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
This article in The Telegraph shows the debate in the House of Commons on Syria and comments by various MP's. It also reveals the impasse on Syria with Boris Johnson of the Conservative Party using it to score points against Jeremy Corbyn of Labor Party by calling for demonstrations by peace groups at Russian embassies, and Corbyn's response to this saying all parties embassies including the U.S. should be included. By October 2016 with about 100,000 children and 275,000 civilians trapped inside the Aleppo region in northern Syria, and Russian bombings of Aleppo, the situation is dire. With U.S. president Obama's inaction on Syria, the refugee crisis in Europe from Syrian refugees exceeding 2 million in the Middle East, the situation in Syria is at the point where lacking an effective option to setup a no fly zone at this late stage the political parties in Britain and in the U.S. trade charges against each other. German chancellor Merkel and foreign minister Steinmier visit Ethiopia and Nigeria to stem the flow of refugees from economic crisis at the source with aid and support, as Germany works on its own efforts. France's Hollande tells Putin a visit to France would have only Syria as topic for discussions and calls for Syria to be brought up as war crimes. Even the Telegraph's title is misleading as the article covers the debate in the House on Commons on Syria, but the title appeals to Telegraph readers critical of Corbyn when the debate is about Syria and what action to take about the bombings.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
An overwhelming number of readers who commented on this article by October 27, 2009, were opposed to sending 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan. Looking at all comments in detail one finds that of the 64 readers commenting only a handful, about 8-9 supported sending these troops. Ninety percent of the comments to this editorial asking Obama to fight this war with conviction seriously questioned the wisdom of doing this. Many readers asked why aren't the Europeans putting thier lives at stake, and two asked how the Economist could with astraight face say that Britain's 500 troop increase was a welcome gesture. Readers questioned the assumptions and statements made by the Economist such as" letting the region "slip into amaelstrom of conflict," or "permanent cross-border instability," and "a terrible betrayal of the Afghan people, " in many of the comments. Readers seem conscious of the fact that its not a precipitate withdrawal that is being discussed, its a war for the long haul that it inevitably becomes as the US forces get deeper into the conflict in the mountains of Afghanistan. The discussion is not about the next 6 months but of next year and the year after that and the year after that. That is also what General Colin Powell advised President Obama. He asked Obama to think clearly about the clear goals of this mission. See the link to Powell. The question arises is whether the Economist sensitive to its readers thoughts on this subject, and it is how does it account for such an absolute majority of sensible readers having serious questions, doubts, and outright opposition to a deeper conflict in Afghanistan?...

LyrArc Article Gist
This article in The Indian Express shows that even though Subhas Chandra Bose differed with Mohandas Gandhi during the late 1930's, Bose had a deep respect and affection for Gandhi in mobilizing the Indian people for Swaraj. Bose's relationship with Nehru and Patel were of people at the same level and appeared to compete for attention compared to the relationship with Gandhi which was one of mentor and follower. In the end Bose's restlessness at British refusal to negotiate Swaraj and Gandhi's patience led to Bose actively resisting British rule in 1940.  Mohandas Gandhi had deep faith in the Bhagavad Gita and believed the lines in the Bhagavad Gita where it says- "Whenever, O descendent of Bharata, there is decline of Dharma, and rise of Adharma, then I embody Myself. For the protection of the good, for the destruction of the wicked, and for the establishment of Dharma, I come into being in every age." Gandhi wrote in his Discourses on the Bhagavad Gita on November 11, 1930- "God dwells in our hearts as the holy spirit within us, and when yearning for knowledge, like Arjuna, we take our spiritual difficulties to Him, and seek his guidance, seek refuge in Him, He is ever ready to instruct us." The other way in which Gandhi differed was in his deep insights and views of the British as a people that Bose lacked. Some of this came from his days in London and some of this from his days in South Africa working with and negotiating with the British. Mohandas Gandhi says in Hind Swaraj in 1910- "The English merchants were able to get a footing in India because we encouraged them. When our princes fought among themselves they sought the help of Company Bahadur. That corporation (British East India Company) was vested alike in commerce and war. It was unhampered by questions of morality. Its object was to increase its commerce and