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 New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Stavins of the environmental economics program at Harvard is cited in this NYT article by Coral Davenport. Stavin says that even with the change in policy favoring fossil under Trump administration the trend is towards using less fossil fuel and this trend is unlikely to change. This makes the claims of Trump that half a million jobs can be created with less regulation of the coal industry and shale oil industry, less likely. Industry is shifting away from coal for economic reasons and investors preferences, say experts. At the same time the progress away from fossil fuels is likely to be inadequate to avoid the worst effects of global warming, says Stavins. The change by industry is reflected in the decisions made by executives such as Nicholas Akins at American Electric Power, Ohio based electric power company. Akins tells NYT that he is making decisions for power generation 20, 30 and 40 years from now, and this assumes some form of carbon control. He says no question but that industry will move forward with cleaner energy and that means closing large coal facilities. The incoming Trump administration does not affect his policy. Another factor away from coal is dictated by economics- the availability of cheap natural gas from hydraulic fracturing. Incentives for renewable sources such as wind, solar, are not likely to change either say experts, because the solar panels and wind turbines are made in Republican and Democratic favoring districts and have support of Republicans in places like Arizona, Texas and Kansas. ...

Money Manager

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Intervew by Deborah Solomon with former Clinton era SEC Commissioner, Arthur Levitt, captures the mood of the public in the USA. Super skepticism and disbelief about public servants, including those of some stature in the past like Levitt. The questions are suggestive of the angst and loss of innocence, and willingness to ask the straight question right out. Solomon tries to get Levitt to take responsibility for what has happened under his and others watch. What do you feel Mr Levitt about the American economic landscape and see 401 K's going up in smoke? Have you changed your spending habits? Are you kicking yourself for not having caught Madoff at his game? After you left your SEC post what led you Mr Levitt to become an adviser to the Carlyle Group, which had ties to the Bush family and defense contracting? This question grates on Levitt. He responds that it is such a Michael Moore like exaggeration, that he was an adviser to the Carlyle Group before he went to Washington. And then Ms Solomon asks the question straight out, saying that frankly she can't understand why the SEC culls its leaders from the world of high stakes investment, when there is this "capture theory" that states that regulators get co-opted by the industries they regulate if one isn't very careful. And the response from Levitt is evasive as he talks about the patriotism of the 4,100 people who served with him at the SEC. Ms Solomon isn't accepting this and calls it boosterism, telling Levitt he hasn't answered her question. Levitt tries another escape route and talks about the European system of gray bureaucrats running government agencies forever, and how refreshing the American system of repotting private sector talent to bring fresh ideas is. Solomon's steers the dialogue in another direction. She reminds him about his father Arthur Levitt Sr. , who was the New York State Comptroller for more than 20 years. Yes, says Levitt Sr.'s son, his father was passionate about defending the interests of pensioners, and his mother was a schoolteacher for 38 years. That gets Levitt reminiscing about his growing up years with his grandparents in Brooklyn, when his grandfather would check 75 used bulbs to see if one worked before using a new one. What has thrift got to do with this Solomon starts to think, after all Levitt is an adviser to the Carlyle Group. Put that in your report, yes, says Solomon, I will. Ms Solomon is getting right down to the point by now. Levitt can reminisce about the thrift about the old days, but the public wants answers. Do you feel you should apologize, does this keep you up at night? Levitt's response: not really, I'll try not to think about it. See the link to Rubin's letter of resignation from his position at Citigroup to CEO Vikram Pandit. Rubin another Clinton era adviser and Treasury Secretary, is being asked similar questions....
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. ...
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? ...
