World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

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

All Topics Articles

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

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


The Economic Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Prime minister Modi's visit to the US comes at a time when US president Biden is eager to show the US is fully engaged in the Indo-Pacific region with its allies in the Quad 4 countries- Australia, Japan and India. The recently announced Aukus defense agreement brought together 2 members of the Quad 4 the US and Australia, plus the UK. Aukus is designed to strengthen US presence as a naval power in the Indo-Pacific region in the Indian and Pacific oceans around India, Southeast Asia, China, and across the Pacific. After a futile engagement in Afghanistan the US is reorganizing its presence where it is strongest- in the oceans. In a way that Britain once did in the eighteenth and nineteenth century, the US is dominant in the high seas. US naval power far exceeds that of all navies in the world combined. This is meant to reassure India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam, Australia and Japan, which together have close to twice the population of China, that the US has not diminished its presence in any way from that it had in the 1950's following the Second World War. With this new framework India enters discussions that will focus on health to deal with the pandemic and its after effects, with security and rule of law in the Indo-Pacific region, with trade, technology, new supply chain manufacturing structure in which India plays a key role. With this new focus and clearing past engagements made by other US  presidents, including some mistaken policies, the US emerges as a new force in the Indian ocean, China seas and Pacific ocean region.  On September 23 Modi meets Tim Cook for what could be new supply chain arrangements that Apple could be preparing as it and other US corporations build new supply chain structures to rebuild US manufacturing technologies capabilities that were lost to China over the period 2000-2020. During that period manufacturing technology knowhow was shifted out of the US in a mistaken policy that assumed design and invention were sufficient for the US to keep. The first step in this direction was a change of CEO's at Intel Corp with US president Biden pushing for new US technology reclaiming policy. Following that the new CEO at Intel Corp, Patrick Gelsinger, completely reassessed Intel's mistaken policies of ceding its entire semiconductor manufacturing technologies capabilities to Taiwan and China. Intel made a U turn and is now investing all or most of $50 billion in the US instead of in China or Taiwan.  On September 24 Modi meets Mr Biden to discuss trade, investment, defense, and security. On the same day the leaders of Japan, Australia, Mr. Suga and Mr. Morrison join Modi and Biden for the Quad 4 talks. Indian infrastructure capabilities and Indian economic growth would be key goals to strengthen India along its land borders along Tibet occupied region and Himalayas as part of the overall effort to build a new US and allied presence in Asia.  On September 21 Modi attends a Covid Summit that will look at the way forward in the aftermath of the pandemic and ways to vaccinate the remaining unvaccinated population in the world, as well as vaccination passports.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Of 20 pictures of Shinzo Abe shown in this photo gallery in the WSJ the ones by Kashiyama of Abe on his knees at Iwo Jima recovering remains from the battle in World War II, and by Numata of a safety drill with children in Chiba perfecture where he is seen seated on the ground peeking through metal bars with children, are a must see. Shinzo Abe who led Japan through the 2000-2020 period came from a politically privileged family, but went much beyond that- building relationships with leaders such as Narendra Modi in India and nurturing the India relationship in an act of immense foresight, encouraging an independent minded policy yet working with the US, and defending Japan's position in Asia yet continuing to foster the trade relationship with China and seeking better relations with Russia.  Leaders of US, EU, Germany, France, India, Russia and China, personally felt the loss of Abe in the words they chose to describe the loss. India declared a day of national mourning, showing how far Abe had carried Japan's relationship with India and the number of visits he made to India. ...