make money. It accepted our assistance, and increased the number of its warehouses. To protect the latter it employed an army which was utilized by us also. Is it not then useless for us to blame the British for what they did at that time? The Hindus and the Mahomedans were at daggers drawn. This too, gave the Company its opportunity, and thus we created the circumstances that gave the British control over India. Hence it is truer to say that we gave India to the British than India was lost. The causes that gave them India help them retain it. Some Englishmen say they took India and they hold India by the sword, both these statements are wrong. The sword is entirely useless for holding India. We alone keep them." Gandhi''s view of India was of a nation of shopkeepers, even citing Kruger of South Africa when he was asked if there was gold on the moon. Kruger said likely not, for if there was the British would have annexed it. By 1945 when Gen. Wavell, the Viceroy wrote back to London that he would require more army divisions to control India than Britain could afford, or the British people had the will to support or had commercial interests worth protecting after the war, the British moved up the year of their withdrawal. And began the negotiations with Gandhi for independent India.  Gandhi also says that in his reading of Vivekananda's writings the love that I had for my country became a thousand-fold. Gandhi looked to Vivekananda for inspiration in some of his ideas on Swaraj. Bose says Vivekananda's writings sent him into raptures yet saw Vivekananda "simple as a child" not realizing the spiritual strength Vivekananda had drawn from which overcomes all. As the Lord says in the Bhagavad Gita- "I am the Self, O Gudakesa, existent in the heart of all beings, I am the beginning, the middle, and also the end of all beings. Of the Adityas, I am Vishnu, of luminaries, the radiant Sun; of the winds I am Marici; of the asterisms, the moon."   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
It looks likely that after ignoring the chances of the former Iraqi army disappearing in the war and becoming insurgents the Bush administration military has now embraced them in the form of Awakening groups in Anbar province, initially with tribal groups with ageold traditions predating even Islam but now more dangerously in Baghdad itself with former members of the Baathist military. The tribal groups have limited loyalties but are not friendly to the Shiite led government and fight among themselves. But the Baghdad Sunnis who have already suffered from the Shiite led national police and militas are hostile to the Shiite led government. This is why the movement is growing so quickly as the war against the Americans is turning into an effort by Sunnis of all kinds of politics to turn their attention to the eventual conflict that they see with the Shiites. These Awakening Groups are numbering some 65000 and could quickly reach 100,000 and are watched suspiciously by the SHiite led army and police who refuse to integrate them into the army and police making them more likely to look to money from elsewhere once the Americans stop paying them. The Americans for their part are paying them $300 per month which will cost the US military budget some 234 million dollars and save a lot of American lives and give the US already convinced that this is quite possibly a civil war situation not entirely of its own making , an opportunity to have cover for a withdrawal that shows honorable intentions to Sunni and Shiite alike. The American officers clearly say that once they withdraw there won't be anybody to administer the contracts. Would other Sunni countries like the Saudis step in with economic aid. This is a possibility. This may be why some Iraqis are actually now going back home from overseas, adefacto partition is already taking place, And the Awakening groups only provide the safety to Sunnis in their Baghdad neighborhoods. from the Shiite led police and army. Why would'nt the US simply recognize the defacto situation call it partition or anything else, its the defacto situation. Is it because that leaves most of the oil in Shiite or Kurdish areas, Basra and Kirkuk? But in effect thats what the defacto situation is because most of the oil production as figures show is from the South Oil Company in the Shiite south. See the link to the recent article WSJ Dec 13, 2007, on oil production numbers from the South Oil Company and in the north. Of 2.5 million barrels 2 million barrels came from South Oil and 500,000 from the north. Not much of the oil money is going to the Sunni areas anyway and the national government members are not willing to even meet with the Sunni representatives in some areas. From the larger standpoint of oil supply in world markets and oil prices this means that the current increase supply into world markets will see two new phases. For a while there will be good supply as the insurgency settles down to prepare for a sunni led government in sunni areas under cover of US protection and withdrawal because violence against pipelines ect will diminish. The when the US withdraws this