LyrArc Article Gist
Prof. Jeffrey Wasserstrom of UC Irvine reviews Henry Paulson's "Dealing With China." Paulson was head of Goldman Sachs investment bank and Secretary of the Treasury 2006-2009, the period of the global financial crisis. He made 70 visits to China since his days at Goldman Sachs and calls Chinese leaders Jiang Zemin and Jinping "old friends." He established the Strategic Economic Dialogue in the Bush administration for dialogue on economic issues with China, and setup the Paulson Institute at the University of Chicago to focus on China-U.S. relations. One of Paulson's points is that China's financial system faces a day of reckoning, with large losses and many restructurings. Wasserstrom's review looks at Paulson's view of dealing with China and points to a sense that it needs updating because by the time the book is published a lot has changed with the new Jinping administration. The new administration in China is more assertive in foreign affairs, and less tolerant of both the corruption that became part of the Chinese capitalist development inside a state run one party system, and of the voices for more openness. It also has placed tight controls on the Internet. Jinping sees a constructive role for the Communist party in the future as China makes economic reforms away from state run enterprises, and is working to strengthen the party through discipline and anti-corruption initiative. The reckoning Paulson mentions, Krugman and other experts have described in other language- not as a reckoning but that China was no exception and would face the same problems that the U.S. and the eurozone faced since 2008 from financial excesses. In this sense Paulson's views and interactions with the Chinese leadership may represent another era, a period of exuberance when some of these financial excesses were being built up. Today's economic team of Jinping and Li Keqiang is more focussed on making sure the transition through a economic crisis is managed carefully, keeping in mind the risks for China considering its history, and the situation where China is still a "middle income country" with aspirations for further development to improve incomes and living standards. Their view is that tight control is needed as China makes this transition to a less state enterprise dependent, and more consumer economy, so that there is no loss of the gains made so far. A different set of skills and deft management of the economy is needed, making Paulson's views from another era less relevant. External influences such as managing the complex China-Japan relationship as both countries become more assertive are creating another dynamic in Asia, which Chinese leaders may see as requiring careful management, making Paulson's experience less relevant for a new period with new challenges. For the U.S. the economic cooperation with China now occurs with an added political dimension. Of concern for the tight control, seen as not forward looking and not bringing more constructive voices into the system, and the new complexities of carefully managing the changing U.S.-China-Japan relationship in Asia. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Two Harvard economists, Lawrence Summers and Lant Pritchett, say China is likely to revert to the mean of average long term growth of developed countries after this spurt of growth is over. Growth is likely to slow to 6% by 2016, and revert to the mean of 2% for industrialized countries in the long term. Goldman Sachs banker Jim O'Neill, says the growth at a higher rate could be sustained because of urbanization. Summers does not rule out this outcome as he accepts a range of outcomes, with the most likely outcome being a reversion to the mean. The factors often cited for slowing growth are lower of productivity of capital as corruption and close connections determine where capital is allocated, misallocation of capital, large increases in credit in the economy since 2009 leading to bad debt in the financial system, aging society and demographics with increasing numbers of older people. Other reasons are the choices being made by Chinese leaders for slowing down to address the problems of air pollution and contamination of water supplies, inflation in housing prices, overdependence on exports, need to shift to increasing domestic consumer spending but unable to do this with the lack of spending power of large parts of the population because wealth is excessively concentrated in the upper ranks of society. The need to manage these forces ensuring some measure of stability depends on finding ways to reduce the growing concentration of wealth and power, in itself a challenge for the Communist Party elite. A combination of different factors with some still unknown factors are likely to play a part in this reversion to the mean for China, a situation encountered by every country so far in North America, Europe and Japan. This makes it even more important that each developing society structure its development around the most optimal goals with the least costs attached to the development....

