LyrArc Article Gist
A coalition of Sunni businessmen, Communists, and popular activists led by Moktada al-Sadr from the holy city of Najaf in Iraq takes the lead in Iraq's 2018 elections with 55 seats. This coalition called Sairoon or Moving Forward was put together to fight corruption in Iraqi politics and government. The coalition named Nasr of prime minister Haider a--Abadi won 39 seats, and is seen as likely to work together with Sadr in forming a government. The parliament has 329 seats. Another party of militia members who led the fight against Islamic State Fatah won 45 seats. Sadr has called for less intervention from America and Iran in Iraq's government and plans to cleanup the corruption in government.

LyrArc Article Gist
Tom Brokaw is perplexed by the absence of the war in Afghanistan as a campaign issue in 2010 US elections. Especially because the war is in its 9th year, has caused 5000 dead, 30,000 wounded, and cost over $1 trillion dollars. He reasons that this is because the vast majority of Americans can opt out of fighting the war on the ground. The all volunteer service draws from 1% of the population, with the majority from working class or middle class backgrounds. This has an unintended effect in making the costs of the war less visible, when actually it is taking a toll in other ways. The US is short of funds to build much needed infrastructure or update infrastructure. States and local governments are laying off teachers because of budget shortfalls, and the national budget deficit makes less money available for solving pressing problems in carbon emissions, energy, and infrastructure. Only recently New Jersey Governor Christie put on hold a new tunnel into New York City because of a lack funds. Pressing infrastructure issues elsewhere will be postponed in this manner. And the outlook for the next 20 years, according to Robert Gordon of Northwestern University, is not going to be better with slower growth at an average of 1.5%, leaving less money for the kinds of projects that defined America from the Erie canal to interstate highways. Brokaw says, the country would benefit from an effort to discuss what happens next, in the continued expenditure of blood and treasure. A discussion of what happens next in this effort to deal with Islamic rage....

LyrArc Article Gist
Changes that are ocurring in Pakistan that are different from what was seen in the past. Pakistan's elite appears to have lost touch with ordinary Pakistanis. The country is becoming more Islamic in its thinking. America is now cited as the biggest threat for Pakistan in Pew Research and Gallup surveys by close to 60% of those surveyed. India is seen as much less of a threat, less than 20% see India as a threat. Over 10% see the Pakistan Taliban as a threat. Pakistan may be looking more inward now than in the past. In the past India dominated the military's thinking. Now it is concerned about too large of an American footprint in Pakistan, and may be encouraging the perception that America is a threat to Pakistan's having nuclear weapons. Pakistan's failure to invest in education, a budget for the military that takes a disproportionate share of resources, lack of investments in infrastructure continue to affect Pakistan. Female literacy is low, at about 40%. Support for democracy is not strong because of poor governance. Democracy in Pakistan is distorted by the large landowning families dominating Parliament. And the two main parties are dominated by the Bhutto and Sharif families. Only 42% of those surveyed said democracy was the best form of government in the Pew poll. Both the military and civilian governments have failed to make wise decisions that would bring opportunities to ordinary Pakistanis. Too much of the nation's resources were wasted in costly conflicts with India, and involvement in Afghanistan, which have not done much for Pakistan. In this situation Pakistan and Pakistanis continue to struggle along with no clear direction, but somehow make things work. A pullback from conflicts in neighboring states and focus on improving the lives of ordinary Pakistanis requires some far-sighted leadership....

LyrArc Article Gist
A study group at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy sends a public letter to U.S. president Obama on the Iran negotiations. It says the nuclear agreement negotiated with Iran "may fall short of the administration's own standard of a 'good' agreement." It is signed by some of Mr. Obama's main advisors during the first term. Some of these officials told the NYT that the letter was the result of serious concern that Mr. Kerry and other negotiators were moving towards major concessions that would weaken the international inspections of Iran's facilities, back away from making Iran reveal suspected past work on weapons, and allow Iranian R&D to move ahead with making nuclear fuel once the accord expires. The five Obama advisors from the first term who signed the letter are: Dennis Ross, Middle East negotiator, David Petraeus, CIA director, Robert Einhorn, State Department proliferation expert, Gary Samore, chief advisor on nuclear policy, Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman Jt. Chiefs of Staff. Gary Samore is president of the advocacy group United Against Nuclear Iran. The letter was also signed by President Bush's national security advisor during his second term, Stephen Hadley. Such a large group of advisors to presidents Bush and Obama familiar with the details of Iran's development of nuclear technology and weapons capabilities could give Republicans support to kill any agreement that falls short on inspections during Congressional Review. On this key factor where only vague assurances are made by the Iranian side- such as signing an International Atomic Agency convention giving inspectors broad rights to visit suspicious sites, followed by Ayatollah Khamanei ruling out military sites- the letter is specific. Inspections it says " must include military (including Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps), and other sensitive facilities. Iran must not be able to deny or delay timely access to any site anywhere in the country." Inspections work rigorously done is set as a precondition before any significant relief from economic sanctions on Iran....

