LyrArc Article Gist
The changes taking place in Saudi Arabia under Prince Mohamad Bin Salman are the subject of this article from Prof. Mohsin Khan of Jindal Global University. Similar changes were initiated earlier under MBZ Mohamad Bin Zayad in the UAE which inspired the changes in Saudi Arabia. The effects are easy to see for Upward Mobility, Diversity, the economy, the relations with the EU and the US and other countries, the shift away from oil to renewables, women's participation in the workplace, and education in science and technology. During the last 50 years the wars in the Middle East have wasted resources in unimaginable ways, human and in trillions of dollars that could have improved the quality of life and ease of living of people. The result is that like Britain in the nineteenth century the US in the 21st shows no interest in Afghanistan or regions of South Asia which have scattered its resources. The shift now is to the seas and the region that covers the west coast of Africa through the Indian Ocean to the Pacific past Indonesia to Japan and the Hawaiian islands, the western coast of the US- called the Indo-Pacific. With the US, India, Australia, and Japan committed to freedom of navigation and international law in the region. It is all about investment, new supply chains, trade and growth, science and technology. And the UAE, Saudi now fit in within this larger framework, along with the European Union, and other countries in this region. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in WSJ says China's government faces severely strained government finances. Local government entities sale of land financed 40% of local government revenues in China, and most of these have dried up with the very real loss of confidence in property sector. Government now faces $900 billion in shortfall in revenues says this report. There may be psychological hurdles in China's growth with the effects on mental health from lockdowns in major cities, the revolt in the property sector with home buyers losing confidence in developers, the loss of confidence of foreign investors from US and EU. The dependence on the property sector to carry so large a burden of growth for the last 2 decades in China may now look like an error. The dependence on foreign investment may also be an error as the loss of confidence could mean some withdrawal and a lack of sustained investment.  It could even be said that restraints on both sectors property and foreign investors could have created alternative paths to growth, and reduced the shift of factories from the US and Europe to China that have now caused trade friction and and a reverse shift of investment back to home countries of US and EU. Trade friction has it appears backfired in a way that extends to the overall relationship which could have been prevented by preventing the hyper growth that happened. Greg Ip of the WSJ has argued that compared to Japan's growth in the sixties and seventies from a country of 100 million the hyper growth for a country of 1 billion for 2 decades created a massive impact on communities in US and EU that were dependent on factories that were lost to China. This has alienated large sectors of the public in the US and EU which could have been prevented by restraints on hyper growth in China. Ip says the growth was too large and too fast for the US to cope. It may have permanently damaged the relations between the two countries showing that trade and globalization had unintended effects when left to business which has no comprehension of how the macro developments can affect the relations between the peoples if the other effects in the relationship such as community impacts are ignored which business says is not its role,  and governments staying away from keeping an eye on how it was happening and adjusting for ill effects with restraint and redirection of business policies. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Efforts to impeach two previous presidents including Democrat Clinton failed in the Senate where the vote requires a two thirds majority. The first impeachment vote against Mr. Trump failed in the Senate. In the House of Representatives only a simple majority is required. Majority Leader McConnell says he will not reconvene the Senate before president Biden takes office. Vice President Pence has refused to invoke the 25th Amendment. House Democrats have moved ahead to vote for impeachment of president Trump for the storming of the Capitol offices in Washington D.C. Their impeachment statement says president Trump's remarks that his supporters had to fight like hell or they would not have a country, constituted incitement of supporters. President Trump won 74 million votes in the last election more than in the 2016 election and lost with Mr. Biden winning 81 million votes after polarization of the country. With such a large portion of the country voting for Mr. Trump Mr. Biden risks his agenda of fighting the pandemic, and other parts of his program, becoming immersed in partisan infighting. This would also result in continuing the division of the country, and continue polarization.  About 5 House Republicans are expected to support impeachment. In the Senate some Republicans say there are impeachable offenses yet only Mr. McConnell and the senator from Utah, Mr. Mitt Romney, favor impeachment.  Mr. Trump's style of governing was controversial from the beginning of his campaign in 2016, strident and taking on critics. He governed through relative moderation compared to his aggressive posture towards critics. For instance on Mexico his remarks offended critics, yet he negotiated a new trade agreement with Mexico replacing NAFTA to ensure worker protections in Mexico, and worker jobs and wages in the U.S. Negotiations with China on trade were conducted by a seasoned veteran, Mr Lighthizer,  who was deputy Trade Representative under Reagan, and negotiated the trade agreement with Japan that worked to reduce Japanese trade surplus in the eighties. On the economy before the pandemic hit in March president Trump made significant progress reducing unemployment.      ...