New York Times Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
MIT News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This review of Acemoglu and Robinson in the MIT News is relevant to the situation faced today. The two professors at MIT and University of Chicago, have provided two books relevant to today's crises, the first "When Nations Fail" in 2012 about the need for inclusive nations, and the second "The Narrow Corridor" about the importance of the role of individual and society in sustaining democracy. Their point in the first book "When Nations Fail" in 2012 coming after the financial crisis caused by banking excesses stated that the nations fail when they are not inclusive.  In practice it is about " the system being rigged" to favor some groups as the Republican party and Mr. Trump say has happened. The banks and lobbyists, pharmaceutical industry and lobbyists, tech industry and lobbyists, leading to a system where individual and society are pushed into a corner. Social theorist and economists fail to look at things in practice such as profit seeking behaviours and unethical behaviour that goes unchecked, which continued after the financial crisis into the election of 2016, with charges of rigged systems.  This week Germany's DW.com oped pages covered New York with the statement that treatment in New York costs $15,000 for coronavirus infection illness yet many New York residents in the worst affected neighborhoods would find a $500 expense difficult to bear. Early closing of schools to control infection rate was resisted by Mayor De Blasio of New York because many parents depended on schools for lunches for their kids. The situation had been allowed to deteriorate to that level.  In their second book the MIT authors are saying that the role of the individual and society are important to check that of the state (for example if it is perceived as being rigged by the influence of lobbying of legislators and politicians as the Republican party and Mr. Trump have maintained). It is only when it is checked and there is some tension is there the possibility of democracy and democratic processes, say the two MIT authors. In the absence of this the states and elites of politicians and business interests supporting the leaders and their common behaviours, become a perpetual state, in effect a one party rule of two parties with similar behaviours and interests in the state. A situation that allowed the outshoring of American manufacturing and European manufacturing to China including critical infrastructure, essential infrastructure over 2 decades even over the protests of Mr. Lighthizer since 2010. As the twin crises evolved in Europe of austerity policies after banking excesses in Europe, and the migration crisis of migrants coming from North Africa and the wars in the Middle East, a similar situation began to develop in Europe as the political elites entrenched in Germany, France, and Spain faced new voices. The tensions that arose were constructive bringing in the role of society and individual that the MIT authors say are so necessary for the narrow corridor of democratic process to function. New parties emerged in France with Macron's La Republique En Marche, Podemos and Ciudadanos in Spain, and in Germany with the SPD and CDU shrinking till the revival of Merkel for her handling of the pandemic. Coming from an intuitive way born from experience in East Germany, Germany's recent president Joachim Gauck, civil rights activist  came up with the same ideas. He is a Lutheran pastor in former East Germany who struggled against the government of the German Democratic Republic (former communist East Germany) for a role for individual and society against the state. We profiled and quoted him in "The Way Forward"  column in Lyrarc.com. Gauck's point was that  having diverse groups in the conversation is important, not excluding others from outside in the conversation is important. Gauck called  debate "the oxygen of democracy,"  that needed to be maintained.  Genuine democratic process is hard to sustain, it happens only when the role of individual and society is given prominence, so that only a narrow corridor exists for democracy, a narrow space in which can be sustained only if the effort is there, the goodwill is there, and the grace of Divine Providence.  It is fragile and it is critical to sustain.   In this sense the sometimes heated debate in the U.S. and Europe, Asia and Latin America about words such as- austerity, community, solidarity, migration, New York Mayor De Blasio's choice between school lunches and infections, about infrastructure, pharmaceutical prices, infrastructure, outshoring, jobs sent overseas, manufacturing locally, made in USA or made in India or made in France, Atmannirbhar Bharat, misallocation of capital starving health and public services, are all relevant and essential for democracy. This includes the discussion to avoid use of the military in protests in American cities in the middle of a pandemic which just crossed the 2 million mark in cases in the U.S., that was taken up by Defense Secretary Esper. In it lies the hope for democracy and many voices. Der Spiegel recent look at the pandemic how it happened in China, closes with the line- you need more than one voice in society. A constant reminder that many voices be heard, counseling patience, but also that wise choices be made with divine providence.           ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Finnish president Niinisto provides a new understanding of Mr. Putin and the thinking that led to the invasion of Ukraine. Mr. Niinisto has an advantage having spoken with Mr. Putin countless times says this report in WSJ, and spoke again to Mr. Putin on May 14 to tell him that Finland was planning to join NATO. Putin simply responded that Russia does not pose a threat and "you made a mistake." He says it was not the Finnish way to not call Putin and tell him directly, and that not doing so would be like sneaking away around the corner. Mr. Niinisto says WSJ, has a rare insight into the thinking that led to the behavior of Mr. Putin in launching the war. Here are some insights from this report by Adam O'Neal of WSJ. On the situation in Ukraine Niinisto says " I would be a lot more worried about Ukrainians than about how Russians feel." Mr. Putin's willingness to see Ukraine's industrial centers, its infrastructure and cities destroyed, turning them into moon craters in the east compares with the relative ease of life in Moscow, St Petersburg and other cities, cushioned by Russian oil and gas exports and financial reserves. As a student of Finland's long and violent history with Russia Mr. Niinisto has some unique insights into Russian thinking. He tells WSJ's Adam O'Neal  that if a Russian is angry, yes, be careful, but if he's calm, be even more careful. The Russian invasion of Finland led to loss of 200,000 lives in 1939-40, and another 250,000 Russian lives in fighting between 1941-1944. Finland has 300,000 men or women in military reserves and men between 18 years and 60 years are called up for military service with the Finnish Constitution requiring every citizen to contribute to national defense. Recently Finland ordered 64 F-35 fighter jets from the US. What led to the invasion of Ukraine by Mr. Putin? Niinisto says that "somehow Mr. Putin has a feeling that Russia was betrayed in the 90's by the West. Over time this thinking continued feeding the negativity says Niinisto and led to the thinking that Russia could be betrayed once more.  Another aspect of Mr. Putin which was covered during the last decade of relations with Ukraine in Lyrarc, was his perception that Ukraine under various leaders before Zelensky was basically led by corrupt leaders including one president he supported but lost power in the last decade. Mr. Putin saw protests in Kviv and Lviv that ousted a president he supported recently as orchestrated from outside. This led to thinking that Ukrainian nationalism did not exist and he believed that Kviv would not be defended and would fall easily within a week or weeks. As his nationalist perceptions and that of a small group that included his partner in office Mr. Medvedev became stronger in the last ten years Mr. Putin made the decision to take the option for invasion in the thinking that the response of the US and Germany would not be to support Ukraine with arms and other aid. The CDU and SPD was perceived as weak in Germany and Scholz not seen as able to cut down oil and gas imports to the EU. Biden was seen as not willing to stop Russia by taking on a difficult conflict because of China allying itself with Russia, considering China's interconnections with the American economy. The timing was seen as good considering that this level of dependence on oil and gas imports of Europe on Russia would never be the case after planned shifts to renewable energy. The Russian economy was cushioned by its $620 billion in reserves and by the world's need for energy even as the shift to renewable was taking place. This window my have induced Mr. Putin to take what appeared to be a rational decision that ignored the common feelings of humanity of risking the destruction of a brotherly people that spoke Russian, prayed in Orthodox churches, and where Russia as a state started in the year 1000. Cambridge historian Brendan Simms in his new book "Europe : The Struggle for Supremacy 1453 to the present," has shown all European powers susceptible of reasoning and calculation of this type in their wars since 1453 in the struggle for supremacy in Europe up to the present- the Portuguese, the Spanish, the Dutch, the British, the French, the Germans, the Russians, the Danes, the Swedes. This also led to British and French empires in Asia and Africa with subjugation of Asian and African people. The Second World War had created the perception that somehow this had changed after the loss of millions of lives- that was the perception of Merkel a pastor's daughter who had grown up in the former communist state of GDR in East Germany, and of SPD leader Steinmeier who felt strongly about the loss of lives from the Nazi invasion. Merkel and Steinmeier built the relationship of Germany with Russia that has collapsed under Germany's new leader Scholz and Habeck-Baerbock of the Greens party. Merkel and Steinmeier also built the trade relationship with China that also faces collapse with China's support of Russia under Mr. Jinping, and the unexpected shifts in Chinese leadership and policies from that pursued by premier Deng and his successors in 1990-2010 of interconnected economic links with US and EU. Mr. Scholz, the new chancellor of Germany has Brendan Simms book on Europe on his reading list for 2022 as he ponders over the lessons of 2022 and the pandemic. Mr. Biden with long experience in the Senate of the US has a memory and understanding of what happened since World War II, how America got to this point, and what it will have to do to bring back the American spirit to the Free World that America has led for most of the last two hundred years. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
It is not clear how China's president Jinping's support for the idea of "China Dream," -of China as a world power on a level with the U.S.- should be interpreted. China will increase its defense budget and continue its efforts to be the dominant power in its region, even as the U.S. and Japan begin to build closer ties in the Pacific. Is it simply a new assertiveness for its rights in relation to territorial disputes with Japan, and a continuation of a policy of peaceful development of earlier leaders. The move could also be an effort to build close ties with the military as the new leadership of Jinping-Keqiang prepares to make major changes in the economy. A speech in Dec. 2012 to Communist party officials in Guangdong province by Jinping, on how the lack of unity with the military led to the collapse of the Soviet Union under Gorbachev, could throw light on the thinking. In a few days an old party was gone, as he put it. This also follows the Bo Xilai episode which involved contacts with the military and the risks of division in the military and political leadership....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the NYT says Russian president Putin is ending up with the very situation he has sought to avoid- NATO forces right next to Russia's borders. Not something the western alliance intended but a result of aggressive moves by Mr. Putin in the Ukraine crisis, and NATO's response of having a rapid deployment force in Eastern Europe and the Baltic states. It says this is not in the best interest of Russia or the western alliance.