LyrArc Article Gist
A brief history of Xinjiang which translates as New Frontier in Chinese. Its the western frontier of China and a vast area that comprises the desert region of the Tarim basin. It has 13 sizeable ethnic minority groups and borders eight countries. Because of the lack of irrigation technologies these arid expanses were settled very late in history, says Victor Mair, a Professor of Chinese language and literature at the University of Pennsylvania. Even the Uighurs were tribes from the Mongolian steppes who settled Xinjiang in the 10th century. For China it was mostly aplace for havin border military garrisons. Around the 10th century and the Tang dynasty in China, trade on the Silk Road- with places like Kashgar oasis towns on the fringes of the desert as hubs- was at its height. It was not until 1760 under the Quing dynasty of ethnic Manchus, that this area was annexed by CHina and serious effort made to settle it with demobilized troops. A civil and military administration encouraged immigration, say scholars Millward and Perdue in a 2004 book of essays by 16 scholars, "Xinjiang: China's Muslim Borderland." About 50,000 demobilized troops were offered benefits, seeds and land if they stayed. A similiar situation seems to have been repeated after Mao annexed Xinjiang in 1949. In the early 1950's the Chinese government established the Xinjiang Province Production and COnstruction Corps, which was setup to manage large farms and construction projects called bingtuan and provide jobs for demobilized troops. The bingtuan are profitable enterprises and an estimated one of every six people in Xinjiang are employed in bingtuan, or 1.3 million people. THe HAn who were 6% of the population in 1949, now comprise 40% of the 20 million population of Xinjiang. Another source of employment is in the oil and gas industry, with the Communist party secretary of Xinjiang for the last 15 years being aprotege of President Hu Jintao, from his days in the Communist Youth League, coming from the oil industry province of of Shandong. These jobs are mostly all reserved for Chinese which causes resentment among the local Uighurs. Wong quotes a Uighur university student as saying, who is the foreigner here and whose culture, language and way of life should be protected. This may be the crux of the grievances of the Uighurs, as their use of the language and religious practice is restricted, and they feel they are second class citizens in their own land. Other articles in the NYT and Economist go to point out that the links with international terrrism are not a source of the problem, and the unrest among the Uighurs is more about a feeling of loss of culture, language, religion and identity, and jobs. And the idea that the best way to work with minorities, or regions with different language, religion and culture, just as the British did in South Asia and India is doing now is through tolerance. See the links to NYT and Michael Wines on 7/11/2009 about the Communist party secretary for Xinjiang, Wang Lequang, whose policies in Xinjiang and now in Tibet through a protege, may be worsening this situation. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
ICBC's strong performance is largely because of the leadership of Jiang Jiangqing. Jinagqing was reluctant to engage in the large scale lending encouraged by the government during the 2008-2009 financial crisis. For this reason he is not popular with the leadership in the government and the Communist party. This could change considering the large number of loans from that period which are expected to go sour in coming years. The U.S., Spain, U.K. and other countries suffered from the effects of bad loans in the banking system and experts say China is not likely to be an exception. Especially considering the excessive lending during that period and slowing growth in China. When this happens Jianqing's banking skills and conservative approach is likely to gain increasing respect within China. Jiangqing has expressed the view that the last thing China needed was to go back to the situation in 2000 when China's banking system was weighed down with bad debt. One has only to look at the change in Spain where once respected senior IMF officials like Rodrigo Rato are now looked at very differently. Jianging's push for expansion overseas- so that ICBC does not end up being a regional bank- is not viewed favorably by the government, which looks for a domestic focus. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Healthcare, climate change, pensions and social benefits, are three issues uppermost in the minds of German voters. Three million new young voters most of them only about 2 years old when Merkel started 16 years in office, look for change. They are well informed and for these young voters climate change is the most important issue. DW.com shows three voters and how they plan to vote. One voter has cast a mail in ballot for The Greens party. The second voter will vote for the Greens. Both because of climate change concerns. The third voter Thurid says her mother is a geriatric nurse and is not vaccinated. She is vaccinated but had talks with her mother and understands her worries about vaccination. She will vote for the Free Democrats because they oppose compulsory vaccination. The three leading parties for young voters are the Greens party, the Free Democrats, followed by the Social Democrats all in the range of 16-18% of support. The Greens have sent out 2 million brochures to voters. Out of 60 million voters in a German population of 80  million, 3 million is only 5% of the vote. What makes a difference is that it is consistent with the general direction of voters young and old, all looking for change in Germany as the CDU party attracts only about 20% or one fifth of German voters. Social Democrats Scholz is way ahead of Christian Democrats Laschet in how voters view each candidate. Will German voters be well informed enough to make a decision based on their desire for change after 16 years of Merkel or will the CDU bringing back in the last days of the campaign the old fears that the communist Left party would somehow find its way into the government using the Greens as a way in- this is a question for German voters. In1994 during the Cold War with Soviets Kohl used this to keep the Social Democrats out and Greens out and formed a coalition with the FDP. Yet today Merkel has grown close to both Russia and China and away from the Western alliance in a way that was unimaginable under Adenauer who helped build the new Federal Republic of Germany after the war. Merkel refuses to even immediately accept a call from a new US president Biden, American president who is closest in style and temperament to Harry Truman who faced off the Soviets in Berlin in 1948.  The FDP opposes a wealth tax or any form of taxes in which the wealthier pay a fair share of what is needed to build crumbling infrastructure in Germany neglected in the Merkel years. In Germany social and economic disparities have grown during the pandemic with poverty increasing during the pandemic as has happened throughout Europe and the world. The US is already committing to increase taxes for the upper incomes. This is where voters have a choice- do nothing with infrastructure, health or climate change or do something by increasing taxes. The choice is now before the German people.  With this question comes a choice for western civilization, with the recent election in the US, and two elections in Germany and then France. Will it look with optimism to the future or will it huddle up in a deeply cautious and slightly pessimistic view of the world that is embedded in Angela Merkel's cautious vision that ended up only responding to crises- some self inflicted as in migration policy, and even self inflicted in tackling euro problems created in the euro currency's faulty design. In fiscal policy as in migration policy Merkel has reversed her position- by supporting European solidarity. Will Germans vote for optimism or never ending caution? Are lessons learned?     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Under Mette Frederiksen immigration which reached 21,000 in 2015 was down to a little over 1000 a year. She is a strong fighter for workers and families and labor rights and yet tough on illegal immigration. She has been proven right about this as Britain and the US under Biden are seeing illegal immigration as a threat to workers and labour, are seeing the risks of distraction from illegal immigration doing a serious disservice to workers and families by making it hard to fight for workers and families on wages, cost of living and other issues.  Even with a strong record of fighting for workers and families, Frederiksen was one of the first European leaders to see the dangers of illegal immigration to society. It gave parts of the political spectrum that had no interest all along in workers and families doing well, an issue to run on that would come to cause grave harm to workers and families. This turned out to be the error of Angela Merkel a CDU leader brought up in Communist East Germany, who had no idea of the risks of her approach for open immigration. As Merkel let this chapter unfold it created fissures in Europe, with Tories and Nigel Farage taking Britain out of the EU and laying waste to its economy for 5 years till Labour's Starmer adopted a tough immigration policy and became prime minister in 2024. That danger then spread to the US in 2016 which also suffered as Republicans and Trump did the same in the US around rhetoric but without serious action on immigration till the Lankford- Biden legislation.  