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.


DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Russia invades Ukraine on multiple fronts, across Belarus, across its western border with Ukraine, on the pre dawn hours of February 24, 2022. Russian foreign minister Lavrov says "tense and detailed discussions" with US and NATO are still taking place. In talks with the US, president Putin of Russia had demanded that Ukraine commit to not joining NATO. The US insisted that this was upto Ukraine and that the territorial integrity of Ukraine had to be respected. Interventions by Macron of France and other leaders failed to bring the two sides closer. The US and Europe with a reluctant Germany looked at sanctions as a deterrent. This proved to be wrong. Mr. Putin has a passionate view of Ukraine and Kviv's historical role in the formation of the Russian state, evident in his televised address only 48 hours before the actual invasion. Ukraine has shifted between Poland and the Baltic states, Germany on one side and Russia on the other in its thousand year old history. The shift away from Bolsheviks and Communists under the Soviet Union after 1990 changed the relationship of Ukraine with its neighbors once again as Ukraine became closer to Poland and the Baltics, and Germany. Germany remains reluctant to revert to the relationship with Russia that led to 2 World Wars. During the leadership of Willy Brandt and successive German SPD leaders, as well as with Konrad Adenauer and CDU leaders, the goal was to build a good relationship with Russia. Merkel of the CDU went as far as accepting dependence on Russia for 40% of its gas supplies, after shifted out of nuclear energy and supporting a new Nordstream undersea pipeline for gas supplies.  The early reaction on DW.com and German television was one of shock as no one really expected that this would lead to a full scale invasion. Scholz of the SPD the new chancellor in 2022 was not active in forging anew consensus allowing NATO's Stoltenberg who is a former Norwegian prime minister 2005-2013 to frame the response of Europe. Norway's role in European security was marginal for most of the twentieth century. Other events had detracted from bringing active German and American participation in coming up with a framework of dialogue to address concerns of both sides and still build a common ground for peace- Afghanistan, the pandemic in its third year, China's deteriorating one sided trade relationship with America that hurt American workers and manufacturing. As a result China and Germany were essentially absent in building the framework for peace. Afghanistan hasty withdrawal made it harder for president Biden to come up with new approaches to build a common framework. President Macron made some faltering efforts on the fringes even as president Putin focused on the US response and its intentions with NATO on European soil, and declared that it was directly US Russia negotiations that needed to work. With this the whole framework of relations since the presidency of Reagan and the relations with Russia and China come to a close. And a new framework needs to be constructed that draws in India already or soon to be the most populous nation in the world, in an effort to build an enduring new framework. The voices of Eastern Europe need to be heard, yet balanced with the voices from India, China, Germany, Russia, and other countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa that are affected by world events. ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
William Galston in the WSJ says outright for the first time in the WSJ that the years from the last term of Clinton, through the Bush, and Obama administrations were an outright failure for the American people. He documents the losses- 5.7 million job losses in 2000-2010 as Clinton opened China's entry into the World Trade Organization without any precautions taken to prevent abuse of world trading rules after the experience with Japan. Worse no help to the displaced workers which fed into the resentment of workers. Sex scandals weakened the presidency and acted as the major distraction during the last years of Bill Clinton. Over the administrations of Bush and Obama almost the entire US manufacturing base was dismantled and shipped to China. Pharmaceutical companies were allowed to charge recklessly when Bush disallowed Medicare to negotiate prices for pharmacueticals placing additional burdens on the American people. Bush started long wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that cost the US dearly in lives and resources wasted with no vital US interests at stake as in Europe. This distracted attention from problems simmering at home. Obama continued these wars preferring to focus on reelection. The migration crisis, the neglect of infrastructure worsened during this period. The Bush deregulation of banks led to the 2009 world banking crisis that led to large layoffs worsening a bad situation from outshoring and creating a class of unemployed, and shrinking household wealth and savings. The Biden administration, the first Trump administration and now the second have started the process of revival of the US. And yet Biden, DJT are relative outsiders who came to the presidency and were not favored in the established order of the 1990-2016 period. One can say about Blair, Cameron, Boris Johnson in Britain, about Clinton, Bush, Obama in the US, and Schroeder, Merkel in Germany that the leadership was mediocre and failed the people of Europe and the people of America.     ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Inherent conflicts between views of Reidel, Biden and other policy advisors such Richard Holbrooke, all wary of Hamid Karzai's government in Afghanistan and General McChrystal -whose experience in tactical strategy was his strong point, not an overall perspective that took into account factors outside US control such as the people, their history, recent history, the terrain, lack of viable government, neighboring Pakistan- spill out into the open. Holbrooke, the special ambassador to the South Asian region has serious differences over Karzai with ambassador to Kabul, Eikenberrry, and with Jones, National Security Advisor. Eikenberry has his own differences with Karzai. See the group "Eikenberry Cables," which provides his cable reports from Afghanistan which talk about Karzai, the Afghan military, and the prospects there, in bleak terms. The same Eikenberry is shown here telling Jones that Holbrooke's chilled relations with Karzai are not helping, and Jones assuring Eikenberry that Holbrooke is on the way out. Followed by Secretary of State Clinton supporting Hilbrooke by talking to Obama. See also the group "April 2010 Biannual Defense Departmet Report on Afghanistan," which shows that of 92 districts surveyed none supported the Karzai government, somethig that must cause policy team members to pause and think....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Admiral Mullen chairma joint cheifs confirms most of what the British Ambassador in Afghanistan s saying about deteriorating prospects in the country. He understands the heroin growing issue brought up by US counter narcotics experts in the NYT recently, by saying "we've got to impact pretty significantly, pretty fast on the poppy issue". He is aware that poppy growing is abundant in the south and in Helmand province pours upwards of $100 million to finance the Taliban. General McKiernan who heads NATO forces there says that NATO forces would be authorized to attack narcotics bosses, their soldiers and infrastructure, if they are linked to movement of weapons, improvised explosives or foreign fighters in Afghanistan. Which is possibly a waiting mode till more troops are sent to Afghanistan as policing this rugged mountanous country with tribal regions and loyalties complicated by the narcotics layer and widespread corruption in the Karzai government and its loss of popular support requires many more troops than are now in the country and a sustained campaign. So far the US and European forces possibly outnumbered have resisted alienating the poppy farmers in the south through land based eradication. But with more troops Mullen's new approach and Petraeus's has to shift to something like that, at the same time as they follow Petraeus's new counterinsurgency doctrine in display in Iraq to draw down the Taliban strength to its core supporters by winning other tribal factions with no hardcore loyalties over to the American side....
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
For what a ruble buys in Russia , 2.7 times what a dollar buys in the US, Russia gets alot of bang out of its defense budget of $149 billion, about $401 billion (Purchasing power) compared to US $997 billion. Add to this Russia is now a war economy in the war with Ukraine and concentrates its forces in one theatre not four as the US spread out over Indo-Pacific, Europe and Middle East and Korean peninsula. This is the reason behind most of DJT's actions reflecting realities in defense. Shut down the Middle East theatre which is also what the American people want by moving everything in the direction of economic progress, turning down the revolutionary and sectarian ideologies that roiled Egypt of Suez, Iraq and Syria, Afghanistan and Pakistan in the 60's and dragged the world into costly insane wars. And do this with the consensus of Russia, China and India. Wind down the war in Europe- accept the Russians as a Northern European power with a settlement of the Ukraine conflict, and let Germany lead Europe's defense. Manage the relationship in the Indo-Pacific with India and South and Southwest Asian investments in economic infrastructure that will offset China's rapid growth of the last three decades by incentivizing South Asia and South western Asia parts of which were called the Middle East by the Britons and now can be rengaged in the South /Southwest Asian group of nations led by the US. This is the policy for the next 25 years to 2050 that a Russia, Germany, US, China, India consensus sees as a constructive future for the people of the world.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A meeting of the Financial Action Task Force in February gave Pakistan months to move against the money sources and assets of terrorist groups. This could lead to action against banking links with the outside world.  This financial group acts against money laundering and terror financing. It is arguing for sanctions in the event no action is taken. Pakistan's deputy interior minister says Pakistan is taking a proactive approach and banning one group, detaining members of another group named Jaish that operates in the Kashmir region.