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. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In the period approaching the 70th anniversary of the Communist Party of China and its role in the revival of China after centuries of decline, confrontation with European and Japanese invasions, and poverty, China is taking a long view of Hong Kong protests. Carrie Lam stated China was too conscious of Hong Kong and China's international reputation and was pursuing "the long game," in dealings with Hong Kong protesters and its relations with the U.S. and Europe. This approach sees the need for China to create a positive image as it seeks to settle the trade dispute with the U.S. that hurts China's efforts for improving the standard of living and continuing its modernization. This means keeping relations with the European Union on a good footing as it pursues tit for tat tariffs and resumes talks with the U.S. without giving up what it sees as its sovereignty for industrial policy and trade matters.  A new sign of this is changing the focus of Hong Kong protests from the Chinese government to Hong Kong tycoons who China says have created the housing shortages through their policies. By not releasing land they own for building new affordable housing and driving up prices because of the greed for returns the tycoons in real estate are asked to take some of the responsibility for the mess in Hong Kong and anger of protesters. The social and economic tensions have contributed to anger of protesters for which the government has become a easy target says China as it looks for ways to tackle the issues underlying the protests and separate the negotiable issues from the issue of "sovereignty" or China's right to decide its internal affairs. In the light of the Communist party's struggles against European colonialists and Japan's Imperial Army, "sovereignty" is a sensitive topic in China.  As part of this approach Carrie Lam, Hong Kong leader held a Chinese version of Town hall meeting to listen to the complaints of Hong Kong leaders for the first time after weeks of protests, to let people vent out their feelings and complaints.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial says Donald Trump's first foreign policy speech is full of contradictions. Mr. Trump says foreign policy should be "unpredictable" yet this also means says the WSJ, that the country should trust his instincts, and everybody else a loser- "I'm the only one-believe me, I know them all- I'm the only one who knows how to fix it." It says the speech gets an "Incomplete" at Trump University. It criticizes Obama, but in failing to stand up for peace through strength that marked the post war peace since 1945, WSJ says that more than people realize Mr. Trump is a continuation of Mr. Obama's policies of withdrawing from global engagement that has ensured that peace. Trade wars with China, Mexico and Japan could lead to a world recession. Though much needs to be done to ensure trade is fair to U.S. workers and business, Trump has no clearly stated path to do this, instead relying on brinksmanship that could end up in trade wars.

LyrArc Article Gist
After all the media talk about tariffs inflation- inflation is at 2.4% in May 2025. Tariffs was part of the toolbox of strategies under Lighthizer and Jamieson on getting fair world trade, and not like Congressman Hawley in the 1920's who understood little about the workings of the US economy. This fact the official media such as the WSJ and NYT, Wash Post, BBC need to get it right about the Hawley Tariffs. Hawley was born in rural Oregon in 1864 went to country schools, and was president of Willamette University in Salem, when it's population was 4258. As House Ways and Means Committee chairman he wrote the failed tariffs bill Hoover signed in 1930. DJT's US Trade Representative Lighthizer in 2016 led the successful negotiations with Japan under Reagan, Scott Bessent who leads negotiations on tariffs with China with USTR Jamieson, has a deep understanding and grasp of today's financial markets. Tariffs is one of the tools in the US toolbox to get Japan, China, South Korea to even the playing field for US companies and bring back manufacturing to the US. Without it China would not budge from its unfair advantage and would not negotiate in fairness. This is proven in the way Japan in the 1980s and China today are responding to the US position preparing their economies for not relying on sudden surges in exports putting whole industries and workers in America and Europe out of work and out of jobs. DJT says- "No we are not going to accept that," the EU is catching on and adopting a similar position, China knows that.  The media is irresponsible in presenting tariffs in a negative way, irresponsible to American workers the 10 million put out of work since 2000, and to American families and the Nation.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Historical reasons spanning generations which have led to an impasse in Japan-S. Korea relations under president Park and prime minister Abe. The colonization of S. Korea and president Park's need to distance herself from her father who served in the Imperial Japanese Army when S. Korea was a colony of Japan, all serve to keep the two countries apart. The U.S. "pivot" to Asia under president Obama and pressure on S. Korea to improve relations with Japan has not helped. S. Korea prefers to stay neutral in Japan's disputes with China because of trade relations with the two neighbors and historical reasons.