That bill would have closed the border with Mexico and ended immigration as an issue forever if passed into law in December 2023, as Senator Lankford says would have happened. Ending immigration as an issue forever alongside foreign wars as an issue, so that a concentrated effort could be made on improving badly damaged lives of workers and families. And on rebuilding badly damaged manufacturing in the US, rebuilding collapsing infrastructure, and competing with better education and healthcare with the large Asian countries China, Japan/ South Korea, India. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Making some territorial concessions appears to be the only way for peace talks to succeed. For a long time there was insistence on territorial sovereignty of Ukraine by EU and NATO leaders. This appears to have prolonged the war- with needless loss of life on both sides, and costly damage to Ukraine infrastructure, a population that had to face additional winters and hardship in war ravaged areas. NATO's Stoltenberg from Norway, leaders of northern Nordic and Baltic countries, the UK, could take that position without having to face the hardship of the war. NATO had to be re-formed under a new name and new structure  following the collapse of the Soviet Union, with wariness about the possibility of centuries old since 1700 UK and Nordic historical adversarial relationship with Russia casting a shadow over that organization, and embroiling the US in conflicts not of its own choice or of wise leadership. This is the root cause of the Ukraine war. It would have been best to completely restructure NATO and give it a new name without Northern European nations leading it. Principles matter once soviet communism was no longer there NATO formed for its expansionism in 1950's had served it's purpose. Rasmussen from Denmark and Stoltenberg from Norway led the organization for the last decade and half from 2009-2014 and 2014 to 2025, with backing from Obama/Merkel for most of the period of the war in Ukraine. Also most of the period NATO expanded to Russian borders happened under Northern European leaders from Spain, Britain and Nordics (Solana, Robertson, Scheffer, Rasmussen and Stoltenberg) and the organization NATO getting the northern European slant based on historical adversarial relationship of Britain and Russia since 1700- for no other reason than the British wanting to protect its large Empire and commerce in India which in the 18th and 19th century included most of Asia. Under Robertson the UK Defense Secretary much of this transformation into turning NATO into something anti-Russian happened which was primarily because of British and Nordic perceptions of Russia as an adversary. Robertson added the following countries at the Prague Summit in 2002 to NATO- the Baltics, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. Russia faced internal upheaval in those years and Yeltsin in resigned in 1999, Putin was elected in 2000. It is clear that Russia had suffered severe economic hardship in that period and Putin's first goal in 2002 was to stabilize the economy.  It could be said that this turning NATO over to UK and Nordics was a huge mistake considering that Russia was still the largest nuclear power after the US, and British policy was now determining US policy. And Britain's Robertson/NATO should not have involved itself in the Afghanistan war using Article 5, as the US could have handled this alone and limited that engagement. It got US involved in another conflict, conflict with Russia that was to come in Ukraine on the side of the Baltics and Ukraine, without US clearly understanding what the roots of that war was about and implied confrontation with Russia 20 years after the Prague Summit in 2002 under George Bush junior. The incompetence of Bush and Obama/Merkel laid the seeds of the Ukraine war in 2022 following Robertson, Rasmussen, Stoltenberg, small Nordic nations and Britain creating a conflict that did not need to happen, with loss of hundreds of thousands of lives of Russian speaking fraternal peoples of both Russia and Ukraine. The Republican sentiment under DJT of the tragedy of such huge losses of young people, and desire to end this loss of life, can nowhere be seen in bellicose talk in northern European nations, that take the US for granted to fight their wars.  