The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
India in 2022 and looking at 2030 has great potential in the world. India's interests as a democracy are clearly aligned with the US and Europe. In the past when India was small in economic terms after emerging from the British Empire as an independent nation and out of the fire of the partition and wars in South Asia in 1962, 1965, 1971 policies of ambivalence in foreign affairs took place. At that time says Manmohan Singh, a former prime minister who negotiated for rouble -Indian rupee agreement in the 1970's and 1980's India was finding its way for its small but growing economy. This was in the context of the Nehru-Indira Gandhi policy of non-alignment of the early years after independence when India was never presented with an opportunity to make a difference in the world and was only a small part of the world economy. Today's situation is different. The US and European Union now see the need for a principle based economic order and while one may quibble about the small details, in the larger sense, history has intended for us, the US, the European Union, UK,  British Commonwealth of which we are a part, to stand together economically and politically with our shared parliamentary systems based on western- British and American- democracy and values.  Never has history presented such a huge opportunity for billions of people- to meet the aspirations across continents from North and South America, European Union, to Africa, Asia south and south east and Japan. All countries that aspire to the free societies that have evolved over hundreds of years. It is also the spirit in which Hind Swaraj was written in 1910 by Mohandas Gandhi and which was turned into reality only 37 years later under his leadership and vision for India. The non-alignment period of 2 decades was more of a intervening chapter that resulted from a sense of grievance rather than in the spirit of courage and spirited effort that Mohandas Gandhi embodied and led India with. In Manmohan Singh's direct unmistakable terms and from the vast experience he brings as a respected Indian civil servant- "India as the largest peace loving democracy stands to gain enormously from this principled trade aspiration of the western block of nations of the US and European Union. It presents a tremendous opportunity for India to become a large producing nation for the world and a global economic powerhouse. However, to capitalize on these opportunities India needs free access to these markets, an accepted and global currency to trade in and seamless trade settlements." Manmohan Singh sees millions of factories manned by hundreds of millions of people of all castes, creeds and religions of India. This is a pivotal moment of change for India and India must grasp it firmly. It is also the Mohandas Gandhi of Hind Swaraj taken to a new level from 1910 to 2050, and today's young people's aspiration for India.  ...
Georgetown Law Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US Trade Representative Lighthizer in the Report on China's Entry into WTO sees this as a mistake in the policy of president Clinton. Clinton has said that was a mistake. David Sacks raised this issue in a podcast with Larry Summers, an economist who was deputy to Robert Rubin and Deputy Treasury Secretary, then Treasury Secretary succeeding Rubin in 1999. Clinton on the advice of Rubin and Summers set up the framework for China to join the World Trade Organization without the safeguards and the setup that would prevent it using state capitalism and subisidies to build its own economy with exports, to ally with American corporations to support the outshoring of almost the entire industrial base of the US. Shocking as it sounds this has happened, had happened by 2016, when Donald Trump with the advice of USTR Lighthizer took the first steps to reverse this with Tariff policy, which was supported by president Biden, and continues in its new phase under DJT in 2025. Rubin and Summers had supported deregulation of financial markets and removal of the Glass Steagall Act by 1999. This was to led to the financial crisis of 2009 that was to be one of three body blows to the American working and middle class. The others China entering WTO without safeguards that led to deindustrializing US and loss of its manufacturing base, loss of 5 million jobs, tens of thousands of factories. And the third was the pandemic. “ . . .it seems clear that the United States erred in supporting China’s entry into the WTO on terms that have proven to be ineffective in securing China’s embrace of an open, market-oriented trade regime” 2017 USTR Report to Congress on China’s WTO ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China sees a principal peacemaker role for Ukraine peace settlement with its economic benefits in US/EU trade as foreign policy. NYT's David Sanger reports from the G-7 meetings in Italy in June 2024. He says the G7 sentiment is changing about China in the last few months of 2024 compared to 2023. In 2023 China was seen as a nation that had more in common with the US than Russia considering historical differences between the two nations. As the US veered round to the view China's indirect economic support and its technology was helping Russia in escalating attacks on Kharkiv and the border regions of Ukraine, Europeans were skeptical. No longer, the Europeans now see China's relationship with Russia in the same way. Another change observed is that China is not pursuing a peace settlement participation to end the war by not joining a Swiss effort. Instead says Sanger China is seen as wanting to wait so that at some future date it would be the principal actor in bringing all parties to a peace settlement for Ukraine. With Ukraine facing escalating attacks in the Kharkiv region the mood has changed and China is now seen differently from just a year back. This as shown in the adjoining article in NYT on student exchange for US and China and China's view that racism exists towards Chinese students in the US is affecting the effort for closer understanding between the people's of the two nations sought by the two nations since 1972, and in the interwar period with Gen. Joe Stilwell fighting the Imperial Japanese Army alongside the Chinese people. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