LyrArc Article Gist
No country benefited more than first Japan and then South Korea till 2000, and now China till 2022 from the trade and sharing of industrial technology enabled by the American backed system of trade and industry. Walter Russell Mead says in WSJ that China has chosen to challenge the system through which it developed into an industrialized nation with the US running huge trade deficits, sharing its technology and letting Chinese manufacturing displace American local manufacturing. China is seen as challenging the system. Yet what has happened is that this process of displacing American manufacturing and industry was not sustainable anyway and continued for a decade longer than it would otherwise have lasted because American industry could not easily reverse a course it had set of setting up manufacturing in China, once that manufacturing base had already been transferred from the US to China and American companies had grown accustomed to a new state of affairs of making overseas in China. Not much thought was given to how American workers would react to that situation as companies and industries making that transfer made independent decisions. This led to the election of Trump with wins in midwestern states that had suffered from loss of manufacturing communities.  The Trump tariffs on Chinese goods and the Biden administration lining up completely behind American workers and families for the first time for Democrats has sent the signal to China that it finds the situation of China's dominance in the trade system unacceptable. The document of "China 2030" of the Chinese Government with planned dominance in key sectors and industries was met with alarm across America in all parties. The paradox of Apple as a key sector in Chinese manufacturing and the largest American company is the result of policies pursued by America without realizing the true cost of shipping manufacturing out of the country. That process is now being reversed with change of management starting at Intel Corp. and other companies to bring the manufacturing base back to the US. This policy is being resolutely pursued by the US and will speed up following the pandemic which has further demonstrated how much of a mistake the policy of sending out manufacturing in critical areas such as health could be. This is the reality behind the rhetoric and verbal exchange between China and the US. With the rapid growth of Chinese manufacturing countries such as India were put in a difficult situation  as this was preventing the local industrial base developing in India with Chinese imports in the same way as it had damaged that of the US and the EU. Worse it led to the use of US and European technology in China's defense industrial base including aviation and other sectors that threatened India's borders with repeated Chinese incursions in the Himalayas, from the Pakistan western Himalayas to Ladakh and the eastern Himalayan mountains. That situation existed long before the Trump and Biden administration and the Modi administration called for a return to America of its industrial manufacturing base and its technological leadership. Both the Bush and Obama administrations and the Indian Congress administrations failed to realize the dangers of letting the US, European and Indian industrial base wither. India is not just a country but a culture that extends from the Himalayas all the way across Bangladesh to the Indonesian islands which shares a common cultural history of Buddhism and the Vedanta. This is a region that has a population of about 2 billion people. In a larger sense the cultural history extends to  Vietnam and Japan with its Buddhist culture whose origins go back to India, and also of China itself. In the larger sense this is a population of close to 3 billion people. The economic development of this region and learning from the parliamentary traditions and scientific discoveries of the modern period since 1700 is a task for both the US, Europe and the people of the region.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
DJT 1.0 was led on the tariffs policy by USTR Robert Lighthizer, who had experience negotiating with the Japanese negotiators in the Reagan era. He is today respected by  Republicans, is seen in an important role in economic policy and to prepare the tariff policy actions of the new DJT administration. Lighthizer prefers to get Congress to take action with legislation. He also believes that domestic manufacturing will make gains with new and higher tariffs on Chinese imports. Lighthizer policy is falsely compared with Hoover Tariffs Act of 1930 when world trade was 9% of world GDP, today it is 63% of world GDP, and where under Hoover in 1930 the tariffs were across the board all countries 20,000 goods. Under Lighthizer on specific products where dumping is happening -steel, aluminium, autos, with Japan in 1960-70 or China 2000-2020 targeting American industries + technologies for takeover. And falsely when it comes to raising costs to each American family on average by $4000 a year by economists. The conventional view for business for 2000-2016 through Bush and Obama favoring free trade did not take into account the unusual experience of China which entered WTO in 1990, then expanded in a way unprecedented in history at 10-12% growth rates for 15 years destroying American manufacturing with dumping, having support of outshoring by companies in the US, and not giving reciprocal treatment for exports from the US to China. China also had unrestricted access to US technologies in this type of trade. Lighthizer's approach was to specifically address this problem not a general across the board tariffs on all goods (20,000 goods) on all countries as with the Hoover Tariffs Act in 1930. Lighthizer's approach adopted by DJT called for reciprocal trade response with China as the US had already done with Japan, not unilateral across the board tariffs, and when world trade had advanced to about zero tariff rates. And falsely compared to Hoover 1930 Act because under Hoover tariffs were 29-40%. raised to 60% when world trade was small, was 9% of GDP. The Biden administration has tacitly agreed with Lighthizer's vision by not reversing DJT tariffs. A new higher tariff will probably be selective based on the industry, country and what goals the US has set under the new administration for that industry. Some of the tariffs revenue may also be used for tax cuts. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The 25% auto imports tariff goes into effect April 2nd 2025. How much will it increase prices in the US for automobiles? The average is about 10%, say some experts cited in WSJ. This includes price increases on higher priced brands such as German brands BMW's and Audis, Mercedes Benz, and VW cars made in Mexico to ship into the US. It also includes European car makers including Stellantis that make cars in Europe and Mexico to ship into the US which could lose market share to American car makers who make most of their cars in the US. Ford makes 80%, GM 60%.  