Similar action was taken since 2002, and since then the ebb and flow of terrorist groups in Pakistan has taken place over 2 decades, with the groups also attacking internal targets in Pakistan.  In the period of Soviet invasion of Afghanistan the U.S. trained and Pakistan supported jihadist groups so that the problem goes back to 1979.

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A detailed account by Thomas Schweich, a senior official and deputy in the law enforcement bureau to Anne Patterson, Assistant secretary of State for international narcotics and law enforcement affairs. He talks about how the Pentagon and the UK military have thwarted efforts for aerial eradication of poppy fields which has worked in other countries like Columbia. In fact Anne Patterson was an Ambassador to Columbia and knows about this first hand. He also talks about how through their efforts northern Afghanistan was cleared of poppy fields but how the cultivation has shifted to the south to Helmand and Kandahar provinces. The government officials in these provinces are actively involved in the poppy farms that are being setup there and support Karzai and help him organize the Pashtun vote for coming elections. So Karzai is protecting these officials and because of this opposes aerial eradication and does not support using Afghan Army for land eradication. The military in the U.S. and the UK does not want to take more casualties by turning against them the officials and farmers who support the government, but this is a short sighted policy because this helps make the Taliban insurgency stronger with access to cash and weapons because they also are actively setting up farms in their areas of southern Afghanistan. Aerial eradication takes care of poppy farms in all areas and has been effective in other countries. In the long run the military takes many more casulaties because of the bigger insurgency and Taliban they have to deal with. The military's policy is called "Sequencing," and its basically we'll deal with drugs later which is based on a complete misperception and understanding of the situation facing them. Schweich is in the thick of these battles and has fought them wit courage it appears from this account. He has the support of Secretary of State Rice but has not been able to get the Administration to get Karzai to change the way he is operating. It risks making the situation and insurgency in Afghanistan a lot worse if not corrected. Its a call for action and for educating the public and clearing all the misunderstanding and myths and fog about whats happening in Afghanistan....
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Landers and Gale of the WSJ show how undersupplied conscript soldiers, high inflation and industrial breakdowns during wartime have led to major upheavals in Russia. Three conflicts led to such changes in Russia's domestic situation. The Russo-Japanese war in 1905 led to Russia seeing one fourth of 340,000 Russian troops killed in a battle near the Chinese city of Shenyang, and loss of most of its Baltic fleet in a Japanese attack on Port Arthur. The war ended with a peace treaty arranged by president Theodore Roosevelt of the United States. The Russian czar gave up most of his absolute powers in 1905.  In 1914 Ukraine was involved in regime change as the Germans fought to take Ukraine. The czar wanted to keep Russia's expansive sphere of influence. Without Ukraine's agriculture and industry and its population Russia would not be a great power, says an expert on Czarist Russia. At the time the Russian military was ill prepared in motorized vehicles and communications equipment, and industry lacked the ability to resupply the military. Inflation jumped leading to unrest and protests. Fighting in the First World War led to millions of refugees. In 2022 experts see the same old problem of seeking spheres of influence leading to wars, and the lack of sufficient ability to cope with prolonged wars when short wars were expected by the regimes in power in Russia. Dissent inside Russia and protests led to the abdication of Czar Nicholas in March 2017, and Bolsheviks led by Lenin seizing power in November of 2017. By 1979 Ukrainian leader Leonid Brezhnev was leader of the Soviet Union as Russia's economy could not keep up with modernization. Seeking spheres of influence Brezhnev pushed into a long war in Afghanistan in the mistaken idea that a quick strike on Kabul with a change in government would achieve Soviet goals in central Asia. By 1989 the Russian army withdrew from Afghanistan and in 1990 the protests led to the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union and emergence of Russia as a separate country. Landers and Gale of the WSJ see these events in Russian history showing how wars have led to domestic changes and upheavals in Russia when leaders projected power beyond Russia's capacity to handle the results of conflict. Russia's economy is about the size of Italy or Britain say experts and its industry much smaller than the European Union economies and the US, Japan combined.  ...

