interests of business on both sides- was continued by Kerry under Obama 2008-2016. Sullivan, Blinken and Biden have built a Strategic Economic Cooperation Framework that has clear goals on the American side and goals on the Chinese side, and work between the two presidents and their cabinet ministers. Trump 2016-2020 rejected the earlier Strategic Dialogue but was not able to set up a sound framework that would guide future relations for decades. Sullivan helped set up a new framework around three principles- To Invest, To Align, and To Compete.   Here he describes how the plan to invest trillions in infrastructure in the US was part of this plan's principle To Invest. On Align it was to derisk not decouple by reducing the excessive concentration of supply chains in China, that was revealed as a problem in the pandemic years. Building up manufacturing at home and in India, Vietnam and Japan. Align also was to have allies Japan, South Korea and India to be aligned with the US policy. It also meant that all three countries would follow the same framework for their economies To Invest, To Align, To Compete.  By combining the strengths of the 2 largest economic centers Seoul/Tokyo with New Delhi/Sydney in Indo-Pacific the leveraging effect of US strength could be felt to support its position. And third to compete on level field so that America retained control of its technologies and implementing exports controls. And sharing this in  open communication with China that the US was protecting its technology and interests the way China has done in the past for its interests. The benefit of open communication even where there are differences had the advantage of not turning this into open rhetoric that damaged relations as had happened under previous administrations. Wang Yi on China's side having seen and approached it with careful study and reflection had similar goals to stabilize and put the relationship on a sound footing. Sullivan met extensively with Wang Yi in meetings in several locations around the world. Ministers Yellen, Raimondo, Blinken, Kerry, were sent to China for extensive discussions as part of this strategy in 2023 leading to remarkable change in the mood and confidence in US- China relations after tumult in 2016-2020 and uncertainty in previous administrations. Much credit goes to president Biden and Jake Sullivan, Anthony Blinken, and also to Wang Yi and Jinping in no way diminishing their own initiative, so that for the first time in decades the US China relationship is now on a stable footing. Both countries faced common challenges around counter narcotics, around climate change, and other issues. These are being addressed. Competition is managed carefully and no rhetoric is taking place so that the largest two economies and about 1.7 billion in US and China and 2 billion people who are allies in India/Indonesia/Vietnam/ Korea/Japan living on the same planet earth can have economic and other cooperation  with different cultures, economic structures and systems of government. The result of such a framework also gives the basis for cooperation with America's allies to invest in Africa and Latin America and in the people of these two continents as another level of alignment and investment for a safer better world. ...
The Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Britain will offer a pathway to citizenship to 3 million Chinese in Hong Kong, British Foreign Secretary, Dominic Raab confirmed an earlier statement. This applies to British National Overseas status (BNO) and their dependents upto 3 million. He stated that the new security law to control protests in Hong Kong were a "flagrant" violation of the agreement made with China 23 years ago.  He called it a "clear and serious breach of the joint declaration" of the two countries in 1997. The new arrivals from Hong Kong and their dependents will be given 5 years limited leave to stay and work in the country, at that point they can apply for settled status and after 1 year of settled status they can apply for British citizenship. The Foreign Office expressed alarm at one provision article 38 of the security law that seeks jurisdiction over anyone who criticizes China wherever they are in the world, putting them at risk if they travel to Hong Kong or China. ...