Overall US international Trade Commission in 2024 looked at the 25% US tariff in a study and showed 5% increase in auto prices in the US. President Trump's call to GM and Ford asking for restraint in pricing may be coupled with the government returning some of the money in tariffs revenue pool to American or foreign manufacturers investing more to make more cars in the US including to Hyundai which announced a $21 billion investment. More such investment decisions are expected from Japanese automakers. For example Subaru has capacity for 450,000 cars in Lafayette Indiana plant and sells 650,000 cars in the US. One would expect it to increase the capacity of the plant or add a new plant in the US. The Japanese government and Japanese business will have additional incentives to invest in the US because of the US support for Japan in the Asia-Pacific, US openness to give trade benefits to Japan in the post war period, incentive to make the Republican DJT plan for tariffs to work as a united Japan-US effort. This would include restraint on pricing.  Toyota is in much better financial shape than VW and has a large market share in the US which it will work protect with pricing restraint and more US investment. Only VW and German luxury car makers BMW, Mercedes may not cooperate. Yet VW sells only 300,000 cars in the US compared to 2.3 million for Toyota. BMW and Mercedes sell luxury cars where buyers could absorb the additional luxury brand cost without impacting inflation overall. Some of VW's car sales would be absorbed by American and other automakers considering VW was losing market share and nearly exiting the US market. before this. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The leaders of India and China, Narendra Modi and Xi Jinping will meet at a 2 day summit in the central Chinese city of Wuhan, China, on April 27, 2018.  The meeting is significant because for the first time the 2 leaders will meet on a one on one basis for a significant part of the time without aides to get a better understanding of each other, and a get a sense of how to establish a good relationship between the 2 countries. Ma Jiali of the China Reform Forum, a think tank affiliated with the Communist Party's Central Party School says a better relationship would serve China's interests for regional calm, so that China can focus on internal issues of tackling poverty in the interior of China, tackle economic issues arising from a difficult trading relationship with the U.S. including the tariffs of the Trump administration.  China's leadership have not anticipated the decisions made by president Trump and the Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer to take a strong stand on correcting an imbalance in trade that leads to about $1 billion in trade deficit each day for the U.S. with China. Previous administrations in the U.S. have not taken action. Also at issue in the U.S. China relationship is for the first time transfer of technology for "Made in China 2025." China's earlier advances were made with a free flow of technology from the U.S. and Europe.  The last time the two leaders met was in 2014. This time the issues of border relations in the Himalayas, and the relations with China in the Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean region, the growing relationship between Australia, U.S., India and Japan, are seen in a different light with the strong disagreements on trade relations with the U.S.  China sees a need for improving relations with India. Prime Minister Modi faces new elections in 2019 and the need to focus on infrastructure and development to win a second term in office for the ruling BJP Party.  A reduction in tensions serves the interest of both countries and leaders.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This story by Asa Fitch of the WSJ shows how NVIDIA co-founder Jensen Huang, built NVIDIA into a major semiconductor company. He did this by developing faster chips for graphics and other uses using parallel processing instead of sequential processing. It is now a rival to Intel as it plans an acquisition of ARM Holdings in Britain. Huang started NVIDIA in 1993 when computer users wanted faster computer graphics.  NVIDIA has about $10 billion in sales compared to larger rival Ital with $72 billion in sales. With its efforts in AI and other tech fields NVIDIA now surpasses Intel in valuation. Softbank bought ARM Holdings in 2016 for $32 billion. It is now looking to sell ARM to NVIDIA or another buyer. Problems it faces in the acquisition is British laws that may decide to prevent approval for sale of the company and the loss of jobs. ARM based in Cambridge has 6700 employees. ARM makes the chips for smartphones. The trade war between the U.S. and China and the sale of ARM chips to Huawei are also factors that will be considered in British approval or disapproval of this sale of a British company owned by Softbank of Japan.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Proof that this is not an ordinary deep recession like those in the post war period comes in the way foreign trade is reacting in this downturn. Already evidence of this has been seen in the way Germany has been affected because of slowing exports from China to the US. German exports to China have declined as the Chinese export model comes under severe stress. A similiar situation is playing out for Japan. Now new proof of the drop in foreign trade is emerging in Commerce Department figures. Combined exports and imports of the USA dropped 18% in 4 months July to November, to $326 billion from $398 billion. Two thirds of this drop was in imports. So China and Japan's exports to the USA are severely affected. Japan showed a 27% decline in exports in November, according to the Japanese Ministry of Finance, and imports dived 14%. According to calculations by the WSJ, Germany had 11.8% decline in foreign trade in November, and similiar numbers for France and Britain. Chief US Economist at IHS Global Insight, Nigel Gault, says this is going to be the worst global recession since World War II. Combined with what is happening to inventories, (see links) and what is happening in housing, banking, the auto industry, and other industries, the complications of non-transparent packaged financial products clogging the American financial system, the hugely indebted consumer (see links), and the $2.1 trillion and rising cost of the stimulus and bailouts needed by one estimate, suggest that the recovery forecast for 2009-2010 does not take into account all these simultaneously occurring patterns and developments working together. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Over the short run Europe presents some opportunities after Germany's Merz gets the constitutional brake on spending removed and plans $1 trillion in spending on infrastructure and defense. The US is busy with immigration and other challenges, and tariffs are part of the effort to stop fentanyl on Canada, Mexico and China. This poses uncertainty for business in 2025 which should gain clarity as most tariffs are meant to ensure a level playing field and India, China, EU, Mexico, Canada cannot argue with the idea of we charge them what they charge us, as reciprocal tariffs, as fairness in trade. These countries have reason to cooperate as it is basically fair trade DJT administration is after. Japan cooperated so history shows it can be done and Lighthizer was Deputy Trade Representative under Reagan when he got the Japanese to cooperate and be fair. His deputy is Jameson, now US Trade Representative in 2025. They are no ideologues, just fed up with the way things are and US carrying the trade imbalances and shipping manufacturing overseas that hurts ordinary Americans. US exceptionalism is seen as prevailing after a period in which American companies gain a footing in a level playing field and unfair advantages China, EU other nations had are corrected for investors in the UK, Australia, India and many European countries. It also gives American companies a chance to retool for a new business environment that can offer more opportunities and markets including in India and Europe. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip points out in this WSJ analysis that the new NAFTA after negotiations and warnings from Mr. Trump to scrap NAFTA, is not very different from the old NAFTA. Mexico made concessions on auto exports and labor rights, wages. Canada made concessions for the dairy industry. Yet the combined influence of business interests, Canada's lobbying in U.S. Congress and state governments, and the restraint shown by Trump's own advisers prevailed in limiting Mr. Trump's tendencies to go for a "America first" agenda. It shows, says Ip, that there is resilience in the existing order.  It also shows what future trade negotiations with the European Union and Japan over steel and autos could look like. President Trump will continue to face resistance within from his advisers and from exporters, business, Congress, on following an exclusively "America First" agenda. President Trump will need to extol NAFTA in its current version the USMCA, U.S. Mexico Canada Agreement, to get it through the U.S. Congress in 2019.   Mexico's main concessions on autos were to agree to potential tariffs if exports exceed 2.6 million vehicles.  This keeps Mexico's status as a major auto export hub intact. Auto experts say VW and Mazda may simply pay the tariff of 2.5% for lower priced models assembled in Mexico that do not qualify for duty free entry instead of shifting production to the U.S. Current shipments from Mexico are not affected as U.S. demand is weak. Labor rights and higher wages in Mexico's auto industry are a win-win for Mexico and the U.S.. They are supported by the socialist administration of newly elected Mexican president Obrador. Canada's main concession was to expand U.S. access to Canada's protected dairy industry, with Canada already prepared to make the concession. Mr. Trump had also to consider the possibility that excluding Canada from the USMCA would have not passed Congress, and face even more resistance in a Democratic controlled Congress after 2019 elections.  The support Canada has received in Congress does not extend to China, which gets much less support in Congress, leading to higher uncertainty in the negotiations with China and possibly different outcome with the size of the trade imbalance of $1 billion a day factored in.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in WSJ looks at the impact of the 2018 Trump tariffs retained by president Biden as the US seeks to reduce its overdependence on Chinese imports and bring back American manufacturing. This followed misguided policies of previous administrations since Clinton that weakened American manufacturing strengths. Have the US tariffs on Chinese goods worked? The WSJ graph with information from US Census Bureau shows that imports from China in 2022 going down to the levels in 2007 of about 16-17% as a share of US imports, down from a high of 21% before the Trump tariffs halted a rapidly rising curve. Imports from Germany, South Korea and Japan in 2022 were down slightly hovering around 4.5%. Imports increased from Canada and Mexico, the US's traditional partners in North America, around 13.5% as a share of US imports for each country. Also increasing were imports from Vietnam. Some of the imports from Vietnam are Chinese products shipped through Vietnam to evade tariffs, and it is not clear whether the figures from Vietnam have been adjusted for this. President Biden is looking at different scenarios in an effort to tackle inflation. One supported by Janet Yellen, an economist at US Treasury is for the US to relax some of the China tariffs. Most economists in previous administrations including Yellen failed to understand what surrendering American manufacturing to China on the scale and speed that happened would do to communities across America that depended on factory jobs. The devastation of these communities has led to increased divisions in America, weakened American manufacturing, and led to outflow of technologies vital for national security and national well being.  Republican senators, US Trade Representative Katherine Tai and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan are opposed to any relaxation of tariffs. Studies show the removal of the tariffs would have only a small impact on the consumer price inflation index reducing inflation by 0.26%. Lifting some tariffs on school supplies and summer bicycles as proposed by the US Chamber of Commerce would have little or no impact on the consumer price index for inflation. This is because the inflation is triggered by oil and gas price increases stemming from the Russian policies and invasion of Ukraine. This has also aggravated food and grocery costs  through blocking of agricultural imports from Ukraine. An additional factor was the increased demand after the pandemic easing in 2022, but that demand is already easing in July with glut in inventories at Walmart and Target, and excess warehouse capacity at Amazon. It would also send the wrong signal to China that the tariffs imposed by president Trump after a Section 301 trade investigation and based on improper loss of technologies to China are not being taken seriously by the US, says Republican Senator Hagerty of Tennessee. The Labor advisory committee to the US Trade Representative Katherine Tai also opposes any such move after the serious damage done to US workers and to US national well being and security. This happened under the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations with failed trade policies that ceded manufacturing to China. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
What a change DJT's first 100 Days and actions on immigration and tariffs , Ukraine and Russia, have made in China's and World relations in Asia, and in Europe - all for the better, significantly better relations worldwide.  China has worked out a peace settlement in Ladakh frontier with India. It has come together in Tokyo with Japanese prime minister Ishiba and China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi holding hands, and South Korea joining, all three nations vowing to remember history and work together. In Europe Russia is being brought back into the community of nations for big power cooperation with the US after 3 years of war in Ukraine. And Germany has removed its constitutional brake on spending that frees up $1 trillion in funding for infrastructure to replace much of its rail and other infrastructure built in 1900. One would not know this reading the NYT on democracy or the WSJ on tariffs or the Washington Post on assault on federal workforce, or the Atlantic, Politico, DW.com or FR24, Der Spiegel, nor Le Monde, much of the world media slanted on way or another. One does not hear about military exercises so often as the world realizes that so called large economies China, Germany, Japan and India all depend on American goodwill and willingness to give rather than take for most of the post war period since 1950. For the last 6 years in the latter half of the Trump administration and the 4 years of the Biden administration during the pandemic relations between China and the US deteriorated and China first retreated into its own then opened up a bit. The initial idea that it could manage the DJT trade actions evaporated as Biden continued the DJT first round of tariffs. Now Navarro, Lighhizer, and his deputy Jamieson are all back advising DJT for anew round of reciprocal tariffs and tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China for not stopping fentanyl flows.  