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.


Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Kevin Maurer looks back at 15 years of covering Afghanistan since 2004, and asks was it worth it.  The conflict has cost 145,000 lives for the U.S. period of the war alone. Not counting the war in which the Russians were involved in the decade before the U.S. involvement. In fact the Russian involvement in Afghanistan was costly enough to hasten the collapse of the Soviet Union and bring Gorbachev to power to unwind the war and make the changes that led to the collapse of the Berlin Wall.  2400 U.S. servicemen dead and 20,000 Americans wounded. The cost to the U.S. is $737 billion for this war, according to a report in 2018 from Brown University's Costs of War Project. Just as the Soviet Union showed the damage from this war the U.S. has seen the cost of this war and foreign entanglement in another war that started accidentally with international interventions in the Iran-Iraq region as a cost that was borne with consequences. This includes the neglect of infrastructure and the damage to the middle class prosperity built up in the 1950's and 1960's after the Second World War. The U.S. got into this war with 9/11 attacks on New York City. By 2010 what began as a war fought by a few Special Operations teams turned into a war with troop levels reaching 100,000. Presidents Bush and Obama both failed to end the war by winning it. In 2014 finally combat operations stopped and American troops mainly conducted anti-terrorism operations and trained Afghan forces. In recent years the war has gradually disappeared from the national discussion in the U.S. and is barely talked about. President Trump wants to end the war even if it means talking to the Taliban and negotiations directly with the Taliban are ongoing.  One result of this war is the aversion to costly international entanglements and the highly unpopular nature of the conflicts. There are serious costs of the conflict in terms of neglected domestic priorities including infrastructure, loss of U.S. technological edge in key industries, and the competition from China, an the investments in health, education, services that were not made, the increase in inequalities and the diminishing of the middle class. The global financial crisis of 2008, the result of faulty banking, added an economic dimension through the loss of middle class savings in the U.S., worsening the financial situation of the middle class in the U.S.    ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
German views on Trump's economic policies are described by DW.com's Jeffrey Michels. German business sees a Trump presidency increasing the uncertainty affecting the global economy, a kind of second hit after the hit from Brexit. There is concern about the $114 billion euros in exports made by Germany to the U.S., because of Trump's increasingly protectionist policies. Trump could move to the centre, but so far these populist policies have helped Trump win in the primaries, and this is unlikely to change in the election campaign,  says DW.com.  Trump opposes the TTIP trade agreement with European Union, and because of opposition in Germany, these negotiations are likely to flounder. Even under a Clinton presidency there is little support for more trade agreements, and economist Krugman points out that most of the gains from free trade have already been made. 

POLITICO Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The European Union has a massive surplus of $147 billion with the U.S. President Trump is making this an issue in trade negotiations. A 20% tariff on German cars imported into the U.S. is part of the tariff response from the Trump administration. 

To settle this dispute Germany is making new offers with the visit of European Commission president, Jean Claude Juncker, to Washington. France sees little room for compromise as it sees Trump's efforts designed to break European unity by driving a wedge between France and Germany.

The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Juan Manuel Santos, former president of Colombia helped negotiate the peace with the FARC guerilla movement in Colombia. Here he points out the changes in South America that have led to the end of guerilla conflicts. This achievement comes after extended conflicts that affected Peru, Colombia, central American countries Nicaragua, San Salvador, Guatemala, following conflicts in Brazil and Argentina that led to the formation of military dictatorships that fought battles with guerilla movements. This goes back to the Castro movement in Cuba against the dictatorship of Batista, and the Cold War during the Krushchev days of the Soviet Union in the sixties. Much of this has ended, yet Santos draws a conclusion that the Western hemisphere is in peace that ignores the legacy of these conflicts. In many places the drug trade has simply moved to places further north, to destabilize governments in central America. The guerillas have become part of the drug trade as ways to integrate them into society have lagged behind or not worked. As a result life is difficult in central America leading to migration northward, similar to migration to Europe from war torn regions in North Africa. Mexico has continued as a key part of the drug trade affecting rural communities in places previously untouched by drugs such as New Hampshire and places in the northeastern U.S., even after a decade of war against drug trafficking gangs by Mexican president Calderon. It also destabilizes Mexican politics such as the murder of 42 students in Guerrero province for civil activism. It is also destabilizing a major democracy such as the U.S. as Donald Trump has sought support from communities devastated by drugs in the U.S., and sought support for a racist approach to politics. For these reasons the more visible conflicts of North and South America are now replaced with a less visible but no less insidious and dangerous mix in politics that has entered civil life and discourse across the region.  ...
DW.COM Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump is to announce U.S. withdrawal from the 2015 Paris climate change agreement. The process of withdrawing is one that takes 4 years to complete, putting off a final decision till after the presidential election of 2020.