The wisdom of Washington, Lincoln and TR/FDR clearly caution in getting involved in European centuries old animosities. For the US it meant in practical terms that it could no longer carry out the Monroe Doctrine essential for peace and good governance in the western hemisphere as only a Russia desperate to make its views known about NATO would interfere in the western hemisphere against US assertion of the Monroe Doctrine with the US Navy. Instead drug trafficking gangs took over Latin American countries and created a flow of fentanyl and millions of people through migrant traffickers across the US southern border. As America has expressed its concern for loss of Russian and Ukrainian men in the war for the first time under DJT Russia has distanced itself from Venezuela, Mexico and Latin America. The loss of hundreds of thousands of young Americans to fentanyl is a shared tragedy with the loss of hundreds of thousands of young Russians and Ukrainians in the last decade. How reliable are Northern European countries when it comes to protecting the eastern seaboard of the US with the acquisition of Greenland? It is a policy pursued by presidents since the Alaska Acquisition from Russia. By Seward, Teddy Roosevelt, Harry Truman and DJT. Denmark the land where NATO secretary general Rasmussen was from followed by Stoltenberg from Norway  (for 15 of the years of the war in Ukraine 2010-2025) the US efforts to protect its eastern seaboard are rebuffed by both Denmark and Norway, and the US presented in a negative light as an imperialist power in the face of Danish East India Company's  colonial attitude since 1700 clearly imitating the colonial British East India company.  It shows Northern European nations looking out for themselves not for the US, and embroiling the US in their wars at the cost of the entire western hemisphere being destabilized. The population of UK, Denmark and Norway, Baltics is far less than the Mumbai, Shanghai, Sao Paulo , Berlin and Tokyo regions. Should the views of a small population in northern Europe of 2% of the total determine the future of US, Europe, China, India, Brazil, and other parts of the world with 5 billion people the 98%, when issues of war and nuclear conflict, nuclear buildup, the western hemisphere destabilized with drug trafficking gangs running rampant in countries, divide the world in opposing blocs, when the wellbeing of most of the world's people in Asia and Latin America, Africa is at stake by establishing a essential degree of cooperation by all sides. The US under DJT has chosen a wise policy of cooperation over conflict -with China, with Russia, with all the major powers, and with smaller powers. Reading the wisdom contained in the writings of Washington, Lincoln, TR/FDR confirms it is clearly the wise choice. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A recent book "The Spirit Level" has become popular in Britain. It says that countries with greater disparities in income also do worse in a number of social indicators, from higher murder rates to lower life expectancy. It also affects the consensus in society which is a necessary underpinning for sustained economic development and economic growth. Inequality when it affects the middle class and reduces the size of incomes in the middle, or creates stagnation in incomes, poses large risks for society and affects economic growth. In the US the home foreclosure crisis and the lack of bargaining power of wage earners in the middle class has created this problem. This is exacerbated by the banking crisis and bad loans in the banking system. Studies show that slow growth in college graduating rates in the USA after 1970 compared to the period 1900-1970, has increased inequality, especially with today's knowledge economy. Germany is also affected by this problem as wages for workers have remained stagnant with the labor reforms. Interestingly a combination of economic growth and payments to the poor have increased the size of the middle class and its incomes in Brazil. The austerity policies in Britain will affect incomes and income growth in Britain for the middle class. In China the gap is widening quickly between the urban areas and the rural areas. And the policy of residency permits- the hukou system-which limits internal mobility from rural areas to the cities and towns, makes the inequality all the more glaring. The lack of democratic election makes the situation worse in China compared to Brazil, because free elections in Brazil enabled leaders from the working classes such as Luiz Inacio Da Silva and Ms. Rousseff to emerge as heads of government. These leaders pursued policies that would explicitly bring a more shared prosperity in Brazil compared to the leadership in China. In China policies are determined by entrenched interests in its model of development- the state-owned companies and banks and their managers, local and government officials of the Communist party, and businesses with the networks and connections with the Communist party and local governments. This is why the ginni coefficient which measures inequality has dropped significantly in China, putting it in the rank of developing countries with poor records in equality. Inflation in China, India and Africa also affects the poor and lower middle classes to a greater extent. Current trends suggest that rebuilding the middle class in the developed countries and providing fairer distribution in developing countries will be of serious importance in coming years. Especially with the likelihood of more economic crises which tend to adversely affect the middle and lower classes disproportionately....