LyrArc Article Gist
Pierre Razoux, a French historian provides this account of the Iran-Iraq war that lasted from 1980 to 1988, at a cost of 680,000 people killed and $1.1 trillion in war destruction and money diverted from the economy. In 1980 Saddam Hussein of Iraq launched the war by attacking Iran which had just come under the Ayatollah Khomeini with the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1979. The war dragged on for 8 years with Khomeini persisting in the war. With U.S. and Saudi policy to increase production bringing the price of oil down from $30 to $10 designed to bring Iran and Iraq to the peace talks, as well as the Soviet Union to withdraw from Afghanistan, all three being major oil producers. The dollar also weakened by 37% during this period. The diplomatic isolation of the Khomeini regime made it more difficult for Iran to buy arms on credit than Iraq could, leading to the war ending with Iran finding it no longer possible to continue the human losses. The Carter administration, particularly with National Security Advisor Brzezinski, tilted towards Iraq to oppose Soviets in Afghanistan, and the Saudis also supported Iraq during the early period. Under president Reagan the U.S. began covert and direct assistance to Iraq to prevent an Iraqi defeat early in the war. Rumsfeld visited Baghdad in December 1983 and March 1984 to organize the U.S. effort to oppose Iran. This may have laid the seeds for future conflicts that lasted through the administrations of the elder and junior Bush. As Razoux points out the Revolutionary Guards became entrenched from this period in Iran's history, making it difficult for election process to work or elected governments to operate. 23 months following the end of that war in 1988 Saddam Hussein launched a war on Kuwait, leading to the U.S. led Gulf war and the entry of the U.S. into a ground combat role, which was followed by the invasion of Iraq under George Bush after 9/11 attacks. The twin wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are estimated to have cost the U.S. over 1 trillion dollars. The result today is largely the division on the ground into Shia regions under the Revolutionary Guards and the Shiite government in Baghdad, and Sunni regions led by Islamic State and autonomous Iraqi Sunni tribes, ignoring the Iran-Iraq boundaries set in the colonial period by the French and the British. In all the amount spent in the Khomeini-Saddam war of $ 1 trillion being about $2 trillion in today's money, and the $1 trillion spent by the U.S., means about $3 trillion has gone into the wars in this region. This comes at a time of deficits in government budgets in the U.S. and a deep recession in the U.S. and Europe. It also explains why the U.S. public is reluctant to take even the minor action such as giving a standoff "no-fly zone" protection to the rebels in Syria, and supported the Obama administration in its reluctance to keep even the basic military force in place to protect its diplomatic mission in Libya, where the cost would be small relative to earlier enlarged military missions under the two elder and junior Bush administrations. The result is that refugees are pouring into Europe from Syria and Libya, through Turkey. Turkey itself is host to millions of refugees in camps along its border. The vacuum and the withdrawal of the Obama administration from the region has led to the rise of Islamic State with covert assistance from Sunni regimes in the region to counteract the growing influence of Shiite Iran. It also may explain the Iranian people's support for the nuclear weapons effort through years of sanctions, leading finally to an agreement with the Obama administration that relaxes sanctions in exchange for a future possibility of acquiring nuclear weapons. Lost in the conflict is the Arab Spring of 2012-2013, with the Tunisian democracy the only surviving result of that movement for democracy and awakening among Arab peoples. The Reagan administration in its aggressive anti-Soviet position made large errors- including ignoring human rights abuses and use of chemical weapons in the Iran-Iraq war, by supporting Iraq and reversing position after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, having a disastrous effect on the entire region decades later. Much of the Obama administration's reluctance for any action may stem from the U.S. role in this period and its consequences of protracted conflict. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Scott Anderson of the NYT provides an indepth look at the Arab World and its fragmentation through the eyes of five people from each part of the Arab world- Egyptian, Kurd, Syrian, Iraqi and Jordanian. He says the countries that fell apart are precisely the ones that were formed by the British and the French, and Italy, following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire  using divide and rule policies- Britain in Iraq, France in Syria, and Italy in Libya- without much thought given to setting up viable nation states. This is why Iraq has a Sunni-Shia divide, Syria has similar divisions, and Libya with a largely tribal based structure, never really held together after the colonial powers left, and were held together only by strong dictators. Today's problems trace back to these historical events. This is complicated by the largely young demographic and restlessness of the people for change coupled with problems of underdevelopment in education, tribal loyalties, religious loyalties, and lack of political and social structures that could keep the countries together as change and transition to democratic processes took place. The role of the military further complicated matters in Egypt. Even Iran experienced these divisions because of the intervention of the great powers including Russia in Iran since 1900, leading to swings between liberal governments, foreign power supported governments, and a swing back to religious leadership as at present. This is one view of the region, others are presented by Ramadan (Oxford),  Bernard Lewis (Princeton), and leaders in Qatar and Emirates, other experts, some of whom point to the failure in leadership and the elites to find solutions to the problems of underdevelopment, in education, health, infrastructure, and aspirations for a voice in their governance. As the same divisions left by colonial powers affected Asia- in India, China, and Korea, but a larger vision of progress prevailed through crises and difficulties.        ...