production will decline for a period as the sunnis and shiites form their own separate governments. After that as peace settles down on the region in a kind of coexistence of sunni and shiite governments oil production in Iraq will see a modernization and significant increase. As the new Shhite government will need a lot of money to fund reconstruction of its areas Iraq may hav an incentive to really bump up production like the Russians did afterthe Yeltsin chaotic years. Note that of the $2.4 billion oil investment budget for 2007, only 30% of this was spent in 2007 according to the link WSJ Dec 13, 2007, even though the industry is using dilapidated and old equipment and facilities and badly needs investment, so the impact of a real modernization and investment once the country's Shiiites and Sunnis have their own governments and coexist and peace settles in the region would be huge increase in oil supply. In this sense this is why its been so difficult to understand oil prices and supplies. Twisters have been thrown into the works for the Iraq area because of the civil war situaton and for Iran the nuclear situation and the rhetoric simply complicated matters even as Iranian production was declining and its internal demand growing. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama and President Maliki of Iraq meet at the White House in 2013- both in an awkward position. Maliki having to ask for American assistance in fighting Al Quaeda in western Iraq after insisting on America's complete withdrawal two years earlier. Obama having to face uncomfortable questions on the withdrawal and the current situation after American sacrifices in Iraq during the Bush period. The situation in 2011-2013 involved use of Iraqi airspace for the government of the previous Iranian president Ahmadinejad to supply the Assad regime. Maliki also opposed sanctions against the Assad regime. The visit by Maliki and requests for aid and increasing investment in the oil industry, comes as Iran under president Rouhani improves relations with Turkey in late 2013 to head off increasing Sunni-Shiite sectarianism and conflict in Syria, Iraq and other parts of the Middle East.

LyrArc Article Gist
Nouri al-Maliki, prime minister of Iraq, on his vision for Iraq after the American withdrawal in 2011. Iraq's role as one of many democratic countries in a new Middle East and a new Arab region. He sees combining and expanding the powers of the provinces, while preserving unity of Iraq, as a way around the demands for more autonomy in the provinces. He also sees a policy in which Iraq turns down foreign interference in Iraq as the best way moving forward. He sees a building boom in Baghdad, as a millon homes are built for low income families and the country draws foreign investment.

LyrArc Article Gist
Khedery describes the complete collapse in Sunni- Shiite relations under the Maliki regime and the Iranian influence in Iraqi politics in stark terms. It will take a near miracle, tolerance for religious faiths and opinion, and an exceptional leader, to turn things around and put the decades of misrule of Hussein and Maliki behind. Without that there can be no Iraq. Khedery goes into the misrule in a manner that American political and military leaders only talk about in a sparing manner so as not to make the entire Middle East policy look disastrous.

LyrArc Article Gist
Awareness about climate change is increasing. A poll in 2017 shows 61% of people in 38 countries seeing it as a big threat. Only terrorists inspired bigger fear. Even with the U.S. withdrawal from the climate change agreement many cities and states in the U.S. including California and New York are committed to the goals set in the Paris Accords. China is making a shift away from coal and fossil fuels. Yet the huge demands in Asia, particularly India as it shifts from a rural to an urbanized economy, mean that the shift away from fossil fuels is going to be very difficult. In the last decade 2006-2016 energy demand in Asia increased by 40%, according to the Economist, oil and coal use increased by about 3% a year and natural gas at 5.2% a year. Solar energy and wind power use is increasing and solar becoming cost efficient. Yet Asia still depends on fossil fuels. Even the use of electric cars in China as it pushes for higher numbers of electric vehicles means use of energy coming from a electricity grid powered two thirds by coal, producing more carbon dioxide than some very efficient gasoline driven car models. There are short term costs in the shift from coal but this comes with a better cleaner air demanded by urban residents, and less costs in health. In certain countries like India the costs are to be balanced with the need to tackle rural poverty.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The return of street bombings in Iraq by Al Quaeda affiliates leads to increased sectarian violence in 2013. Sunnis feel they are targeted as Iraqi government forces conduct searches following bombings, and issue residence cards for Sunni areas to prevent infiltration by Al Quaeda terrorists. Sunnis fear the formation of Shiite private militia groups.