100 Days

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman calls for a third party candidate to bring a focus on the issues facing the U.S. - winding down the war in Afghanistan, increasing fuel economy and conservation to reduce dependence on foreign oil inclusing a gasoline tax, enacting the proposals of the Simpson-Bowles Commission which eliminates or reduces tax expenditures and reduces spending, and provides any needed fiscal support for the short run. He says the two party duopoly is not working and even if the third party succeeds only in framing the debate and the issues in a constructive and useful way, it will have achieved something significant.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The amazing story of Abdel Hakim Belhaj who is seen as a foe by the CIA and turned over to Gaddafi's regime from Bangkok, followed by six years in Libyan jails. He is in the Western mountains near Tripoli leading a brigade that enters Tripoli. Because of the military discipline and experience gained in Afghanistan, Belhaj is put in charge of Tripoli by the Libyan Transitional Council. He looks to the future and is grateful to NATO and the U.S. for freeing his country. He holds no rancor for the past and looks to the future.
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
From all accounts the lawyers against Musharraf, the opposing factions of Bhutto and Sharif and the Islamist parties alliance distancing itself from Musharraf's campaign against insurgents in the tribal areas and Waziristan, and the army's failure to do much against the militant islamist in the border areas with Afghnaistan present a picture of Pakistan coming apart. The army as a national institution is losing credibility even as the US needs the Pakistani military to continue the fight in the border areas while it is fighting with other Nato forces in Afghaistan's southern provinces. Actually whole areas in the British assigned areas of southern Afghaistan have been given up to militants or provincial leaders with their own forces. In this situation even as the people seem genuninely keen on a new direction their is no unified leadership or organization to hold it together which commands the confidence of large parts of the country and people. And so the US even under pressure to support democracy would simply put its interests in Afghanistan and the border regions of Pakistan before the interests of the people of Pakistan in finding some genuine solution to the problems. that would give Pakistan a chance to set a new longterm direction different from its past. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
NYT's Thomas Edsall does a great service to America by pulling together different views on the causes of the alienation of the rural population in the US from the Democratic party. The situation in Wisconsin with Ron Johnson winning in that state on the back of resentment of the rural population is shown. It all started say experts with the the so called Third Way that turned out not to exist of Tony Blair in Britain and Bill Clinton in the US that quietly accepted the Reagan view of the world and moved the Democratic party in a different and unknown direction. Obama made things worse by embracing Tech and tech companies into the Democratic party, and ignored the concerns of rural and agricultural parts of the US. The Obama period continued the Clinton policies of letting China takeover America's position in manufacturing, and allowing the offshoring of much of American industry to China. By not closing the chapter of America's wars in Afghanistan and Iraq president Obama lost many critical years. Mr. Biden now has the extraordinary challenge of not meekly accepting what has happened knowing that it is not in the spirit of the party of FDR and Truman, that the Democratic party will stand or fall with the common man, that it will take some time to recover from these missteps, that it is in the interests of America and the American people, and for what America stands for in the world. It is all embodied in what Carl Sandburg once wrote- "The People, Yes!" ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The public health emergency announced for the pandemic ends on May 12. Title 42 is a law that uses the public health emergency and pandemic to turn people back from Mexico who cross the border illegally. Democrats and Mr. Biden were critical of the way people were treated at the border under the Trump administration. Yet when faced with higher numbers crossing illegally as Title 42 ends on May 12, Biden and Democrats see the need to replace Title 42 with rules that will tighten controls at the border. It is essential in several ways. It blunts the Republican message to voters that Democrats are not handling the border issue and uncontrolled immigration well. Mr. Obama did this for 8 years by continuing a high rate of deportation of illegal migrants before Mr. Trump.  