DJT tariffs are selective and reciprocality makes them fair. This also cushions the impact on consumers and countries. Countries who have blatantly unfair tariffs for decades can then decide as in EU, China, India, Japan, S. Korea, Mexico and Canada, can decide how they will respond by looking at what they need to do for fair trade. Some tariffs are intended also as domestic policy for failure to control of fentanyl into the US as with CMC countries Canada, Mexico and China. US producers will make goods sourced from these countries at home and as DJT says about autos from Mexico this will lead to American producers in Detroit picking up production and bringing manufacturing back home to USA. Most goods Americans use were made in the US in the postwar period from 1950-1980, American manufacturing will get the boost it so badly needs after unfair trade practices from other countries in the EU, Japan, Taiwan and China. By April this policy will be in place, by June in 6 months the policies will be fully operational at entry ports in the US including Los Angeles and Long Beach. All tariffs are selective, carefully evaluated for individual countries and products and regions based on reciprocality a principle that is fair to all countries and the principle on which the world trading system is founded. Individual companies and industries that gain this or that benefit may present it differently saying is good or bad based on their interest and profits- for the US and American people the principle of reciprocality provides a yardstick that is both fair and in the long term interest of bringing jobs and higher wages to the US. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Bide meets British prime minister Starmer in Wasnhington as Britain is ready to approve use of its long range missile systems inside Russia. This comes as Russia is about to gain control of the Donetsk region. Republicans other than Mr. Trump and his supporters are for stronger support to Ukraine following US policy of opposing invasion to achieve military goals since 1900 against the Japanese in China and the Vietnam War was fought on the same basis in the 1960's considering the South Vietnamese state as an independent republic, just  invaded by the north, by North Vietnam, just as the US had done in the Korean War between North and South Korea. In the Vietnam War nationalism played apart with the Vietnamese nationalism prevailing by 1970. Russians see Kiev as the origin of the Russian State in the 9th century, and eastern region of Donetsk as Russian if western Ukraine seeks to join NATO and EU. Britain has opposed Russia since 1750 as it saw Russia as the threat to an Empire it was building in South Asia, in India that financially supported its Empire worldwide for 200 years till about 1950. Britain engaged in the Crimean War against Russia so that along with the French it could control Turkey and its Ottoman states in the Arab Middle East under the guise of trade. This effort was pushed back by Kemal Ataturk in the 1920's when he founded the modern state of Turkey in Ankara. ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In a first at Davos World Economic Forum, China's president Xi Jinping uses the 2017 meeting to give a one hour long spirited defense of the world trading system, critical of U.S. president elect Trump's protectionist views without naming him. Xi pointed out that "no one will be winners in a trade war." And went on to add that restricting world trade was like "locking oneself in a dark room, keeping out wind and rain from outside but also light and air." For the first time Jinping stated that China would take the U.S. role of defending the world trading system from attack as needed. On climate change Xi defended the Paris accords, and gave China's commitment to pursue changes regardless of what the U.S. under president Trump does. This follows Chancellor Merkel of Germany's statements on the issue critical of the views of president elect Trump, and taking the lead to defend the world trading system. Xi also pointed out that many of the ills that led to voter discontent in the West were not really from the freeing up of trade but from the pursuit of excessive profit with the financial crisis of 2008.   ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