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Sabotage of two tankers in the Persian Gulf and reports of activity of Iranian proxy forces in Iraq and Syria have led to an American response with the dispatch of a aircraft carrier and other forces to the region.  This report in the NYT says Defense Secretary Shanahan has prepared plans for deployment of American forces in the region with one plan calling for 120,000 troops to be dispatched to the region. As president Trump is against American involvement in land wars in distant places, the force is designed as a precaution in case of an Iranian attack through proxy forces in Syria or Iraq and not for a land operation. National Security Adviser Bolton has taken a strong position on Iran since the days of the Bush administration. The U.S. withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal, the sanctions on Iranian oil, are part of a new policy of the Trump administration. The European Union countries have followed a policy of preserving the nuclear deal of 2015, even though the U.S. is pressuring EU countries. The oil sanction have led to a sharp drop in oil exports and is hurting the Iranian economy. President Rouhani of Iran says Iran may withdraw from parts of the Iran nuclear deal and the Iranian response is leading to heightened tensions in the region.  It was only recently that the Democratic party Obama administration pursued the Iranian nuclear deal with opposition from Republicans in Congress and skepticism of Israel. The election of president Trump who says the deal was a bad one has reversed U.S. policy leading to a complete change in policy and a possible confrontation with Iran. U.S. policy can veer back and forth depending on the party or president in power who completely different perceptions of the region. Obama had sharp difference with Israel and Saudi Arabia, and a different perception of Iran. Trump and Bolton see Iran as a threat to the U.S. After Iran shipped most of its nuclear fuel out of the country in 2016 in exchange for lifting of economic sanctions under president Obama's nuclear deal it would take over a year for new uranium enrichment facilities to produce the materials for a nuclear bomb, according to this report in the NYT. When the Obama administration negotiated with Iran the window had shrunk to a few months.   ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Washington Post's editorial board offers insights on how the situation in Syria and Iraq deteriorated under the Obama administration's policies.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The shooting of former deputy prime minister Boris Nemtsov, a leader of the opposition in Russia, in Red Square, Moscow, on Feb. 28, 2015.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A very relevant comment about the media coverage on Putin's negotiations in Beijing for supplying natural gas to China, by a reader of the WSJ, Frank Peel. He points out China and Russia do not share the same goals and Putin talked about the Chinese as tough negotiators after signing the deal. The price as a "commercial secret" is because its years, could be 5, before gas actually flows to China from Siberian fields. Russia, is a smaller oil based economy- having failed to make the transition to a diversified economy- and very susceptible to the economic conditions in Europe and the U.S., as the 2008 crisis showed with very steep drops in output. President Obama has also pointed to this. Russia also shares with Argentina the tendency for elites- in the case of Russia a newly created oligarchy of business interests under Putin and his predecessor- to shift capital out of the country, making it even more susceptible to loss of value of the currency, the ruble. Devaluation of the ruble experienced under Yeltsin was severely traumatic for Russia, and the head of Russia's central bank went on state television recently to reassure ordinary Russians that this would not happen. The rainy day sovereign fund of over $400 billion acts as a cushion for shocks in short periods, but sustained loss of foreign investment would damage prospects for future improvements in standards of living or economic growth....
Washington Post Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Declan Walsh describes the role of the military in Egypt, Turkey and Pakistan which has marginalized political parties and democratic process. The shift in Pakistan towards a democratic state shows the limits of the military's role in politics. Throughout Asia and Latin America, beyond just the Arab world, S. Korea, Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Colombia, the movement is towards democratic processes of government. As political parties mature a more centrist position was adopted in Chile, Brazil, Argentina, and Islamist parties in Turkey, a similar trend is likely in the rest of the Muslim world as political parties are able to mature and deliver in economic terms and improving living conditions. The Saudis and UAE may be able to deliver in economic terms because of oil prices and supplies, each country and the people in the region has to determine how it will tackle its economic problems and move forward or fall behind in a rapidly developing global economy. Egypt, Pakistan, Turkey and India are no exception....
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Out of the rubble of failed policies, lack of far sighted leadership, and the failure of Middle Eastern elites and leaders, must arise the right way forward.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›

Lessons of Libya

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
During the early weeks of the Libyan people's struggle the Wall Street Journal was one of the rare voices that stood up for freedom in Libya, saying the U.S. had to have the will and was not so overstretched that it could make a difference working with its allies in NATO. It took some time for the Obama administration to make up its mind by which time the Gaddafi forces would have entered Benghazi. It was the leadership of Sarkozy of France and Cameron of Britain that made the decisive difference at the right time. And as the tide turned it was the young people of Libya who could be seen in the video footage who showed bravery against the organized heavily armed forces of the Gaddafi regime. The lesson from the U.S. support for the Libyan people's movement for democratic government is that the U.S. can make a moral difference and a strategic difference when it follows the right instincts that have guided the country since its founding.

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