The New York Times Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Economist Paul Krugman points out the risks of a trade war in the tariffs announced for steel and aluminium by president Trump. Yet he accepts that he advocated stronger action on China's currency in 2009-2010 when the U.S. economy was weaker. In the past on the TPP agreement proposed by president Obama, Krugman said that it would have an insignificant impact as most of the gains on trade were already made. Here Krugman is critical of the language used by president Trump about trade wars being "easy."  This is taken out of context though as president Trump is saying that it is easy in the context of a country enjoying a $100 billion surplus with the U.S., because that country is going to have incentives to maintain a good trading relationship with the U.S. Essentially this means that the steel industry in the U.S. benefits. China also benefits as it closes many of the older steel plants that led to overproduction. This would reduce overcapacity in China's steel industry, a problem China's economic planners see as a priority. China already is making the shift to higher technology products and this process will be accelerated, as it puts less emphasis on steel and metals as it did in its earlier stage of development. As a result contrary to textbook economics this has the potential to be a win-win solution for the U.S. and China in the long run. So little was done under the Bush and Obama administrations to manage trading relationships with other countries so that the interests of small communities across the U.S. were protected from unfair trade- that Reagan administration trade expert Robert Lighthizer took up the cause of the U.S.,workers in these communities. Surveys showed U.S. public opinion also had shifted among educated, professionals and middle class on this issue by 2015, against unfair trade that hurt U.S. interests. Robert Lighthizer is now the Trade Representative for the U.S. in the Trump administration. Reports in the WSJ about the discussion within the Trump economic council, show Gary Cohn favored not imposing the tariffs on steel and aluminum. Lighthizer advocated the tariffs and was able to convince the president.  For Trump this presents a win-win situation, as a mild response by China -and other trading nations that have enjoyed a favorable situation in the past -with its huge surplus and favorable trading relationship with the U.S. would present a win for the president. Economist Krugman accepts this when he says tariffs in the current context of the trading field- that is more favorable to other countries- are not such a big deal, only the use of such policy that is likely to endanger world trade.  As in much of the debate that takes place this adds to the headlines today yet provides delayed and limited relief to communities across the U.S. devastated by world trade as documented by experts who studied trade patterns and their effect on regions across the U.S.  As the WSJ points out in one report the trade deficit itself may continue to grow under president Trump because of other factors. The U.S. dollar surged 8% during the last 2 years of the Obama administration with the economic recovery underway. With Trump's election win the dollar surged another 3%. This may play a bigger role in the direction of the trade deficit than the new steel tariffs announced by president Trump. Workers and unions matter. As TPP pushed by Democratic party president Obama was opposed by the unions, and by the auto industry (workers and auto companies) in the midwestern states which suffered a hollowing out in the last decade. A WSJ survey after the election showed Clinton received 56% support from union workers in 2018 compared to 65% for president Obama in the 2012 election. Some of that erosion in support may come from Obama's TPP stand fervently opposed by the unions and workers in the auto industry. A similar situation took place in Ontario with hollowing out of the auto industry in this large industrial state in Canada and led to the rejection of the Conservative government and election of the Liberal Party under Justin Trudeau. This lesson is so far lost in the Democratic Party's debate.     ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What has happened that makes it so hard for Democrats Biden who stood on a picket line for the UAW autoworkers union, Harris fighting for workers, that they cannot easily convince workers that they are on their side? It is because compared to 1980 not the lowest income groups but the "downwardly mobile" white and other groups without college degrees have taken the brunt of the loss of manufacturing jobs. It is why the "zero-sum" stories of the former president have appeal to some workers who have lost the most from deindustrialization of the US. Even though Biden, and Harris, have fought hard and are putting in place the policies for the fight to reindustrialize America by taking old plants and modernizing them one by one across the country. No one has ever done this before including years in which the former president was in office. In these visual graphs it is easy to see the sharp decline in incomes and status in society of workers without college degrees as the economy changed after 1980 sending steel, auto and other industries to Asia. By 2024 these workers lives had been upended by the loss of these industries and the hope for income and place in society that existed in 1980. Every US president from Reagan through Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump had failed to address this. Biden was the first president to take this up but too much has happened with to reverse this in 4 years, the pandemic, inflation from loss of supply chains to Asia, and wages not keeping up with cost of living.  NYT's Badger, Gebeloff and Bhatia show analysis of the economy, incomes and jobs in 1980 vs the economy, incomes and jobs in 2024 for persons with a college degree and without a college degree.It shows the sharp differences in the eastern Midwestern states of Michigan, Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio and Pennsylvania over 4 decades of job losses, loss of income status and self worth for men without college degrees. With their jobs in manufacturing disappearing also disappearing was the middle class lifestyle- of owning a house, having a cottage or boat in the countryside, and sending kids to college. ...
BBC News Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Noonan of the WSJ says it is important that cooler heads prevail in the Korean missile crisis. She says it is important that cool and calm voices prevail for the U.S.- the voices of the generals surrounding president Trump- McMaster, Kelly and Mattis. The statements by president Trump are seen as reckless. Any comparison to the Cuban missile crisis with rational players on both sides is refuted by Noonan. Krushchev and Kennedy cannot be compared to Trump and Kim Jong-Un. The U.S. had conversations with Ambassador Dobrynin and Foreign Minister Gromyko of the Soviet Union at the time, the U.S. has no contacts with the North Korean government. The situation is vastly different and as retired Gen. James Thurman, head of U.S. forces in South Korea 2011-2013, points out in a NYT report, the dangers of miscalculation are high.

Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Seen as a rural urban divide, less educated and well educated and tech workers the situation in France looks similar to that in the US in the elections of 2016 and 2020. With business in the US and European Union shifting manufacturing to China and the governments neglecting rural areas, decline in standard of living for people on pensions that have not kept up with the cost of living, the situation in France as in the US is decades in the making. Bernie Sanders and Melenchon were appealing in different ways to younger people yearning for change and a system that would correct these changes.   Melenchon coming this close to less than one percentage point of Le Pen in the first round of French elections shows that a straight Macron Le Pen version of what has happened is an oversimplification, just as seeing the changes in America under president Biden vs Trump would be a simplification, as voters for Sanders who voted for Biden are changing the Biden agenda and setting America on a new path. A path to reshoring jobs that were sent to China, rebuilding American manufacturing, increasing workers wages and restoring workers leverage for higher wages, investing $2 trillion in child care, housing, supporting worker incomes and families, supporting older Americans on pensions. In the same way beneath the idea that nothing has happened after the yellow vest protests for cost of living, that has not only not gone away- but increased in the concern for cost of living in this election with the surging inflation - new developments are happening.  Even as Germany under Merkel appeared not be changing in 2020- 1 year after Merkel the situation will have changed completely to address social concerns that were ignored earlier and to invest in infrastructure in a big way. Behind this is a fundamental change that is taking place. Facing a challenge from totalitarian states the fabric of society in the free world, the US, Germany, France, other EU states, India, and nations in the free world will have to respond with changes that restore the fabric of society to what it was before this kind of fracturing, bringing all parts of society together to bring all the energies in place for rebuilding, investing in infrastructure, restoring local manufacturing and renewal. It requires a unified effort to be put in place to respond in the right way.     ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US has expanded access to products from China and other countries gradually leading to a loss of US manufacturing over 2 decades. Today both Republicans and Democrats see the dangers of such economic policies for American workers and families. Mr. Trump first raised this issue that has been raised for a decade or more. Mr. Biden realizes what this means for the future of the Democratic party with the loss of manufacturing communities in the US. For this reason the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework and new economic alliances in Asia are being built in a different way. This may not seem much today but as the US shifts its investment, and the European Union shifts its investment, to home countries and countries in Asia and Latin America, Africa, till 2030- 2040 over two decades this will create huge opportunities for the US, Europe, India and other partners in the free world. It is a mistake to think that a better life for the people of the free world can be built on the mistaken idea that the loss of American manufacturing communities was somehow acceptable. The sudden failure of the trade policy with China after the loss of so many American manufacturing communities shows that in the long run only policies that benefit both American workers and foreign workers will work and deserve support. The return of US manufacturing and European manufacturing to US and Europe must therefore be the very foundation of our effort and with it can evolve the building of manufacturing communities in friends in the free world such as India and other Asian, Latin American and African countries.  For India this is the kind of policy that Mohandas Gandhi would have chosen because of his broad and deep knowledge of the world and how it works best, he would have seen policies that benefit American manufacturing communities needed as much as building manufacturing communities in India. The ripping up of manufacturing communities in the US and Europe and what it has done to American and European workers and families, as has happened with globalization, would have been abhorrent to Mohandas Gandhi. This is why the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework and economic alliance in Asia starts with the right principle even in its basic form, with the hard work of all and creative ideas creating the right solution for the Free World as it evolves to 2040. With respect for all, opportunity for all, confidence of all, efforts of all. ...