In 2022 in eastern Ladakh China's PLA had a big standoff with Indian forces in eastern Ladakh at Galwan and Pangong Lake. The Quad was active with Australia India and the US in Indo Pacific and China conducted military exercises close to Taiwan.      ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In this look at China's One Belt One Road Inititative, DW.com analyst Siegfried Wolf is critical of the way it was put together. It has no institutional structure, and is mostly based on bilateral not multilateral arrangement, and lacks transparency. He says its will complicate geopolitics in the region. This is already evident with Japanese foreign minister Kono calling for Japan, Australia, India and the U.S. to come up with an alternative to OBOR. Wolf says the EU has concerns about corruption, exclusion of regions inside countries such as Pakistan in economic arrangements, and seeks free trade guarantees. His biggest criticism of the Silk Road Initiative is that being based on Chinese loans it will pose a severe challenge in terms of debt buildup for weaker economies. This was already evident with the effort to convert part of about $6 billion in loans to Sri Lanka, through a $1.12 billion lease to China of the port of Hambantota. Wolf says many of the projects inside OBOR were already planned before it was setup, and now put under OBOR as part of president Jinping's initiative.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Japan's regulatory structure for the nuclear power industry is weak because of the dual role played by the regulator- Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. It regulates the nuclear power industry, and also promotes Japanese nuclear technology in Japan and overseas. The tasks are separated in the U.S. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission supervises nuclear plants in the U.S. It is independent of the Department of Energy which does research and promotes nuclear power. An earlier effort to correct this dual role arrangement in Japan failed, when an independent Nuclear Safety Commission was created under the cabinet. This body was never given the authority to inspect companies and mandate changes. A body that supports the commission has 4000 scientists and staff. It does research in nuclear technologies, but it has ended up becoming nothing more than a think tank, in the words of a former commission deputy chairman. What makes this situation worse, is the practice of amakudari, or "descent from heaven," a practice in Japan where senior Ministry officials retire young and take up positions in the private sector at companies like Tokyo Electric Power Company. In recent years most of the retired officials have taken positions in the energy sector. In fact Japan's Bar association investigated problems after a 2007 earthquake that shutdown a TEPCO nuclear plant. It recommended an independent regulator. The Democratic Party of Japan supported this idea before taking power in 2009. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A senior Indian diplomat, and former ambassador to China, Gautam Bambawale, says China's action in the June 15 clash at Galwan Valley was the worst violence since 1967. He sees it as a premeditated and well thought out action. His view is that India's relations with China will deteriorate further. That this was an action by the PLA to take territory to what it sees as the LAC or border. For small tactical gains he says "China has strategically lost India." This will impact trade and other relations going forward in his view.  Nothing of this sort was expected says Bambawale. All the agreements put in place since 1993, everything for tranquillity at the border, all the mechanisms, have now collapsed. Bambawale has provided a very lucid and clear account of the relations and the border issues. He goes on to say that Chinese observers have given reasons for the Galwan clash with PLA- that India should stay away from the US and other democracies such as the European Union. Some reflection shows that the opposite has happened. And further reflection would show that the same situation was repeated in the period of transfer from British Empire to Republican India, and from Nationalist China to Communist China from the period 1947 onwards. Different perceptions and different leaderships that gave the perception of gaps between the two countries. In the 1950's after the Korean War Chinese perceptions about India could have led to the incursions that brought China to the borders of India in 1950, similar perceptions of gaps in development and capabilities could have led to the conflict in 1962. From 1993 peace prevailed with India after China entered the World Trade Organization under president Clinton in 2001 following a 10 year effort. Because the focus in China was on development after a series of crises, internal sense of a widening technological gap with the US and Europe, disagreements with the Soviet Union, and the experiments with market economy, internal struggles for democracy. With that period coming to a close as the new trading relationship has led to working class losses in factory jobs in the US, China is faced with protecting its economy as it and the US look at changing supply channels and how it affects both countries. It is a critical time for China as it faces governments in US, France, UK and Canada determined to protect their own interests in manufacturing jobs, renewing supply channels, and in technological advancement. The response is similar to that in 1962 when seen from the Communist party perspective as a gap has opened up with India following China's progress in the 30 year trading relationship with the US and Europe. That gap and the difficult situation China faces today with the US and EU in trade and technology has brought forward the Galwan clash and future clashes in Ladakh and at the border.  