During the presidential debates Donald Trump was asked about his proposal for a 45% tariff on imports from China to the U.S.. Trump's response was "if they don't behave." he would use this as a negotiating tactic against China. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas responded by reminding viewers of the high tariffs under Smoot-Hawley legislation that were one of the factors that created the Great Depression in the 1930's. Economist and former Federal Reserve chairman Bernanke is a student of the Great Depression, and says "it was highly counterproductive, it lengthened and deepened the Great Depression." Economist Peter Petri of Brandeis University in his study cited in this article, says that the tit for tat that starts with such a move could eventually cost the U.S. 1 million jobs. It might fix one problem the one of imbalanced trade with China his figures show, and create another huge problem the loss of markets for U.S. goods all over the world. Overall a 45% tariff would reduce U.S. merchandise imports by $383 billion and reduce U.S. merchandise exports by $658 billion, says Petri. Gordon Hanson, economist at the University of California, San Diego, who has actually shown how trade has affected different counties in the U.S., leaving some dependent on government assistance. Hanson sees this tariff as counterproductive, it makes the U.S. more self-sufficient but hurts U.S. exporters, would significantly hurt the tech boom, and reduce America's standard of living. The problem is that everybody can get into this in a tit for tat. France did this even before the Smoot Harley Act of 1938 was passed in 1930 with 60% increase in tariff on individual items, by higher tariff legislation in 1928. Close allies Canada followed quickly after Smoot Hawley increasing its tariffs, so did Great Britain. Unemployment went up significantly after 1931, worsened by weak banks and lack of support from the Federal Reserve. Trade with Mexico would come to a halt Petri shows, and the result would be more Mexicans trying to cross the border turning a relatively non existent problem of immigration in 2015 -with Mexicans preferring to remain home and net immigration dropping significantly following the 2008 financial crisis and the strict Obama policy of deporting illegal immigrants- into a real one. Trump says its just a threat, but it is likely to lead to a tit for tat response by China, then by U.S. allies, other trading partners. Consider that president Herbert Hoover opposed the Smoot Hawley bill for raising tariffs on industrial goods, and only proposed adifferent legislation reducing tariffs on industrial goods and increasing the tariffs on agricultural goods to give relief to American farmers. Politics intervened as Smoot from Utah and Hawley from Oregon, from mountain and agricultural states with a lack of understanding of how the international trading system works but as heads of two influential commmittes, the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee, let politics overrride and pushed their legislation through Congress. In 1932 Smoot and Hawley were defeated for reelection, but the damage had been done, and promises of better conditions for workers and farmers never kept. A significant reason for the U.S. standard of living is that it is a leader in the global trading system. Even in 1945 and the years following the end of the war tariffs were higher in Britain and other countries. In return for this leadership the U.S. enjoys the advantages of the dollar being the main global currency, and the advantages of a world leading technological sector that has large global markets. Hanson and Autor have pointed out how imbalanced trade has hurt some counties in the U.S. This is a very real problem for workers in the manufacturing sector, as shown by elections in the midwestern states, Michigan, Ohio, Illinois and other parts of the country. The problem is compounded by the tech sector looking out for itself, the financial sector looking out for itself, and forgetting that we are all in the same boat. And that includes the Chinese who are in the same boat. China is doing a major shift in policy towards a consumer driven economy, and this needs to be accelerated for the benefit of ordinary Chinese. This makes the policy of a 45% tariff by the U.S. doubly unproductive because it hopes to add urgency to the problem of the U.S. trade deficit and manufacturing workers, but takes an approach that risks ending up damaging the global trading system by setting in motion a process that no one controls or can foresee the destination....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Republican majority in the House and large number of seat in the Senate, will make it difficult to get approval of three items for improved Russian-US relations. The items are: an arms control treaty to reduce nuclear arsenals and resume inspections, a civilian nuclear agreement for greater cooperation, and getting Russia admitted into the World Trade Organization. It might even rupture the reset policy of the Obama administration and stifle progress made so far.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The first farmer in recent history to become president of the US, 1977-1981, Jimmy Carter ran a peanut farm in the southern state of Georgia. He also served in the US Navy under Admiral Rickover. Rickover hired Jimmy Carter for the US early submarine program in 1949. It was Jimmy Carter's loss to Ronald Reagan that made the Democrat a rare one term president. The Iran hostage crisis happened during the election year 1980 which may have shifted the election in the Republican Reagan's favor. The economy also suffered from high inflation and lower growth during this period leading to the loss of the presidency for Carter. The incidents leading to the fall of the Berlin Wall happened during the Reagan presidency. This led to the period of three decades when the free market, less regulation period led to the 2009 economic crisis and the earlier breakup of the Soviet Union leading to the economic crisis in the early period in Russia. It was during this period that 2 Democrats president Clinton and Obama tacitly accepted the Reagan era policies of free markets and less regulation. This period is now coming to a close with the pandemic and a reassessment of what has happened. During that period Clinton paved the way for China's admission into the World Trade Organization. The lack of regulation has led to Section 230 leading to a proliferation of undesirable content on the internet, with support for regulation in the Us Congress. US policy is also moving to support its own industries something the Reagan policies saw negatively, particularly chip manufacturing where the US has lost its leadership role. The period that ended the Carter presidency is thus an inflection point that is now reversing itself decades later with the sense that government staying away from the economy is not a desirable thing. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Weymouth interviews Colombian President, Juan Manuel Santos. Santos was finance minister, foreign trade minister, and defense minister under former president Alvaro Uribe. The U.S. is negotiating a free trade agreement with Colombia. Santos has improved relations with neighboring Venezuela, which under Uribe were strained upto the breaking point. He is also improving relations with Ecuador, and working to strengthen the Andean Development Council. Santos says Colombia has a smaller drug problem after defeating the major cartels, though mini-cartels still operate in the country. On fiscal responsibility Colombia has introduced a rule in the constitution to limit deficits to 1% of GDP. Santos expects 5% growth in 2011. He hopes to protect Colombia's growth in a global financial crisis by strengthening regional reserve funds, multilateral cooperation of Andean countries, and central bank monetary policies. Santos plans to abolish the DAS intelligence agency in 3-4 months. He plans to create a new intelligence agency and transfer functions such as immigration that were under DAS to other agencies. He has also launched investigations and action against corruption in the government and against public officials working with local mafias. To do this he is working with the attorney general, prosecutor general, the controller general, and police. This has led to criticism from Uribe who sees the changes in policy pointing to deficiencies in the Uribe administration. Colombia is a country with a population of 46 million and plays a significant role in the northern part of Latin America. Santos assumed office in 2010 and was the choice of Alvaro Uribe. His policies have won him a 71% approval rating....

China Goes to Nixon

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points to the economic muddle that China is getting itself into. He says one way of looking at what is happening now with high inflation is that inflation is the market's way of undoing the currency manipulation that China has engaged in. By following aweak currency policy to protect export interests China has created an artificially high trade surplus. But this is now turning into a lose-lose proposition for both China and the US as market forces push wages and prices up, whittling away at any competitive advantage of China's weak currency policy. He says some estimates he has seen show that Chinese undervaluation could be gone in two or three years. Chinese consumers are asked to accept interest on savings limited to 2.75% and below inflation, with the spread designed to help banks earn their way out of bad loans made during the stimulus lending binge of 2009-2010. What is happening is a massive allocation of capital away from consumers to lending for state owned companies that have created overcapacity in many industries, and use part of this capital to engage in real estate speculation. Krugman says China may be on its way to some kind of crisis with collateral damage to the rest of the world as it is a major importer of commodities from Canada, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, and a major importer of high tech goods from Germany and the USA....
The New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump outlines a plan for Afghanistan that increases the U.S. troop presence from about 8500 with an addition of 4000 more troops and advisors, in addition to a counter terrorism force. To war weary public in the U.S. he says: "I share your frustration over a foreign policy that has spent too much time, energy, money- and most importantly, lives- trying to rebuild countries in our own image instead of pursuing our security interests above all other considerations." About his criticism of the war when president Obama was in office as a huge costly waste of resources Trump said: My original instinct was to pull out, and historically I like to follow my instincts... I heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk at the Oval Office." After resisting the advice of his own advisers Trump decided to fire Bannon who had supported use of American private security contractors for the war in Afghanistan, and used parts of the media to question national security advisor McMaster's views on this. Gen. Mattis, completed a strategy review that showed the mistake of creating a vacuum would repeat the situation of Iraq where president Obama withdrew forces in 2011, leading to a sequence of negative events- with Russia, Iran and Islamic State moving into the vacuum, making American intervention in the war necessary, increase in terrorist incidents worldwide, and a flood of refugees into Europe. Ironically clearing the path for an outsider's bid for the White House, with