The Indian Express Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What this Editorial board opinion in the Indian Express is saying is that India should concentrate its efforts on modernizing its economy on a scale that is similar or surpasses that of China because of its access to the latest technologies. Just as China capitalized on the opportunity presented by its entry in the World Trade Organization in 2001, through an economy wide effort to build a manufacturing and export logistics base. India is presented with the opportunity of building its own manufacturing and export logistics base as supply chains are being redesigned in 2023. This requires a longer term plan with clear thinking and concentrated effort with the entire resources of the nation. What looks like a small or gradual shift in supply chain with the US and EU adding India and Vietnam to their Chinese manufacturing base is going to change with every change in world events, as the US concentration of manufacturing in China becomes a situation that is impossible to to maintain. The only logical way for the US and following the US the EU to create a proper balance in its political relationship with China is to change fully its lopsided concentration of manufacturing in China. Biden is only making the initial moves, the EU is only waking up to the need to make its own changes to reduce this concentration. How much distance does the US need to cover to reduce its concentration in China? By a large amount because the shift of manufacturing was excessive and ill advised done as companies in the US raced in a competition to shift outside over 2 decades and simply outdid themselves and performed a disservice to the workers and families of America whom they served. Just for the US to get workers and families to benefit from return of good manufacturing jobs to the US and restore its manufacturing base that has shriveled, it will have to be a massive enterprise, where day by day it becomes more evident that more and more needs to be and accomplished in an accelerated way. What this also means where appropriate to leave a progressively year after a year larger base in India, and also Vietnam, much larger than is envisaged today. This situation is even more acutely felt in Japan which to bring a proper balance in its political relationship with China needs to even more urgently reduce its concentration of manufacturing in China. It must be the task of the Modi government to have a clear view of the road ahead- build the needed logistical base for exports using the latest technologies and set higher and higher targets for manufacturing.  If you look at the map of Asia this is the Global South- India is 60-70% of the Global South with its population of 1.4 billion people mostly young with aspirations for a modern economy like that of the US and Germany. Add to that Indonesia and Vietnam, and other nations already in the redesigned supply chain in 2023 and you have 2 billion people in Asia. Concentrate on this for the next 2 decades for a complete transformation of India, that is what the younger generation demands of its government. ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Guardian provides this first account of what happened in the Galwan Valley border between India and China at the Line of Actual Control. It is described as the worst fighting in 60 years. On the high steep ridge lines above the rapidly moving Galwan River a patrol of Indian soldiers encountered Chinese troops in a steep section of a high mountainous region. They believed the PLA Chinese Army had withdrawn from the ridge in line with a June 6 disengagement agreement. The Indian government says that what happened afterwards was pre-meditated ambush by the PLA forces. In the fighting that ensued the Indian commanding officer was pushed from the narrow ridge falling to the gorge below. Reinforcements from the Indian side were called from a post 2 miles away and about 600 men were fighting in near total darkness in high mountain ridge with stones iron rods for upto 6 hours. Following a decades long tradition to avoid escalation of hostilities because of nuclear weapons of both countries the two sides have not used other weapons. Most deaths on both sides were from soldiers falling or being knocked from mountain ridges. The main problem in the conflict is the Line of Actual Control exists but since China's takeover of Tibet in 1950 there is no agreement that has set the official border. The British Simla agreement in 1912 set the border with Tibet in an agreement between Tibet and the British Empire in India, when Tibet was an independent country. China claims that historically going back to Ming and Qing dynasty Tibet was part of its region. For most of its history Tibet was an autonomous region with closer contacts with India because it is close to Nepal and Nepal is very near the Indian Bihar state border.  A new rail link from Raxaul, Bihar in India to Kathmandu is only 137 kilometres, and from Kathmandu to the Tibet border is only 205 kilometres. Fast rail or road links would put Tibet within a few hours by rail or road to Tibet from India. For the entire period the US exists as a nation about 250 years and from the first landing of the colonists on American shores about 1607 Tibet was a mountainous region that was so remote that few people even knew about the country's existence. Beijing and Shanghai are four thousand kilometres away, India much closer to Tibet through Kathmandu, Nepal and India sharing a common culture, and no one thought much about the mountainous borders at 15000- 20,000 feet in the western Himalayas, till China's takeover of Tibet in 1950. India had no clear idea what this meant in 1950- no clear border except for what was agreed between the Tibetan independent government  and the British in 1912 which was set under the British Empire- resulting in a fluid border. And China had no clear idea that this would put in a place it would not want to be thousands of miles from the Yangtse valley region home to most of China's population, in a remote mountain region at heights of 15,000 -20,000 feet, with little to gain. Throughout history since 1000 and earlier Tibet remained a region that acted as a buffer between China's western provinces and India, the high mountains at 15,000- 20,000 feet making it inaccessible. Which is why the Ganges plains and the Yangtse river valley plains contact was made more through the oceans than by land, and the areas developing distinctly different language and cultures. All this changed after 1954 when the Qinghai Tibet highway was built, the closest city on the Chinese side is Xining. Xining to Tibet is a distance of about 2000 kilometres at an average height of 4500 metres or about 14,000 feet.  ...