As Mr. Jaishnkar, India's Minister of External Affairs as well as former ambassador to China,  has pointed out this is a very different aspirational India that China faces. The same kind of grassroots development that happened in China and rapid pooling of capital, human resources and technology inputs for development is taking place in India, and will continue for the next two decades, quickly bridging any gaps in modernization between the two countries. The difference between a youthful population in India and aging population in China and Japan, is likely to add another dimension. China's Buddhist culture that came from India is not likely to go away, more likely is that China will see a revival of Buddhist ideas of wellness and living more as culture than religion. The experience with British colonialism that prevailed both in India and China, and which from its base in India caused so much grief to China during the Opium wars will recede from memory. Extending borders from historical memory of Japanese incursions into border areas in Manchuria could have led leaders after 1950 in China to extend borders to remote areas in the Arunachal region of India and communist theory books may have created the perception of defensive moves. In the context of an aspirational India similar to China, and no real intention on the part of India to extend itself in any way to China's provinces in Sichuan, this extending of borders as a defensive move will be seen as stemming from memories of Japanese incursions in the 1930's, but simply costly and not relevant in any way to China's own aspirational development and progress. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China's manufacturing sector contracts in June with the PMI index dropping below 50 - to 49.0.  Exports were also coming in lower. Experts say the increase in interest rates by the US is reducing imports of Chinese goods into the US. This comes as local governments are strained in their finances by $900 billion, and a budding revolt is taking place from property buyers with developers in financial trouble, as reported in the WSJ. Psychological hurdles now loom in the loss of confidence in the public in the property sector, loss of confidence of foreign investors with many constraints in operating, mental health issues for the population in many cities with the covid lockdowns.   The growth has slowed to 0.4% and there is now a realization dawning that there was overdependence both on property sector and foreign investment that set up new factories offshored from the US and Europe that alienated the public in these countries. Unlike wih the situation of Japan in the sixties and seventies for modernizing its economy growth of the scale China was pushed into by misguided and self interested  business interests in the US including its investment banks and local government officials in China without restraint by the central government in Beijing, ultimately led to trade friction and permanent damage to US China friendly relations. Communities in the US and the EU simply could not cope with the hyper growth from hyper shift of factories from the home countries to China that pushed this hyper growth. The property sector played the same role in the domestic front with too big a burden carried by it resulting in hyper growth. This did not have to happen. It happened because of a lack of understanding that this would have consequences in the longer run which is now showing up. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
GM and Ford US International Trade Commission report in 2024 sees only about a 5% increase in prices for a 25% tariff in car imports into the US from EU, Japan, Canada, Mexico and China. With US production GM at 60% Ford at 80%, both companies are better positioned to shift production to the US following 25% tariff on cars imported into the US. GM also has the financial strength to invest in new auto plants in the US. Given a period of transition US companies are in a position to tap the added demand as more cars are made in the US.  Stellantis Stellantis formed from the merger of Chrysler, Fiat and Peugeot makes many of its cars overseas in Mexico and in the EU, and has considerable exposure. Toyota Toyota sales in 2024 were 2.3 million cars, with about 60% of the production in the US. Hyundai and Kia, Nissan Hyundai makes about 80% of the 840,000 cars it sells in the US in US plants. Hyundai plans to invest $21 billion in the US to make cars in the US including $5.8 billion for a steel plant in Louisiana. Other companies may follow Hyundai to Make in the USA. VW VW had plans for an expansion to make 590,000 cars. It has current  sales of about 400,000 cars in the US. Expansion at the Chattanooga plant or putting in another plant could help it make most of its cars in the US. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
India's Foreign Minister told a conference that China's forward deployments at Galwan in violation of 1993 and 1996 agreements was an attempt to change the Line of Actual Control. China after years of peaceful development under previous administrations, during which China had gained from the trade relationship with the US and foreign investment from the US business community, sought  to put India at a disadvantage using its larger economy and technological assets obtained through American business assistance. This was done by making forward deployments right at the Indian border to change the Line of Actual Control in progressive steps. Jaishankar made it very clear. "It is hard work, very patient work, but we are very clear on one point, which is we will not allow any unilateral attempt by China to change the status quo or alter the LAC. I do not care how long it takes, how many rounds we do, how hard we have to negotiate- this is something we are very clear of." Going back to the period of independence with Nehru in 1947- China's occupation of Tibet was an occupation of a peaceful country that led to the situation that India faces today of a border stretching from east to west on the Himalayas that faces China. Faced with the partition and refugees from that partition India under Nehru was not in a position to respond effectively to that occupation. Does China gain anything from being at that border through the occupation of Tibet is a serious question? Why? Because it faces a Vedanta and Buddha driven culture and people with population of 1.8 billion stretching to the Indonesian islands that were and still are the fundamental source of  China's own Buddhist culture and tradition.  US business has allied with one country after another Japan, China and now India. The US has faced wars with Japan, and sometimes in a failed attempt to understand the aspirations of  Southern Asia allied with British ideas of the region which were based on the policies of British Empire to divide the region on religious and language, caste based barriers. US business also lacked a true perception of the importance of working class and families in the US as it sent factories and surrendered its own manufacturing to China. The world is now changing following the pandemic and new supply chains and manufacturing policies of the US are being structured. It is in this context where India's pace of economic growth and technological advancement will change its capabilities and its capacity to meet the aspirations of 1.8 billion people in Asia with a common tradition and culture. It is in this context that one can ask the question does China have anything to gain from the occupation of Tibet and being on the border with a country and cultural tradition of 1.8 billion people stretching across South and South east Asia?  