Brexit in which refugee fears and uncontrolled immigration played a part, and the news of terrorism and the war in Syria-Iraq creating a sense of insecurity. A key difference in the Trump approach with Obama's approach is that "conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables will guide our actions from now on," in line with Trump's criticism of Obama's approach. The military in the U.S. has long maintained that the best approach would have been to insist on U.S. presence in negotiations with the Iraqi government under the sectarian prime minister Nouri Maliki. Gen. Mattis was head of Central Command under the Obama administration and must have pushed the view of the military to president Obama to no avail. Failure to do so led to the growth of Shiite militias and the alienation of Sunnis in Mosul, leading to the fall of Mosul to Islamic State thus creating the current crisis. Gen. Mattis and Lt. Gen McMaster are intimately aware of the problem and must have convinced Trump that this is what really happened, that a repeat would waste the sacrifices of American soldiers in the twin wars. Trump gave this as his reason when he said in his televised speech to the nation- essentially a criticism of Bush that he expanded the conflict too quickly, and Obama exiting too quickly to create a void. Trump call his policy "principled realism."  The roots of the crisis are in the India-Pakistan conflict. Like the conflict in South East Asia the conflict in South Asia extending from Iran to India and Pakistan, may take a generation to overcome. A rapprochement between India and Pakistan, beginning with trade and economic relations, is not only in America's interest, it also provides the basis for a realistic American withdrawal. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A Peterson Institute of International Economics study on the TPP trade agreement shows it would reduce growth in the U.S. manufacturing sector by a fifth, according to this report in the NYT. Workers incomes and job losses in manufacturing are a key concern for voters and account for the surge in polls for Trump and Sanders in the U.S. presidential election of 2016. All four leading candidates Clinton, Sanders, Trump and Cruz oppose the TPP agreement. Congress will wait till after the election to decide. This is a big issue today because about 5 million jobs have been lost in 1977-2014, according to the Alliance for American Manufacturing. The Peterson study predicts job losses of 50,000 a year, yet another study by Tufts University predicts job losses of 450,000 a year. Another study by the Economic Policy Institute study shows other damaging effects such as labor's share of national income declining from the TPP.
Washington Post Original article ›
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? ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
  As policies moderate, and policy action delivers results such as stopping the war on Ukraine, rebuilding the US Navy, and trade that brings back jobs, fentanyl deaths near zero with CMC (Canada, Mexico and China) forced to stop fentanyl flows, the small slippage in DJT support from federal workers in Republican districts and losses to business from wide deportation could reverse. DJT's first 100 days with strong action from the start, given the 2 year window before a possible Democrat takeover of the House and letting out the frustration on border policies of the Biden administration, are taking the Nation by surprise. Immigration policy on illegal migration is supported generally in the US except where it reduces customers to small businesses for fear of deportation such as occupational therapy.  Government employees who voted for DJT are uncertain about their jobs and are a group that is taken aback by the speed and action on cutting the government federal bureaucracy of 2 million workers. Many federal workers are spread out in the 51 states and many are in Republican or Republican leaning districts. With some slippage DJT approval is now at 47%, and slightly higher disapproval at 51%. As a result these two groups are moving away from supporting DJT in the first 100 days. Some who still support him outside these two groups are expressing disapproval of action coming this early and forcefully, yet support the overall policy agenda on immigration and cutting spending. There is also a small yet vocal group that supported RFK Jr. and this group remains energized by his promise to take action on health. Others who wanted strong action on immigration to reverse errors of Biden policies for illegal migrant entry and dispersal across America remain committed to DJT policy.  ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Russia experts Robert Nurick of the Atlantic Council, and Graham Allison of the Belfer Center of International Affairs at Harvard, see a sea change in attitudes to Russia following the interventionist policies of president Putin. The Obama administration will now focus on limiting Russian influence for the remaining two years of Obama's second term. There is a loss of faith in Putin on the part of Obama and close advisors. Russia is seen as a regional power, and the Ukraine crisis is seen as having a serious impact on the Russian economy through decline in trade, foreign investment and capital outflows. Russia is a regional power because it is not the same as the old Soviet Union, it is much smaller, with a declining population, and dependent on oil revenues, and in this sense not the Russia U,S, president Truman and Kennan faced during the Cold War. Obama advisors see Putin's