LyrArc Article Gist
In this WSJ report a top American Defense Department official before resigning says- "I have no problem with feeding China or trading with China. I have a problem with arming China." Advanced or sensitive manufacturing technology is still being approved for export to China says this report in WSJ, even as the US perceives this to be a national security threat. Experts say the Commerce Department report approval process needs overhaul and the US needs close coordination with the European Union on this process. Of the total US $124 billion in exports to China in 2020 only half of one percent needed a license Commerce Department data reviewed by WSJ shows. Of that small fraction of one half percent Commerce Department approved 2562  applications or 94%. This even includes array of semiconductors, aerospace components, artificial intelligence technologies that could be added to China's military. This means that even towards the end of the Trump administration with its talk about national security threats, through the four years 2016-2020, nothing much happened in this important field.  The difficulty that the Trump administration faced and America faces is putting company and business interests first or American security interests and retaining competitive technological advantage interests first. American administrations and business have consistently failed to follow what plain ordinary Americans understand by America first. Even when it is clearly evident that America is handing over sensitive advanced technologies with very little in return, and creating out of nowhere competition that poses serious risks for the national interest, business and administrations operate indifferent to the national interest. Even right into the period when this is making the world a riskier and more dangerous place.   This is the state of affairs today, and the situation is not about Congressmen visiting Taiwan or ships going through the seas in that region, or international law. All that is American policy  and is well known and well understood. What is missing is the right action and the right determination behind other action that is sending a different message at the same time -that the US is oblivious to its own interests. That administrations, even those such as the recent Republican one under Mr. Trump, see a higher priority in following American business wherever it goes in pursuit of individual company interests alone, even if it does not accord with the national interest. Lobbying groups distort what policy should be in the public interest and in the interest of both countries, leading to a breakdown in the whole process itself whenever governments surrender their role of protecting the public interest.  Outshoring manufacturing was bad economically at the level of communities across the US, leading to divisions that weakened the country in the last decade, it was also bad for the economy of the country with loss of the best manufacturing jobs, beyond what economists in their ignorance of the big picture sought to show was the consumer- often the same person who lost a job or stopped seeking work- paying less. It was bad also for China as it created the hyper growth that rapidly contaminated land, air and water and created an inherently unstable relationship in trade with destruction of jobs at a pace that America had not faced with Japan and with which it could not cope. Could a pace that worked for both nations have worked? At the root is the notion that business knows best even if it is in plain sight to every plain American that the country's most advanced technologies are being shipped out. Governments do not fulfill their responsibilities and fail when they fail to tell business what rules are in the public interest, as it was never in the first role of business to protect the public interest. That the European Union has simply followed the US in this has created a problem for both the US and the European Union of deviating from what plain Americans or Europeans see as abundantly clear.  Even in plain dollars and cents business and economists fail to grasp the true cost for the whole country or whole people compared to the benefit for an individual or an individual company. The cost of wars even small wars can be be trillions of dollars which are borne by the whole country or people, and most of it by the middle and less economically well off classes in a country. Creating a belligerent competitor in world affairs and the risk of conflict and war is to lose trillions of dollars when the benefit to an individual, groups, or individual companies is no more but a tiny fraction of that trillion dollar cost, not including what all the plain people pay in human lives. It is not that anyone benefits as the people in the belligerent competitor country follow the same pattern of loss that would happen in the US. One should ask is it not a loss for China also? The example of Imperialist Japan is not so far off in time for Americans or Asians including the Chinese and Japanese people who suffered so greatly to forget. Business remains oblivious to the public interest not just for America but for the world, individual companies do not see it as their role beyond that of pursuing individual company interest. Is it not then for the government to set the rules. Is it alright for government to not fulfill its responsibilities? Even when this pushes the world faster to into conflicts as technologies take the place of exercise of wisdom in conflict, and even when there are unmet challenges such as climate change that affect the whole planet.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. and China presented conflicting views on trade and security in Asia-Pacific region at the APEC summit in 2018. Vice President Pence said "we don't drown our partners in a sea of debt," in a criticism of the China Belt and Road Initiative. The U.S. has 1500 new projects and $61 billion in new investments in the region. Mr. Xi Jinping stated " confrontation in a Cold War, hot war, trade war will produce no winner." 

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Obama reinforces German chancellor Merkel's call for "a persistent presence in the Baltics," with a visit to Tallinin, Estonia, in September 2014. Obama told people in Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia that he would work with the U.S. Congress to place more U.S. equipment in the Baltics and increase U.S. troop presence there. He stated the Baltics are "not post-Soviet" territory. Obama said at a concert hall in Tallinin about Russian support to separatists in eastern Ukraine- "It challenges the most basic principles of our international system- that borders cannot be redrawn at the barrel of a gun, that nations have the right to determine their own future. It undermines an international order where the rights of peoples and nations are upheld and cannot simply be taken away by brute force."

LyrArc Article Gist
Seib points out that Deficit Commisssion chairmen, Bowles and Simpson, have jolted the Republicans and Democrats with their carefully prepared recommendations. The other members of the 14 member commission cannot now dodge easily the responsibility of taking up the unpopular steps. And Republicans and Democrats have to wake up to the need for taking bold steps. No longer is it easy to postpone deficit issues by making glib talk and not taking action.

LyrArc Article Gist
A Joint Editorial by U.S. president Barack Obama and India's prime minister Narendra Modi in the Washington Post on September 30, 2014. Strobe Talbot, a former deputy Secretary of State says he does not remember a situation in which this type of joint editorial was put out by two heads of government. Speaking on Indian television "Times Now" with Arnab Goswami, Talbot says this is a result of intense advance preparation on both sides that he is personally aware of from his contacts in the two governments. The editorial says the two countries are "natural allies" using the words of former BJP Indian prime minister Vajpayee. It emphasizes the fact recognized by both sides that the true potential of the relationship has not been realized. It sees the election of a new government in India (with a decisive mandate) as a natural opportunity to move the relationship in line with India's rapid development agenda, and the U.S. own need to generate economic growth. Specifically Modi and Obama plan to discuss building up Indian manufacturing, and expanding affordable renewable energy including nuclear. The "Clean India" program is received with particular enthusiasm and an area of collaboration for improving sanitation and hygiene throughout the country. The relationship is viewed as bigger than projects and investment, in that it can add to helping build a more peaceful future for the global community- with the two countries tradition of interest in peaceful development that benefits all nations....