LyrArc Article Gist
Vietnam devalued its currency by 8.5% on Feb 11, 2011. A series of devaluations have reduced the value of Vietnam's currency by 20%. The devaluation will lead to higher cost for imported products, especially refined oil products, thus fueling inflation that is already high in developing countries. The Communist party central committee is not giving inflation fighting a priority, and instead is focussed on keeping high growth rates. The party's inflation target is 7% annually, same as 2010 for 2011, when the inflation is already estimated to be about 11% for 2010. Barclay's now expects inflation to reach 13.5% by March and exceed 15% by June. Part of the hesitation to raise interest rates and slow inflation as is happening in China and other developing countries, is the need to create new jobs for a young and increasing workforce. Vietnam's inefficient state enterprises, poor management at some enterprises, and state subsidized lending, have created problems which are putting downward pressure on the currency. State owned shipbuilder Vinashin approached bankruptcy recently with $4.4 billion in debts and poor management decisions. Another significant reason for the devaluation is the seriously precarious situation of Vietnam's foreign exchange reserves. State media have reported that Vietnam's international reserves have fallen to "more than $10 billion" at the end of 2010, compared to $16 billon for 2009 and $26 billion for 2008. This suggests a deeper crisis from years of loose monetary policy and lending to state enterprises to create China type growth rates. Vietnam still a less developed country and not equipped to handle this kind of growth, say analysts....

LyrArc Article Gist
Any Asian conflict involving China would in a few months destroy Apple's value, CEO's would change quickly, and Apple policies change to shift entire production to India and the US in a rapid shift. Tim Cook would be seen as having gambled against America's interests, unresponsive and failing after repeated warnings.  Apple's goal of sourcing from India by 2027 a mere 26% of its iphones, means that a decade after USTR Lighthizer and DJT started the task of reshoring manufacturing to US and allies in 2016, the No. 1 outshoring company would still be making 75% of its dollar value iphones in China. A degree of overconcentration that would make no sense considering that Apple's 75% of manufacturing would be entirely at risk in 2027 after repeated warnings and inaction. The only option for Tim Cook in 2025 is to come up with new goals of shifting a minimum of 50-60% of its dollar value product manufacturing for iphones to India by 2027. . Tim Cook as Apple CEO has done little to prevent the overconcentration of manufacturing in China since 2016. About 10 years after DJT was elected to bring manufacturing back to India or close allies the simple idea of diversification was not implemented. Why? Having set up this system starting in 1998, a system that did not exist before that tiem when Steve Jobs hired Tim Cook with a winning formula to Make in China, a country just emerging from its Communist phase of failed state economy. By 2008 in 10 years the infrastructure was built in a backward largely agricultural economy that was rapidly modernizing under a market economy with state run capitalism under the Communist Party experiment. The Bush Obama 16 years were ones with America not responding to the challenge posed by this new system which could create huge surges in production capacity with focus on key technologies and flood markets. The next decade after 1998-2008 was one of rapid growth of this experiment which combined with design and engineering in the US generated few jobs in manufacturng in the US, but huge profits with huge margins fro a low cost base with a high image and technology innovation product. Lighthizer, Navarro, Jamieson had already sounded the alarm for American manufacturing and loss of jobs in 2016.  America's deindustrialization was becoming a bigger challenge by 2020 so that president Biden continued the policy of reindustrializing. In 2025 China 2025 Plan that was a warning in 2016 is already a reality with China flooding the world in solar panels, and ready to flood the markets overseas with electric cars. Apple may only get a reprieve, this exemption is not the same as the last one. National security is an issue, key technologies need to be protected. There is only one more opportunity to rebuild American manufacturing and keep promises.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Changes in appointments to China's Central Military Commission after the Bo XiLai episode. President Hu Jintao is expected to continue as head of the Central Military Commission for another year after he retires as President to ensure a stable transition to the new leadership of President Xi Jinping. Two generals with close ties to Bo Xilai will not be appointed to the Central Military Commission.