actions as counterproductive for Russia, as the economy is now seen as contracting in 2014, making its actions in Syria, and in Ukraine, unwise foreign policy moves that hurts Russia's economy and future prosperity. Democratically elected leaders in Turkey and Russia with control over the media and shutting down the opposition using control of the judicial process, have shortchanged democratic ideals, and in the process concentrated powers in one leader. This creates risks of arbitrary exercize of power without the checks and balances that are built into a truly functioning democracy, with foreign policy errors eventually leading to a resolution of the conflicts created as these policies are increasingly called into question. Putin and Erdogan were reelected because of economic growth- a contractionary economy or steep declines in growth put everything at risk. A footnote on Kennan, American diplomat and linguist, is appropriate. A quick reading of Wikipedia's excellent account of Kennan will show that Kennan was in favor of a nuanced approach to Russia based on changing conditions. He observed that policies that were seen as anti-Russian actually helped Russian leaders throughout history solidify autocratic type rule, which actually hurts Russia's normal evolution and development. Normal development and evolution similiar to ways Germany and other nations left behind Prussian history and traditions for a open, free society, and in the ways even the U.S. left behind older practices such as slavery in the south and limited representation democracy. In fairness to Kennan it should be said that containment of the Cold War was more a Truman-Acheson doctrine- continued under Eisenhower by Dulles-Nitze, and under Kennedy by Rusk-McNamara- which has roots in Soviet intentions of destabilizing war ravaged western Europe starting with Greece, following similiar efforts in Eastern Europe. Truman was right in aiding Greece, but the U.S. needed to be aware of changing conditions and not take a rigid stance, and get locked into supporting client states just because they were "our guys," a lesson Kennan emphasized throughout his life. Putin and Erdogan use appeals to Russian and Turkish nationalism to improve electoral support and stifle free expression of ideas necessary for growth in any society. This also provides a way to have a discussion with our German friends on engagement and economic relationships, without the rigid outlook of a Wilsonian or Acheson-Dulles kind. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Zhu Changhong plays a key role in investing China's $3.5 trillion dollars in foreign reserves. He is part of the management at China's State Administration of Foreign Exchange or SAFE, a division of the central bank. He maintains a low profile, yet he has played a critical role in shifting investment into Japanese and U.S. equities and bonds issued by the European Financial Stability Fund, reducing the risk exposure to U.S. Treasury's as the U.S. Federal Reserve changes monetary policy. From 45% of China's foreign reserves invested in U.S. government bonds, or $1.11 trillion, in June 2010, SAFE under Zhu's guidance reduced the allocation to 35%, or $1.14 trillon, in June 2012, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis. He has an interesting background. Coming from Anhui province, he studied physics at the University of Chicago, then shifted to life as a trader in financial markets at Allianz's PIMCO investment firm. After spending 20 years in the U.S., Zhu returned in 2009 as chief investment officer of SAFE. He was drawn back to China by another expatriate Yi Gang, a SAFE director who was an economics professor at Indiana University- Purdue University, Indianapolis....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The New York Times reports that comments from Obama administration officials describe an alarming loss of trust and confidence between China and the USA over the last two years. David Shambaugh, director of the China Policy program at George Washington University, says the administration had hoped to work with China on major challenges like climate change, nuclear nonproliferation, and a new global economic order. China, he says, has failed to step up and play that role. He describes the Chinese as responding as an increasingly narrow-minded, self-interested truculent, hyper-nationalist, and powerful country. Jeffrey Baker, a key China policy adviser in the White House, says China's responses reflected a sense in Beijing that China was a rising power and the USA a declining power, especially after the strong rebound of the Chinese economy after the 2008 crisis. The administration is determined to counteract that impression. Other factors complicate things. China is facing a transition to a new leadership in the next year. There are differences within the Chinese Communist party leadership ranks about the direction China should take. Trade and currency issues have come to the point where American public opinion is shifting greatly, with educated professionals changing their views on trade and currency matters. See the recent WSJ/NBC September 2010 poll on world trade, reported by Murray and Belkin in WSJ, Oct 2, 2010. The Obama administration cannot ignore the deep concerns of the American people on these issues. The House overwhelmingly voted in September to threaten China with tariffs on its exports if the Chinese currency, the renminbi, is not allowed to appreciate significantly enough (experts estimate that it is overvalued by 20%). It is not clear whether the Administration's