https://www.hindustantimes.com/ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The UNICEF Represetative in India describes the effort made by children to change attitudes and take action on issues related to sanitation and the Clean India campaign of the Modi government. It shows that a generational change in attitudes is underway as children take the lead for the first time.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China sees the situation in Hong Kong spiralling out of control after two months of protests and leading to a loss of China's sovereignty in Hong Kong. The Chinese official in charge of Hong Kong Affairs in the State Council, Zhang Xiaoming, met with the Hong Kong government representatives in Shenzen and made it clear offering a dire assessment and the most severe since China resumed sovereignty over Hong Kong in 1997 from Britain. Zhang stated- "If the situation worsens further, and there is turmoil that the Hong Kong government is unable to control, the central government absolutely will not just watch without doing anything." He also stated that the central government had enough strength to end the unrest, that the Party center and military force if necessary is behind the Hong Kong government. Wang Zhmin, China's top official in Hong Kong gives a better view of how this is seen in the Party in Beijing. He even called it a "life and death war" comparing it to the "color revolutions" the democratic movements that unseated governments in Georgia, Ukraine and Serbia. China sees this differently than western countries. With its long struggle against colonial rule in the territory controlled by Western powers along China's coastal region, China's ruling party leaders have a very different perception of the situation than is shown in most western media, particularly during the two decades of China's reconciliation with Japan and the U.S. in its effort to catch up. In the rest of the world the perception is very different. The use of a military garrison or riot police from other parts of China would affect China's image carefully built up over two decades of a peaceful developing country working hard to catch up in living standards and technology. As the economy slows to 5-6% the damage would be to business confidence and investment, and to Hong Kong's status as a world financial center. This could also affect China's relations with the U.S., European Union and Britain. with criticism on action by China. Unlike negotiations with Japan by Mr. Lighthizer for president Reagan, when Japan enjoyed a trade surplus such as that of China today (where there were no such issues with Japan as the U.S. had offered security guarantees to Japan), negotiations with China on trade could be affected by issues such as status of Hong Kong. This could lead to a worsening of trade relations, indefinite duration of tariffs and lack of any settlement on trade, further slowing the Chinese economy and hardening positions. ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This is what our energy wars, our climate change wars are about in summary. Europe has moved faster than the US, India and China in cutting fossil fuels use over 20 years 2005 to 2025. Europe going from 1525 trillion watt hours to 792- cutting use by half. The US from 2900 to  2553 trillion watt hours just 12%. And China...China tripled its use. This has come at a price as the costs of renewables push up electricity prices beyond what homes and industry can support. UK electricity prices 80% higher than US and half of UK energy users plan to ration its use 2025. Half of electricity costs in UK come from cost and delivery, other half of costs from subsidies of renewables and other. In Germany high electricity costs are hobbling industry and reducing economic growth. Lower electricity prices make the US more attractive than Germany as a place to invest. Another way to look at it- US and Europe cut fossil fuel use by about 1100 trillion watt hours and China increased its use by 4200 trillion watt hours or 4 times what the US and Europe cut in 2024 over 2005. Adding India, Brazil this would be 5-6 times what the US and Europe saved in 2024 over 2005. The "And "strategy of combining reduction in fossil with building renewable capacity is working out compared to dumping fossil in one shove and going all out renewable. There is also the question of equity. China and India argue equity means we should be allowed to use some fossil with renewable for 2.5 billion people's needs. The other side of equity is the US saying the same as "no fossil period" strategy puts the needs of the large part of the population for lower costs of energy  pushed aside as wealthy classes say it is OK. Even when the savings through cuts and sacrifices in US and EU are cut down, cut down by 5-6 fold increase in China, India, Brazil alone. In this kind of climate change war it makes sense not to go with labels such as climate change denial DJT vs China climate change affirming, when China is diluting US-EU climate change entire twenty year savings of 2005-2024 by a factor of 4, 1100 trillion watt hours wiped out by China's 4200 trillion watt hours added. And India, Brazil taking this to a factor of 6. This is why a lot of the discussion with self-righteous indignation becomes less purposeful. What is clear is that every action to cut cost of living in US and EU for large parts of the people is an effort in the right direction as it frees up resources for the fight against climate change, the sense that we are all in the same boat and in the same struggle. The fight against cost of living is part of the long run struggle against climate change. ...
MIT Technology Review Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
At this rate China and India will through the time young people are being encouraged to pursue reading and education- and through strictly regulated social media and videogames in China and TikTok banned in India- move in the direction of developed nations and the US with 150 million users of TikTok be moving in the other direction where Brazil 126 million users and Indonesia 99 million users are. This report in MIT Technology Review says in 2022 the children and teenagers in America spent 103 minutes on TikTok. Tiktok and Facebook split the social media market with about 5 billion minutes each. If users are on both this could give an average of 206 minutes or over 3 hours a day. Consider that there is a Chinese version Douyin. In China its version of TikToK is strictly regulated for a long time now and nowhere poses the kind of threat to education, reading and building a better educated population in China than in the US. Is that a conspiracy. No, says MIT Technology Review, it is because how quickly and forcefully the Chinese governments regulates digital platforms.  It a clear failure of the US Congress and the federal government that has led to this situation where this may be the first generation of young people that are less prepared for civic responsibilities and are from the amount of time dedicated to social media spending less time on reading to to be knowledgeable, and reading in general for education.  In China action is swift. Take for example video games and addiction. In 2021 the rule was put in that children under 18 could only play video games between 8.00 pm and 9.00 pm on weekends and holidays. They are blocked from using outside of these hours. China is looking for new measures that require creators to obtain a license, and for ways for the government to regulate the social media algorithms themselves.  ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
It is not clear how China's president Jinping's support for the idea of "China Dream," -of China as a world power on a level with the U.S.- should be interpreted. China will increase its defense budget and continue its efforts to be the dominant power in its region, even as the U.S. and Japan begin to build closer ties in the Pacific. Is it simply a new assertiveness for its rights in relation to territorial disputes with Japan, and a continuation of a policy of peaceful development of earlier leaders. The move could also be an effort to build close ties with the military as the new leadership of Jinping-Keqiang prepares to make major changes in the economy. A speech in Dec. 2012 to Communist party officials in Guangdong province by Jinping, on how the lack of unity with the military led to the collapse of the Soviet Union under Gorbachev, could throw light on the thinking. In a few days an old party was gone, as he put it. This also follows the Bo Xilai episode which involved contacts with the military and the risks of division in the military and political leadership....