LyrArc Article Gist
Wang Lequan, who is the party leader for Xinjiang, is aprotege of Chinese President Hu . He was pulled into the party from Hu's days in the Chinese Communist Youth League. He is from Shadong province China's industrial and petroleum capital. Because of his familiarity with the oil industry Wang may have beeen transferred to Xinjiang province. He arrived in Xinjiang just as the Soviet Union was dissolving, and the central Asian administrative regions that were formed inside the Soviet Union were becoming independent countries. China's army had occupied Xinjiang in 1949 under Mao. Millions of Chinese were leaving the Xinjiang area and the thinking was that the Uighur Muslims of Xinjiang would also form their own country. What happened was that Wang reestablished the Chinese presence in Xinjiang province. He opened the Xinjiang region's oil and gas fields to drilling, laid pipelines east to China and west to Kazakhstan. A Production and Construction Corps was formed so that Chinese soldiers leaving the army service could find work, and this was later listed on the Shanghai Stock Exchange. With growing industry and government jobs, many Chinese were attracted back to Xinjiang. In the 1990's 2 million Chinese went back to Xinjiang. At the same time his policies may have had the effect of making the local Uighur people feel that their culture and language weere being threatened and they needed to fight for its survival. Wang acting with dictatorial powers tightly constrained Uighur culture and religion. He substituted Mandarin for Uighur in primary schools, saying minority languages were "out of step with the 21st century," and banned or restricted Islamic practices among government workers, including the wearing of beards and head scarves and religious practice like fasting and praying while at work. He has been Communist party leader in Xinjiang for 15 years, which is unusually long, such jobs usually only lasting 10 years. SInce 9/11 Wang has fought hard to limit the influence of separatism, and the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, an Uighur group, and he has swept up thousands of Uighurs accused of terrorism or religious extremism. He worked to have the East Tukestan group listed as Al Quaeda allies by the Bush administration in 2002. He is closely allied to President Hu who supported Wang, giving him a seat on the Politburo. Wang's protege in Xinjiang has been placed in charge in Tibet. There is a sense with Wang and Hu, that a failure now in Xinjiang and in Tibet to control unrest would lead others in the Chinese leadership who think differently on theses issues to bring a different leadership to succeed them. The difficulty here is that the Han who now comprise 40% of the population in Xinjiang, and are heavily involved in the oil and gas industry, have brough a modernizing influence to Xinjiang but may not be received by the Uighurs as apositive influence. First any government that is in power for as long as 15-20 years tends to lose support over time. This happened with the Congress in Kashmir. Too powerful or corrupt, and lose touch with the young people. But compared to India the democratic ways of that country have helped it recognize the need for respecting the language, religion and culture of the people of each region. The British did the same, so it was something that went back to British times. With the monopoly of power of the Communist party, lack of precedent and amodel to follow that respected different culture and languages, the intolerance of Uighur and Tibetan language, religion and culture, creates a different situation in China. Elections were held in Kashmir recently and an effort is being made for reconciliation with different groups, the media is open and different voices are heard. No such prospect remains for Tibet and Xinjiang. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Readers of the NYT reflect on the Syria-Iraq conflict and the experience in Vietnam. Stuart Gottlieb, who teaches American foreign policy and international security at Columbia University, describes Logevall and Goldstein's Vietnam analogy for Syria as a situation on how one can go wrong by relying on historical reference when new thinking is required based on existing challenges. Others point to the situation in Vietnam as Kennedy's war with 16,000 advisors already on the ground. Kennedy's words "let every country know whether it wishes us well or ill, that we will support any friend, oppose any foe...," were part of the Cold War in the early sixties that Kennedy inherited from Eisenhower and Truman starting with a Communist Iron Curtain falling over Eastern Europe and threatening Western Europe. The situation today is quite different in a Middle East with little to do with Russia and China, at the same time sectarian with Sunni and Shia, and aspirations of Arab people for freedom from dictatorships....