rhetoric on this issue is to assuage public opinion in a business as usual manner, or expected to achieve substantative results to rebalance world trade. The G-20 summit in S. Korea leaves this change for well into the future- China with current account surplus of 5.8% of GDP in 2009 is expected to lower this to 4% by 2015. With the high jobless rate in the US and the large and rising current account deficit, the United States may have reached a juncture where this cannot be put off well into the future years. Other issues, the different foreign policy objectives, and differing perceptions of China and the US of each other, the relationship with US allies in the region, may create additional tensions. These tensions may be navigated by governments of both countries, but the shift in American public opinion on trade, currency and jobs issues will require tangible and real change. As trade tensions will only increase in the next two years with the lack of fiscal stimulus on the jobs front, and no significant change in jobs expected from the Fed's purchase af additional Treasury debt, and a sense that the mutual benefit in the trade relationship with China has been lost to America's serious detriment. China's position may be perceived as stronger than it really is from the faster rebound from the 2008 crisis, and may in reality not be as Jeffrey Baker sees it. As David Barboza has reported in the New York Times, and experts have pointed out, the huge amount of lending encouraged by the government has accentuated weaknesses in the Chinese economy. A significant amount has gone into real estate speculation and will only increase the bad loans on the books of China's banks. This happens at the very time that growth is expected to slow down and make it harder to absorb the bad loans, as was done in the past. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Greece's New Democracy party and Mr. Mitsotakis wins about 41% of the vote in Greece's elections. Syriza come is second with 21% and Pasok left party at 12%. Mitsotakis has increased Greece's growth to twice the eurozone rate, and cut migrants by 90% in line with EU policy. New Democracy party gets 145 seats in a 300 member parliament. The first round was conducted under proportional representation, only 60% of voters cast their vote. Mitsotakis will go for another election by July because in a second round the winner gets additional seats and this could let it form its own government. It sees this as needed to maintain policies of economic growth that have led to GDP growth at twice the rate of the eurozone. A surveillance scandal appears not to have affected the election results as Greeks opted for stability and growth. Mitsokatis himself put it this way- "This is not the time for experiments that lead nowhere." Greece was almost out of the eurozone when Syriza conducted referendums on the debt repayment that led to a chaotic situation, and then moved in the opposite direction in callous implementation when the Eurozone held firm. Mitsotakis said Greece needs to achieve an investment grade rating to lower borrowing costs. Worldwide the policy of delivering on growth is key to success in elections in democracies and in countries that are catching up after the colonialist phase. This is true for delivery of infrastructure and public services such as water and electricity, modern rail in India. It is true also for winning enough public support in countries like China that run parliamentary representation under one party the CCP. Strict immigration controls since 2015 reflect a similar policy pursued recently by Italy. Migrants have dropped by 90%. This is popular among Greeks. Looking back Merkel made a serious error in letting in migrants coming in from Hungary and Austria at the beginning of the migration inflows into the EU in 2015. Merkel came from former East Germany, the communist led GDR, and had no understanding of how harmful this would be for the European Union. In just one year by 2016 the misguided open migration policies of Merkel had led to her CDU party getting less votes than an anti immigration AfD party in her home state of Meckenburg. It led to anti-immigration movements in Europe that were used by parties in a self-serving way including in Britain that led to exit of Britain from the EU. It also led to a decade of austerity and a lost decade for the European Union as it permanently sidelined parties to the left such as Social Democrats that unknowingly or unwittingly ended up with the blame for the public's discomfort with lack of borders and migrants upsetting borders. In balance the right way to tackle this was to build stronger economies that supported workers and families in the EU, that then invested significantly in developing countries of Africa and Asia to help them catch up with modernization. Another failure in policy was the Bush-Obama Merkel policies in failed states such as Iraq and Afghanistan. There it was fundamentally important not to get involved in any way that committed US or EU's precious resources.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report by Timiraos in WSJ describes the tussle between supply siders led by Mike Pence and David Malpass with the zero sum advisors who advised Trump on trade during the campaign. The zero sum advisors are focussed only on how to turn trade to improve the U.S. position and cut trade deficits. The supply siders are trying to show that trade can benefit the U.S. only that it needs to be adjusted so that it works better for the U.S.

The New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us