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This interview with Donald Trump by the publisher, editors and columnists of The Washington Post, Ryan Jr., Hiatt, Lane, Marcus, Diehl, Armai, Attiah, provides an exceptional insight into the views of Donald Trump on domestic and foreign policy, on his campaign for president. It is the result of an effort to get Trump to state his policies on different issues without the fuzziness in which Trump has carried out his campaign, often taking different sides of the same issue. In some situations Trump is pressed hard on his positions or controversial statements, to clarify what he has not clarified in the burst of media attention Trump received in the past 6 months, especially on television media. First some myths and realities. A recent March 19, 2016, issue of the Economist cites the Pew Trust in showing that only about 17% of eligible Republican voters voted in the primaries. A person watching television news media coverage on Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC, would get the impression that the voter turnout was tremendous- this is not confirmed by the Pew Trust survey. The Economist points out that had the other eligible voters cast their ballots and even if Trump had a share of these votes, the results might look different. With a highly fragmented vote in the Republican primaries, and about half of the vote going to candidates other than Trump, Trump's voter support would add up to about 8-9% of eligible Republican voters based on the Pew Survey results. The question here would be is this a representative sample of the U.S. or of the Republican Party. And is one likely to make false generalizations about the nature of the Republican party from such a limited sample of voter opinion. Is voter sentiment inadequately reflected, and results hopelessly skewed because of the lack of good candidates in the Republican Party, and Trump's tactical rhetoric appealing to a group of working class Americans left out in the technological progress of the last decade. In the process is the hard work of the founders of the Republic, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and the framers of the Constitution being undone by a minority of disaffected voters with legitimate grievances on distribution of economic benefits of the technological progress, trade and global manufacturing networks- with a level of divisive rhetoric and decline in levels of public debate rarely seen. These are the clarifications sought from Trump and his response. Attiah raises the question of divisive rhetoric on minorities Hispanics and Black people- Trump says he is only talking about people here illegally, that he gets support from Hispanics here legally. He turns the question to Muslims and says there is a serious problem there that means being careful about how people are being admitted into the U.S. Questions about Trump's controversial statements about a wall with Mexico are not raised. Ryan pushes hard on the question of the libel laws standard that Trump says he is going to change, asking whether this would happen if Trump thinks the reporting "is wrong" but there is no malice. Trump wants the reporting to be fair for him, that reporters call him to check if he did this or that and why, before writing stuff about him, and he sees the reporting from the Post as very bad about him. He says his lawyers would have to tell the media, that he believes he should loosen up the standards so that this kind of coverage does not continue. On ISIS Trump pulls back when asked by Diehl about statements that suggested he would send the number of troops the generals wanted on the ground- estimated at 20,000 to 30,000- saying he would find it very, very, difficult to do that. On a nuclear option for ISIS Trump says he does not favor that. Suggesting that Trump like the other candidates in the election know there are no easy ways to tackle ISIS. Trump would rely on other countries in the region for help with troops on the ground, something that president Obama also favors, with limited results. Diehl also pushes hard on NATO- Trump says hundreds of billions of dollars are going to NATO and the whole burden for defending South Korea falls on the U.S. when it is not now a rich country that it once was. Diehl corrects him by saying for the public record that its not hundreds of billions, and South Korea, Japan pay 50% of the cost for defending their region. Trump wants to see 100% for the Korean peninsula defense borne by the South Koreans and Japan. Trump seees NATO as a good concept but needing more help from Germany, Poland, Baltics. At one point the Washington Post journalists tell Trump this is a position he shares with president Obama. Trump responds to questions from Hiatt about how he would handle the situations in black communities such as Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland. Trump says he feels law enforcement is important and should play a big role in preventing the destruction of property from day one. He says jobs are what hurts inner cities but offers no solution about how to get the jobs lost in the steel industry for Baltimore, black neighborhoods sitting ironically next to the John Hopkins high technology university complex. Trump brings up the response that jobs could be created if the U.S. simply did not spend money on supporting nationbuilding overseas, a policy that president Obama has supported, and which the public has favored in the U.S. As Holman Jenkins brings up in a column on March 22, 2016 in the Wall Street Journal, these policies are being pursued today, and most of these jobs are not coming back so how would Trump bring them back or do anything about it, especially when Chinese workers in China's factories are being displaced by robotics in places such as Hon Hai factories. The more one thinks about it many of things Trump is saying are already being done, and there are no new solutions Mr. Trump has for today's problems of lack of upward mobility for the middle and working class- a priority for Sanders and Clinton also, not just for Trump. As a television personality and a candidate with a understanding of voter concerns, Trump artfully voices voter concerns of working class Americans for problems that defy easy solutions. Are there risks with Trump's approach that Trump has failed to think through or grasp? Does the unpredictable behaviour Trump suggests that would get allies thinking and trade partners responding lead to unpredictable consequences? Divisive rhetoric creates additional distractions in tackling the problems of the middle class and working class Americans. Divisive rhetoric within the NATO alliance would create additional distractions in tackling the problems of defending the European Union, such as using the very show of unpredictability. Diehl pushes Trump on this question. Would trade threats to China lead to a withdrawal from the Senkaku Islands by China? Trump says he thinks this would cause the Chinese to retreat . What if the Chinese see it differently, in their relations with Japan and South Korea, with a long difficult history, not necessarily in their relations with the U.S. Would a trade war hurt the global economy, and hurt confidence in U.S. fianncial markets just when the U.S. and European economies are staging a recovery, and when the economes of China, Japan and India are in a sensitive phase? These questions could not be raised because of time constraints, but must be on the minds of the editors of the Post and the WSJ, coming from different ends of the political spectrum. How would this help tackle the problem of upward mobility for working class Americans that all the candidates in the presidential election share? ...