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
German foreign policy is seen as too dependent on China and too China focused, in this conversation of DW.com with experts at German Council on Foreign Affairs (DGAP), European Council on Foreign Relations. Germany had little focus on India and no clear policy to expand ties under Merkel. German foreign policy should take the example of France and other Scandinavian nations in building strong ties with India, says this report. Relations with China of the US and EU countries are strained following trade and technological competition. Merkel continued old policies from 2000-2010 in 2010-2020 even as the EU was losing its technological edge with China. This report says a new German federal government after the upcoming election has to decide what relations it wants to build with India, following the example of France, and Scandinavian nations. And what role the EU will play in India's rapid development in industry,  technology, shipping, transportation, renewable energy, other fields, and opportunities for co-operaton in many fields in 2020-2030. This is also about "Whats at stake for Germany?" in new foreign policy under a new chancellor from SPD or Greens, or some other coalition. And what role Germany will play in the rapid modernization transformation that is now likely to take place in India in the next 10 years. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Neil Irwin in the NYT why the U.S. China Phase 1 Trade Agreement is more than a hill of soyabeans as he puts it, more than about all the soyabeans that the U.S. farmers can sell to China. China's economy was seeing the effect of U.S. tariffs. Additional tariffs to cover all imports from China to the U.S. would have worsened this. China avoided this by agreeing to Phase 1. The U.S. had looked for some enforcement mechanism based on China putting this down in a written agreement particularly for avoiding subsidies to state enterprises and improper access to U.S. advanced technologies. China's reluctance to do this led to Mr. Trump saying that China had reversed its position and Trump expanding the tariffs stage by stage. These issues are now set aside for Phase 2 still to be negotiated. Both sides taking what they could get. China relief from the threat of tariffs on all exports. The U.S. under Mr. Lighthizer's negotiating leadership retaining the enforcement idea through the tariffs that are still in place of 25% on half of China's exports to the U.S. The bonus for Mr. Trump is the goodwill China generates by agreeing to buy all the U.S. farmers can produce, farmers having not only stood behind Mr. Trump but also forming a key part of his support base. China will continue to compete in technological areas with the U.S., and the state enterprise model which worked for China as Mr. Xi tells visitors will continue. Phase 2 is just that Phase 2, when and if it can be negotiated between Trump with his negotiator Lighthizer and Xi with his negotiator Liu He. On key points neither side is budging. A key goal for Mr. Trump is to put the trade surplus China enjoys of $300 plus billion a year with the U.S. on a serious downward path, and bring so many of the jobs and manufacturing back home. On this trade data for 2019 and the plan for 2020 of both countries is clear. It should be down each year by 10-20% for the next few years, a major achievement of Mr. Lighthizer, who did the same with  Japan under president Reagan. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
One negative effect of the trade war with the U.S. is an increased emphasis on energy security and increased use of coal in China. After China committed to goals for climate change coal use declined in 2014, after reaching a high in 2013. The attack on Saudi oil facilities showed risk in its reliance on Saudi oil. China's import dependency for oil reached an all time high of 72% in 2018, according to BP 2019 Statistical Review. Gradually the commitment to climate change and lower use of coal has changed since 2016 with the withdrawal of the U.S. from the Paris Climate Change Agreement. Initially after the U.S. withdrawal under president Trump China made bold commitment to lead the fight against climate change but has since wavered. In an October 2019 speech Premier Li Kequiang called for the development of the coal industry to ensure energy security.  As China's economy slowed in 2019 in the face of U.S. tariffs and a trade war with the U.S. efforts are being made to increase infrastructure investment which has driven coal use higher. China's steel output reached a record of 750 million metric tons in 2019. The amount of coal fired capacity under construction in China now exceeds the rest of the world combined, much of it from plants permitted before 2017, according to Global Energy Monitor. China is also expected to become the world's largest importer of natural gas by 2020. Even the Russian gas fields from Siberia supply only a fifth of China's energy demands in 2020.  China has made large strides in renewable energy helping it meet its Paris Agreement targets. Renewable energy is about 10% of China's energy mix, but its use showed growth of 29% in 2018, making up half of the world's growth. China's use of coal in the energy mix has dropped to 58% in 2018 from 72% in 2008, according to BP 2019 Statistical Review, as a result of renewable energy investments. At the Madrid Climate Conference China renewed its commitment to the Paris Climate Change Agreement. Now it is a balancing act keeping in mind energy security and economic growth along with the need for clear skies and better air quality. ...