What makes it possible for migrants crossing the US Mexico border illegally to seek to stay in the US, are US asylum laws that were passed after the refugee crisis during and following World War II. The next step is that the US will now end these asylum privileges as they are being used for economic reasons by huge numbers of migrants crossing from regions in Central America because of economic problems. When a coffee growing region in Guatemala was affected by a bad harvest there was a surge in migrants, with similar patterns repeating themselves over decades.  Just as Mr. Biden closed the Afghanistan war because he could see that it was the right thing to do and essential for the US to build abetter future for its people, Biden now sees the need to end rules and policies from a previous era that led to illegal immigration. Biden is also doing this by increasing legal pathways for immigration to the US where it is done officially and in a proper way. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The decision to replace Gen. McKiernan with Gen. McChrystal and to have Lt. Gen David Rodriguez as his deputy, was made by Defense Secretary Gates and Jt Chiefs chairman Mullen, after thinking about this during the transition to the new Obama administration. The failing war effort in Afghanistan with the Karzai government controlling only pockets of Afghanistan and Kabul and leaving the countryside to the Taliban has alot to do with this. Gates feeling is "we can and must do better." That it took so long, with the Taliban only 50 miles from Islamabad, Pakistan, and the question of Paksitan's nuclear weapons falling into thier hands vexing the adminstration, shows that things slowed down with the transition and the economic crisis. The decision was not adifficult one considering that McKiernan had little to show for his efforts, and the rapidly deteriorating situation by all accounts. McKiernan was a senior officer who spent his entire military career commanding conventional forces, serving in the Balkans and the Iraq war in 2003, and has the wrong midset and background for counterinsurgency warfare. McChrystal has experiences suited to counterinsurgency warfare, having commanded commando teams that took out leading insurgents. He is also director of the Joint chiefs of staff, so known to Mullen for his abilities. Rodriguez commanded the 82nd Airborne Division in eastern Afghanistan, is seen as aleading expert in counterinsurgency warfare. He is also Gates's senior military advisor so known to Gates for his abilities. The new strategy is to go with counterinsurgency warfare to turn this thing around. This puts 2 commanders with this kind of experience in Kabul, and close communication with Gates and Mullen because they worked together before. With additional troops, and shift in resource acquisition at the Pentagon that Gates is trying to secure for this kind of warfare, this creates the kind of combination that could help the US in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and achieve more modest goals. See the links to Gates's and Petraeus's more modest goals....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The UN deputy special representative for Afghanistan, Peter Galbraith- and the highest American official there who was also an advisor to Richard Holbrooke, the US representative for South Asia- resigned over differences with his Norwegian boss the Un Representative over the Afghan elections. The issue was whether to take a softer stand on the elections or to confront the Karzai government with evidence of fraud in the elections.
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Lakhdar Brahimi who was special representative of the UN secretary general for Afghainistan from October 2001 to December 2004 and was present when under UN auspices Afghan political representatives met to build anew after the US defeated the Taliban. He says it was a mistake then no to try to atract those in the Taliban movement and other political groups in Afhanistan that could have been brought into the new political setup and administration to build a broader base of support. And the Taliban did not surrender to anyone when it was defeated so the same mebers of that movement could simply resurface. Also no peace can be achieved in Afghanistan without the cooperation and support of Pakistan its neighbor and with tribes. sharing land on both sides of the border. Brahimi says he bitterly regrets not having advocated more strongly 2 suggestions made by the UN in early 2002. The first to reach out to those members of the Taliban who were willing to join the political process and second to deploy the ISAF outside of Kabul with increased strength. He also believes the war that happened in Iraq after the Afghan peace effort may have falso fundamentally altered the views of people in the countryside and in border areas of neigboring Pakistan about perceptions of the US and NATO....