LyrArc Article Gist
India like China is more interested in modernization that brings equality with Europe and America so that the period of misfortunes that struck India and China- as a result of the vastly superior technology and force of Europe as it found a passage to the East around the Cape of Good Hope- is over.  Think about this. If anything happened to democracy and pluralism in the US Indian democracy and pluralism would still be standing a hundred years down the road or the next hundred years after that. What does that say about India? Why? Because India has learnt its lessons under Vivekananda, Tilak, Gandhiji, Modiji, and understands the need for technology, trade and modernization, which is what Modi as a Gujarati with the trading mentality like the British is really after. The so called Hinduism as it is really about the Upanishads and the Gita and the Buddha, and Communism, are really not the driving force in India or China.The Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita like the Bible offer a way an ethos to resolutely fight the corruption and leakages of funds that take the investments out of modernization leaving everyone poor. And India also benefits when democracy works and acts as an enabling force for a modern economy that creates "a rising tide that lifts all boats" (people). Democracy is the tool for development and to tackle diversity of 1.4 billion people. Adam Smith was right writing then in the 1780's around the French revolutionary period and American independence - "Hereafter perhaps the natives of these countries (India, China, Indonesia) may grow stronger, or those of Europe grow weaker, and the inhabitants of all the different quarters of the world may arrive at the equality of courage and force, which by inspiring mutual fear, can alone overawe the injustice of independent nations into respect for one another." India's leaders fought hard after the 1700's for preserving independence from the Portuguese, the Dutch and the British, only they were divided. Ranjit Singh in the north fought the Mughals and the British in the Punjab. The Marathas on the western front fought the Mughals and the British. The result as Gandhi points out in Hind Swaraj in his question "who made the British Company Bahadur?" It was Indian princely kingdoms vying for support from the armies of the British East India Company interested in profits from seizing Indian princely treasuries and trade. Note that Sri Lanka or Ceylon fell to the Portuguese in 1505. The technology gap between Europe and Asia had opened up even that early by 1500's in ship building, in warships and use of maritime navigation technologies. Consider that in 1534 Jacques Cartier was out on his first trips from St Malo, France across Atlantic to explore past Newfoundland to the mouth of the St Lawrence river. The Portuguese and then the Dutch had already beaten the British and the French by 100 years- Britain's exploration of India through East India settlements in Bengal began much later in the 1600's. India like China built around river based civilizations as Adam Smith points out in his Wealth of Nations, Chapter 7, Part 3, America and East Indies-of the natives of India and China Smith says their struck "a dreadful misfortune" that arisen more by accident, that "the superiority of force seemed to be so great on the side of the Europeans, that they were able to commit with impunity every sort of injustice in these remote countries." Every Indian or Chinese will agree with this so great was the misfortune for India and China from the injustice of European nations in the 19th century so much so that Cordell Hull speaking for Franklin Roosevelt and all Americans broadcast to the world in the throes of World War II in 1942 America's call to the world for a new world order based on freedom and development for all nations of Asia, Africa and Latin America. America's Secretary of State Cordell Hull said: "In this vast struggle, we, Americans, stand united with those who, like ourselves, are fighting for the preservation of their freedom; with those who are fighting to regain the freedom of which they have been brutally deprived; with those who are fighting for the opportunity to achieve freedom."     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial cites remarks by Viktor Orban who says he seeks to build a state on national foundations and the "illiberal ideas" behind states such as Turkey, China, Russia. It cites the way Orban has eroded the constitutional checks and balances in Hungary's democracy. Much of this happened, says WSJ, because of economic mismanagement by centre right and centre left policies in the post Communist transition. Because Orban looks to president Putin for authoritarian version of politics, Western Europe should not see this as simply a version of provincial Europe at the periphery, says the Journal. Western Europe can build a strong world of liberal democracies and do this by economic revival in the eurozone and EU countries. President Obama is in the last part of his second term having failed to effectively promote the world of liberal democracies. It is now upto successors to revive the world of liberal democracies and free societies throughout the world.