dw.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Dependence on China increased during the Merkel years to extreme levels. A EU survey shown in this DW.com report shows that of 137 products and services deemed critical, including fields such as renewable energy and health, almost 50% are supplied by China and only 3% by Russia. German foreign takeover laws and acquisition laws are being upgraded only now after years of China's investment in German technology and critical infrastructure  companies. The Merkel administration took a lax approach to protecting German technology and critical infrastructure. A similar situation existed with the Obama administration in the US. New regulations give the German government a veto in all critical mergers and acquisitions. This DW.com report says that today Germany's protected sectors include energy and telecommunications, medical technology, artificial intelligence. The problems  with the previous approach in the Merkel years that showed a complete disregard for protecting vital technologies was that the Economy Ministry in 2016 was not able to stop the full takeover of the flagship German robotics company KuKa by a Chinese manufacturer of dishwashers and refrigerators Midea. In 2018 a Chinese state electric utility company SGCC sought to get a 20% stake in 50Hertz a German electric grid operator which was turned back. Only now with the entry of the Greens under Habeck and Baerbock in government has Germany adopted a clear policy of effective action to protect German technology and critical infrastructure companies. ...
Council on Foreign Relations Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The issues related to India's borders all hinge on Tibet says the Council on Foreign Relations. Sardar Patel and Nehru had differences of their own on whether the McMahon Line set by the British in a treaty with Tibet as an independent country was the border with Tibet or the border with China.  Between 1913 and 1950 Tibet was an independent country, with an Indian High commissioner in Lhasa between 1947 and 1950. After the Cold War set in and China and the Soviet Union fought to defend the rights of colonial peoples the U.S. and Britain did not recognize Tibet as a part of China. Nehru simply remained with the British status quo of the McMahon line as the Indian border with Tibet, without any clear acceptance  of the invasion of Tibet in 1950 by China, yet accepting the new status quo after the invasion, differing from Sardar Patel on the issue. This is why no clear picture emerges from looking at the official positions of the two countries, and a better understanding can be gained by looking at the border issue from the Council of Foreign Relations in the U.S.   Essentially the border issue is not beneficial for what it gives back to each of the two countries. China sees itself rejecting the period of its weakness during the Japanese invasion so that it reasserts its position to borders that stretch outside where Chinese people live. India sees itself rejecting the weakness during the British period and the early post British period during which India was occupied with the issues relating to partition of British India and the partition of Kashmir. This is why the Council on Foreign Relations can provide a better understanding from and independent perspective.  Both sides have little to gain. China by being at the Tibetan border puts itself in a position where it has little to gain being on the border with a large rapidly industrializing country with a population of over 1 billion.  At over 4000 metres or 20,000 feet the territory and landscape is not one that humans can adapt too in any way, except for a few military personnel doing their term of duty of 6-12 months from India or China. China is even further away from the border as it is a remote border from Beijing, Shanghai, Canton or Chengdu, thousands of kilometres when it is just 8 hours from Srinagar by highway to Leh, Ladakh, and the Nepalese border very close to the Bihar state in India. The very distance suggests remoteness, with customs traditions in the region very different from that in China, suggesting very little connection between Beijing near Mongolia and Tibet or Ladakh very close to India by road or rail. To get some idea how close the Tibet border is to India consider that Rasuwagadhi Fort border point between Nepal and Tibet is only 127 miles by road from Kathmandu. The distance by rail from the Indian border in Bihar to the Nepalese border is only 34 kilometres with a new upgraded rail connection. Being this close India is likely to upgrade infrastructure throughout the northeast region as it upgrades infrastructure, roads and bridges and rail throughout India at an accelerated pace for economic development.     ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The large Iranian missile attack on Israel on April 13th 2024 was expelled with American, UK and Jordan's help. It cost about $1 billion in antimissile systems. The US does not seek an expansion of the war. The events show how without a clear policy on non escalation with the US taking leadership- how without this events could spin out of control in unanticipated ways. And the need for priority to be given to rebuilding after the pandemic, not conflict that is driven in a random manner when most of the largest countries on every continent are committed to peaceful development to improve standard of living of their people- US and EU, China and India, Brazil and Mexico, African nations, and most other nations in Asia and Latin America. It is for Biden and Scholz/Macron, Xi and Modi, to make this happen.