NYTimes.com Original article ›
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The comparison by Goldsmith and Moyn has picked the wrong Roosevelt. Only Washington in the war of independence, Lincoln in the Civil War over slavery, and FDR Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the Great Depression and economic collapse, fall in that category and there is no one and nothing to compare with both the struggles they fought and the challenge to the survival of the US. On the next scale comes TR Teddy Roosevelt, and this is the Roosevelt to compare DJT with. TR was unconventional, TR spoke a different language and could be frank and outspoken. TR actions matched his words, as his days on the Indian frontier and with the Rough Riders. TR also had one term plus completing McKinley's term after his assasination. And TR like DJT did not like his successor and did everything to make the comeback denouncing the policies of his successor William Howard Taft in the 1912 election, which TR lost to Democrat Woodrow Wilson. All this is true for DJT in 2026. TR denounced the shift away from his "progressive policies" and the shift to corporate interests of Republican Taft. In this sense also DJT is similar as he denounced the shift to corporate interests of the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama years. TR was no country club Republican and was willing to confront opponents in the politics to fight for the benefit of the working man, splitting the Republican party in the process. This is true of DJT. TR launched the rebuilding of the Navy, and announced he would reassert the Monroe Doctrine. DJT is doing the same and is reasserting the Monroe Doctrine. One could say that DJT feels the hidden TR in him and like Teddy Roosevelt is putting America in the place it once was. For TR the industrial revolution had distorted a country founded on the backs of settlers owning the land independent and rugged, as industry turned the country into corporate interests and workers in factories with few rights, and poor working conditions and wages. This TR even as a Republican fought to reverse. In DJT there is the Republican also of a different mould who fights to reverse the situation created by Bush/Clinton/Bush/ Obama over three decades since the 1990's when America has fallen to new lows when drug trafficking gangs in Mexico and Venezuela are able to run rampant over the western hemisphere, when elites in Canada and the US act impotent in the face of this, or living in their own world away from the streets and neighborhoods of America devastated by drug trafficking, towns and neighborhoods from Janesville to Flint economically deprived as elites shifted manufacturing overseas to China in complete indifference to the American worker and his family, and carried out wars in remote parts of the world such as hills of Afghanistan and deserts of Iraq no worker or farmer in America had even heard of or cared about since the American continent was settled in 1600. If there is a Woodrow Wilson around the corner who won in 1912, for the 2028 election, then it is someone who like Wilson will take policies to benefit the American worker and farmer and his family, and America as a Nation to a better place over the next decade. A passage from Teddy Roosevelt from his Autobiography about who TR was struggling against illustrates this point- "They favored Civil Service Reform; they favored copyright laws, and the removal of tariffs on works of art; they favored all the proper (and even more strongly the improper ) movements for international peace and arbitration; in short, they favored all good and many goody-goody, measures so long as they did not cut deep into social wrong or make demands on National and individual virility. They opposed, or were lukewarm, about efforts to build up the army and the navy, for they were not sensitive regarding National honor, and above all they opposed every non-milk-and-water effort, however sane to change our social and economic system in such a fashion as to substitute the ideal of justice towards all for the ideal of kindly charity from the favored few to the possibly grateful many." (Theodore Roosevelt, Autobiography, Chapter 5 title: Applied Idealism, 1913) ...
POLITICO Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In May 2023 Germany's Scholz overruled Habeck to let sale of 24.9% of Hamburg port to COSCO go through. Here is how over 2000-2016 China build its world class network of containerized shipping ports while the second Bush added the war in Afghanistan to the wars in Iraq started by Reagan/Bush. Without defense costs China built this world ports network. Piraeus in Greece, south of Athens, a port concession acquired in 2004 Antwerp in Belgium (Austrian Netherlands), a minority stake in a container port acquired in 2008. In 2013 with sale of Terminal Link ports in a Cosco 49% stake deal by CMA of France CMA holding 51%, China has stakes in Zeerbrugge and Antwerp, Busan South Korea, and Le Havre, Montoir and Fos in France, Xiamen in China, Miami and Houston in US. Rotterdam, Netherlands- Cosco acquired in 2016 a 35% stake in Euromax Terminal in Rotterdam from Hong Kong's Hutchison's Holdings for $125 million. Valencia and Bilbao majority  51% stake for $270 million, when JP Morgan paid as much as $950 million to ACS of Spain for these ports after the 2009 crisis led to Spanish divestments. Today measured in TEU shipping containers China sends goods to Europe 10 times what it takes in through Spanish ports. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Peter Galbraith explaining the true reason for his firing by Eide and the UN Secretary General Moon. The statement announcing his dismissal to be accurate would have said that this was over differences whether the UN was going to remain silent over evidence of electoral fraud in the Afghan elections, and the issue of ghost polling stations. There is another angle of this which risks endangering the US trrops in the north of the country. Karzai's opponent in the elction is half Tajik and half Pashtun, fraud in the elections may turn the Tajik north against US and coaltion troops, further complicating life for the US, and this is on top of the loss of credibility with the Afghan people of the Karzai government. See the separate article on General Jones telling McChrystal who commands US forces in Afghnistan to cooperate with the strategic review now underway, by not making statements to the press. The other questions arise about the manner in which this dismissal ocurred. A few days before this Hillary Clinton, Eide, and other representatives from the coalition told the press that they think Karzai would win. Had Obama authorized this and what would be the point of such a statement, and at the same time trying to conduct an unbiased assessment of the war in Afghanistan. Here Galbraith comes across as one who had the courage to decide according to what he believed would be right for America and the values it represents. His point is that he could not tolerate the last act of dishonesty in the dispute that went on for months, because of the loss of credibility for the UN itself among the many Afghans who do not support Karzai. This would destroy also the credibility of the US in the country. Can any number of troops make up for this? Wars in Asia have proven that popular support decides the eventual fate of the mission. Only by standing up for its values can the US not undermine the very principles that the troops are fighting for and the people support. ...
Pew Research Center Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What is behind Pew Research Report finding showing an unacceptable concentration of wealth that endangers democracy. Higher income groups making $244,000 a year in 2024 gained 19 percentage points of the total US Household Income moving from 29% in 1970 to 48% in 2024. About 50% of the nation's income going to 20% of its people and most of that to 2%-5% of the people of the US. The gains meant loss of 17 of these percentage points for middle income households making $106,000 a year that went from 62% in 1970 to 43% in 2024. Another 2 percentage points was suffered by vulnerable Lower Income groups making $35,000 a year who owned 10% of US wealth in 1970 went down to 8%.  The problems of divisiveness in the Nation come from three distinct areas. First money for state financed education for all being put into wars in the Middle East from Reagan through Obama and Trump and some wasted through capital misallocation to low priority investment by faulty capital market allocation. Second the high cost of pharmaceuticals and healthcare putting a heavy burden on low income and middle income households making $35,000 or 106,000 a year. Third the neglect of manufacturing that cutoff the opportunities for middle and lower income households and their one chance to move up the ladder. And the parallel shift of resources to technology and financial sectors that created opportunities for a smaller group of immigrant and higher middle income households with these skills.  These are the sources of America's distress and each problem is being attacked at its source by president Biden- exit from Afghanistan, canceling student loans that are egregious and prevent the investment in education America needs, large sustained investment in manufacturing and new supply chains, antitrust action on tech monopolistic behaviour, redrawing the shape of America's pharmaceutical sector to provide access to medicine to all parts of the population.    ...

Obama's war

Economist Original article ›
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?...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman made a similiar point before the presidential election in the US about Obama's inexperience and using the Afghan war to burnish his credentials. See the link to Friedman. Here Congressman Wilson is shown as using Tip O'Neill's and Democrats opposition to the Reagan support for the contras in Nicaragua as the good fight and the use of the support of the "good" war against the soviets in Afghanistan to ward off accusations from Republican right of weakness against the Soviet Union's expansion.
WSJ Original article ›

Time to Go

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Garrison Keillor asks the President to "lets start making our way out of Afghanistan," in his own inimitable style. He also quotes U.S. Marine Officer Matthew Hoh, who resigned his Foreign Service post- "American families must be reassured their dead have sascrificed for apurpose worthy of futures lost, love vanished, and promised dreams unkept. I have lost confidence such assurances can be made any more." And Keillor summarizes Hoh's reasons and does it so well- that our presence among the Pastun people, the people in the villages, the rural religious people, is only wosening the conflict, the role of the Taliban and Al Quaeda is not the main thing here, the real issues are tribal and cultural. The last phrase deserves repetition- the real issues are tribal and cultural, which no foreign nation can overcome.

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