The Times of India Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Prime minister Modi's 5 commitments to get closer to net zero by 2030 will require making ambitious efforts starting from 2021. Modi cited Indian Railways as an example to be followed by the rest of industry and transportation, and homes, for the conversion to clean energy. Indian Railways, he told the COP26 conference, had set ambitious goals to achieve net zero emissions by 2030, cutting carbon emissions by 60 million tons from the 1 billion tons reduction of carbon emission Modi promised by 2030. The ambitious 2030 target of 500 gigawatts of renewable energy, mostly solar using new technologies, is another promise.  This Bloomberg report looks at India's energy mix today which is 44% coal, 25% oil, 6% natural gas, for a total of 75% fossil fuels, and the promise of 50% fossil, 50% renewable and other non fossil fuels hydroelectric, nuclear, that Modi made at COP26 Glasgow. Just as US and Europe, Japan, China have huge challenges ahead to make a massive transformation in record time, India faces the equal need to think clearly and embrace new technologies with speed and scale, and make the investments early for transformation. This is good for India to take on the challenge and venture out to seize the opportunities in new technologies that transform whole industries and a way of living that must be left behind. ...
The New Yorker Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
EIA says half of the benefit of higher fuel efficiency standards for Automobiles 2010-2020 in US was lost because of SUV's and the incentivizing of SUV's in the 2006 CAFE standards have made things worse. The first SUV's came in the 1980's. By 2004 SUV's made up half of car sales and by 2025 outsold cars 2 to 1. What if we took all SUV's and large cars off the roads, or even some of these SUV's by deincentivizing of SUV's in the US CAFE corporate fuel efficiency standards? What would be the savings in crude oil and in carbon footprint? Would it be about the same as releasing an additional 400 million barrels of oil into the markets in addition to the 400 million barrels that are now released through EIA and member countries? This New Yorker essay touches on this idea. During the Iran war the volatile Middle East as a source of oil supplies is a major problem for countries. Some are rationing supplies and in one country 40 million children are not going to school for 2 weeks starting this week because of the sources of oil are so precarious, government offices will only have half of the employees, the rest working from home (almost like Covid pandemic). Many other countries face that situation. The International Energy Agency recently reported that, if “SUVs were an individual country, they would rank sixth in the world for absolute emissions in 2021, emitting over 900 million tonnes of CO2.” The agency says governments must redesign their CAFE standards and their policies so that it would reduce S.U.V. sales, tax gas guzzling vehicles. EIA cites governments in the EU doing this- “Some governments have already started introducing relevant measures, such as France and Germany, which have put a tax on large and high-emissions cars.” Within SUV's also there is an opportunity to reduce the size and make more efficient space utilization designs. Small savings also add up. One has to realize that the current freedom to use energy freely in places like the US with self sufficiency in oil comes with a sense of responsibility for using it wisely so that it can be exported to cut the trade deficit, precisely what the president is doing with India, to cut a trade deficit of $58 billion before it gets to $100 billion. Section 301 is already in place for investigations by the US of 18 countries for a new basis to use tariffs after the Supreme Court decision. A similar approach is taken with EU for hundreds of billions of reductions in trade deficit that will only strengthen the US dollar and the US economy in the long run , and be good for stock markets and jobs as it reduces oil prices and increases the manufacturing capacity/cost for the Nation. Europe, India and China can do the same. Remember that in 2010 SUV's made up 17% of total world sales, and by 2025 SUV's made up 46% of world vehicle sales. This would create another 400 million barrels for the oil markets, which would triple what was released through EIA  this week to 1.2 billion barrels and this would create 120 days of supply replacement for the 10 million b/d lost from Straits of Hormuz, and effectively end the Iran War as it would be clear that prices can be kept low even in the $50's. Essentially buying time till the SU can get more production in Venezuela and other parts of the world to replace much of the Middle Eastern oil that is ending up in a quagmire. This is the best way for the US and Europe, India, China to ensure jobs growth, economic growth with low cost crude oil in the $50 range and ensure much of the poorer countries like Egypt and Indonesia, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, have access to oil at prices they can afford and eliminate poverty. ...
UNESCO Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The UNESCO report on Water scarcity and contaminated water. It creates awareness on World Water Day but comes across as a largely academic exercise, ask any rural woman in India and she knows the significance, question is what should have been done and the resources are there. For action it has to come from nations,, large nations such as India from it's Jal Jeevan Mission, China and Japan transferring the knowhow and technologies to Africa and Latin America and other parts of Asia. The period after a pandemic is also a time to focus efforts on  doing this. How it undermines girls and women and their participation in society is part of the understanding in India, and uppermost in the minds of Indian leaders and technologists, and in the mind of PM Modi. Unfortunately the UNESCO reports fails to even cover right up front in its summary how Jal Jeevan is being done for 1.4 billion people in India to have clean tap water so that people in Africa and Latin America can see that this is possible, if in the Himalayan regions possible in their region it is possible. Just see for yourself in India. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
India's challenges in securing $1.3 trillion in capital over 5 years for infrastructure spending. This is needed including capital from the private sector to support government funding, so that India can build the infrastructure to create new manufacturing hubs that compete with China as the world's manufacturing workplace. The Biden administration's determination to compete effectively with China using is own supply chain in Asia, and the EU's plan to follow what the Biden administration does, is likely to create a new kind of environment by 2024-2025 that will create a steady flow of capital to India and other parts of Asia to finance this effort for rebuilding its supply chain. The Biden administration is seeking to build a culture change from the old culture pushed by Reagan type free marketers that delivered lost decades in manufacturing and jobs in manufacturing for the US. Biden's State of the Union message was clear- "Folks we're just getting started. We're just getting started." By 2024-2025 the Adani story may just be a footnote to this story as other manufacturers and investors pick up the infrastructure challenges facing the US, EU and India for a new supply chain for the Free World built around self-reliance. The Ukraine war and China incidents such as one that happened recently, will accelerate the rebuilding of the new supply chain on the part of the US and the EU with partners in Asia. And change decades old assumptions and trade relationships over months, not years. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
On foreign policy the new German government of Olaf Scholz seeks to build a stronger European Union. Scholz will also follow a policy of close ties with the US. On relations with China Scholz has not stated much. Greens party foreign minister Baerbock's views and Scholz's views suggest a close relationship with the US - a call with president Biden will follow visits to Paris and Brussels. Scholz says "It is now clear what binds us together," referring to democratic values.

Video of all members of the new German cabinet is shown in DW.com, individually with each minister's background, part of the new government of SPD's Olaf Scholz. Wolfgang Schmidt is Chief of Staff and Minister for Special Affairs for Mr. Scholz. Vice Chancellor and Economy+ Climate minister is Robert Habeck. Education, Digital and Transportation Infrastructure, Finance, went to the FDP. Other ministries were divided between the Greens and the SPD. 

The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
COP26 stands for Conference of the Parties for Climate Change. The conference will be held in Glasgow from 31 October to 12 November 2021 in the UK. It is important because for the first time the major countries are keen on pushing forward with climate change policies and targets. This includes India, China, US, European Union, and major Asian, Latin American, African nations. In India Mr. Modi has set a target of 450 GW for renewable energy. China is aggressively cutting back on its use of coal to the point of tolerating cutbacks in electricity for industry and cities. US, UK, Germany, Nordic countries are pushing forward with new targets for reducing coal consumption and increasing renewable energy production, advancing renewable energy technologies. The new Biden administration in the US and the Greens in Germany have replaced administrations that were not as committed to tackling climate change. With China and India also committed to tackling climate change with renewed vigor the stage is set for serious steps to be taken. To reach the target of limiting global heating by no more than 1.5 degrees centigrade countries all over the world have to cut emissions by 45%. In reality emissions will increase by 16% in 2021 because China and India still depend on coal and developed nations have not cut back enough. To cut use of coal and preserve forests, avoid the drastic changes in weather patterns with drought and floods in different parts of the same country seen in Germany, India, African countries and other Asian countries a lot needs to be done. Here Mr Kerry the US Representative for Climate Change, says -"There is a significant increase in ambition on cutting emissions than ever imagined possible. A much larger group of people are stepping up." It is not clear if Mr. Xi of China will attend the Glasgow meeting. He has talked to Mr. Biden at length on this issue recently. Mr. Modi of India will attend and will meet Denmark's prime minister Mitte and other leaders before the COP26 in Glasgow.  ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A Trump-Vance nomination with its huge tariffs inside a Republican shell with its preference for tax cuts is with a large degree of certainty likely to put America further behind China, slipping even further by a decade. And slipping in renewable energy and in meeting the aspirations of ordinary Americans. Most of the public does not realize that Trump-Vance 60% tariffs and Republican preference for tax cuts over infrastructure spending would create inflation and lack of growth in a Trump-Vance second term. Things would get worse because of the contradictions existing in the choice of tariff preferring Trump in a Republican party that sees tax cuts not infrastructure spending -even when desperately needed- as the answer to every economic problem. Without a clear policy of making the trillion dollar investments in the US economy, in manufacturing, in renewable energy, in chips and science, as it has under Biden the US under Trump-Vance policies would have two serious problems- first it would revive inflation. 60% tariffs on Chinese imports and 10% tariffs on other nations proposed by Trump-Vance would increase inflation. In the absence of the infrastructure investment that Biden has put in place it would create both a lack of growth for the jobs missing that come from infrastructure that is badly needed in a aging dilapidated infrastructure economy, and the inflation that the high tariffs would engineer. The benefits would not be great if China chooses to find other ways to conduct business and continues to keep its currency at levels that promote its exports. Even today Chinese products enter the US through other countries or when China builds factories in the US as Japan has done. The Republican aversion to tackling Chinese industrial challenges in the same way that China does by actively supporting American manufacturers would give China another decade of advantage as America slips even further behind in chips, science and manufacturing. This is the real problem in mixing Trump-Vance to the Republican philosophies on the economy which are not right for this point in time whatever their merits may have been in the 1980's when America was the industrial leader in the world.   ...
France 24 Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A nuclear plant in a war zone with repeated shelling? This is taken up in this debate video of 44 minutes in FR24 which you can click on. The world has not seen this since the start of nuclear energy from plants in the 1950's. Calder Hall the first UK nuclear power station and the first in western Europe started in 1956. Eisenhower opened the first US nuclear power station Shippingport on the Ohio river in Pennsylvania, 50 kilometres from Pittsburgh in 1958 as part of the Atoms for Peace Program. The US built 54 nuclear plants that are operating today in 2022 generating 50% of the renewable energy in use today in the US. The question is what does the unthinkable conducted by the Russians and Ukrainians, by weaponizing a nuclear plant do to public perception of the safety of the Atoms for Peace Program initiated by president Eisenhower in 1954? What does this damaging of public safety perceptions after Fukushima do to the Atoms for Peace type of programs in China India, and European Union that are part of the emissions cutting programs in the world? These are serious questions at a time when climate change is not simply a word but means floods, fires, drought, and declining food production all over the world from Spain to Pakistan, from Germany to China. China and India are affected. China has 53 nuclear plants in 2021 with 50 GW and plans to double this by 2030. India has 22 nuclear plants  with 8 GW in 2021 and plans to triple this to 22 GW by 2030. How will climate change be tackled with public safety perceptions affected with another nuclear accident like that in Fukushima arising from shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant. As the president of the UN Security Council Zhang Jun of China clearly stated at the UN SC meeting last week that China opposed use of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant by Russia (or Ukraine) in any way that could lead to damaging nuclear safety leading to an unintended accident. China only gets about 5% of its energy from nuclear, India about 3%, and this will need to increase multiple times to tackle climate change. France gets 70% of its energy from nuclear, the US 20%, by comparison. Nuclear energy safety and clear rules to prevent weaponizing of nuclear plant zones is essential and a solution like that developed for the food grain shipments from Odessa through Black Sea to the Mediterranean has to be arranged quickly. ...
ProPublica Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in ProPublica on October 13, 2020, by Lydia DePillis was written near the end of Robert Lighhizer's term as US Trade Representative.  Bottom Line: It is human behaviour that no country, no kingdom or group will give up its money advantages secured when the opposition was weak or disorganized till the last fight is fought. The British were not giving up India, a source of financing the war against Napoleon in 1800's and then the Industrial Revolution in 1850's, the Dutch were not giving up the financial advantages of their Spices Empire in Batavia (Indonesia). History has shown this. Once gained under a state capitalism Japan was not going to give up its financial advantages gained by the 1980's when the US was weak or disorganized, till the last battle was fought.  Lighthizer who for the relentless Japanese was equally relentless till the goal of fair and level playing field for America was secured. This is true for China today on Liberation Day. This entire report by De Pillis in 2020 shows the Chinese would be relentless in 2020 like the Japanese in the 1980's, the Dutch in Indonesia  in the 18th and 19th century and the British in India in the 19th century and 20th century. China turned Mexico and Vietnam into supply routes into the US market. It continued its efforts to gain US technology in other ways. USTR older officials from the Bush Obama years of failed negotiations with China and endless hours putting together minute details of agreements including the TransPacific Agreement of Obama were not going to like the new approach of Lighthizer so stuck were they with the old approach of no clear goal and not getting an even playing field from China. ...

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