Why India avoids alliances

The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This Economist article looks at India-China relations and the Wuhan Summit between prime minister Modi and president Xi Jinping. It sees India's reluctance to follow a containment strategy in an historical light from the period in which India followed a non-alignment policy in the early post independence period under prime minister Nehru. During the period of the Eisenhower administration with Secretary of State John Foster Dulles India adhered to a strict nonalignment policy avoiding choosing sides in the Cold War. As a result U.S. policy tilted towards Pakistan during the Eisenhower administration. A balance was restored under president Kennedy, with Adlai Stevenson a close friend of India.  The short Sino-Indian war of 1962 led to a situation in which the U.S. backed India and improvement of relations. A semblance of non-alignment in foreign relations continued under Nehru's daughter Indira Gandhi. By 1990 with the opening of the Indian economy to foreign investment, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the integration of China into the global economy, a new period of good bilateral relations with the U.S. and Europe was maintained. In 2017 the potential for a conflict in Doklam, Bhutan revived fears from 1962 in India. In 2018 After the U.S. administration of Donald Trump and Trade Representative Lighthizer imposed trade tariffs on China and restrictions on export of advanced technologies China pursued a policy of conciliatory relations with India. China's relations also improved with Japan and South Korea as the U.S. policy was unanticipated and seen as a significant change that would seriously affect China's economy. India's response was to pursue a policy of good relations with China and the U.S., even as the economies of the U.S. and India were drawn closer in India's pursuit of modernization.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Many of the towns with manufacturing plants in 1992 have switched sides from Democratic in 1992 to Republican in 2016. This explains Donald Trump's success - he tapped into discontent with Democrats who supported trade agreements such as TPP and did little to take up the cause of workers in areas hit hard by foreign manufacturing and imports. It also explains why Republicans are now favoring protectionism and Democrats supporting free trade, traditionally the opposite was true.   As the U.S. manufacturing workforce diminished in size from 15% of the U.S. workforce in 1992 to 8% in 2017, it shifted from cities with unions to blue collar suburbs. Factories in traditional Democratic places were closed down and these cities ceased to be manufacturing centres. Pittsburgh ceased to be a major manufacturing centre as manufacturing jobs declined by 37000, and service industries increased by 168,000. This resulted in the manufacturing heartland going through Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, through Ohio and the Carolinas and into the deep South. In these places whites without college education took up manufacturing jobs and identified with the Republican party's focus on social issues and abortion restrictions. So big is the shift that labor unions that represented 20% of manufacturing workers in 1992 represented only 9% of workers in 2017, according to economists at Georgia State University. Bill Clinton won 49% of working class counties where workers were at least 25% of the workforce. By 2016 the 860 such counties were down to 320 about two thirds now gone, and Mr. Trump took 95% of these counties. The change is dramatic. Voters that identify Democrat are now from cities, more educated, and less likely to be identified as blue collar. As the economies of these cities has shifted to finance and service industries, these residents have not accomodated the conservative cultural views. and have shifted to embracing more immigration, LGBT, gay rights on social issues. Before there was one mention in the 1992 Democratic platform of LGBT says the Journal, now there is 19 mention of rights for LGBT. Republicans have now shifted from privatizing Social Security, and now support some infrastructure spending. Republican platform now calls for free trade that is fair trade. And this has support from the left and the right. Factory owners and factory workers are united in their opposition to free trade rules that hit American factories. Union leaders say the Democratic Party left us. The Democratic Party gets more support and identifies more with Silicon Valley- Mr. Obama's TPP trade agreement benefitted Silicon Valley more than it did auto plants. The change happened over many years and Mr Trump capitalized on this. ...
The Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The close alliance between the CDU and the CSU in Bavaria appears to be unraveling. The immigrants at German borders have dwindled down a trickle, about 11,000 immigrants today compared to the wave of immigrants entering Germany in 2015. The CSU's prime minister in Bavaria Mr. Soder and the Federal Interior minister from the CSU Mr. Seehofer, blame the conflict between the two parties on the 2015 decision by Merkel on immigration. The German ARD broadcaster shows 62% of Germans favor stronger action on immigration. The pressure on the CSU comes from the gains by the anti-immigration party AfD in recent national elections. The CSU hopes that by shifting its own position on immigration to a standoff with the CDU and Merkel's position it can hold off the Afd in the elections in Bavaria in October 2018. The pressure on Merkel comes from members in the CDU and from the SPD leadership, which have accomodated some of the criticism of open immigration to reduce the immigrants at German borders, yet now see the need to meet any challenges to Merkel's authority. This is why the head of the SPD, Ms. Nahles called Mr. Soder's push for a confrontation on the immigration issue as acting "like a bonzai Trump." The CDU party leaders in Bavaria call for a "axis of the willing" joining leaders of the governments in Austria and Hungary. and the newly elected government in Italy to impose immediate controls on immigration at the borders. Merkel says she is open to different points of view within the CDU-CSU alliance, but action should be based on keeping the European Union together, and be taken after EU meetings in Brussels. Will this result in a fall of the government? Angela Merkel has adapted to the changing situation on immigration leading to the small trickle in new immigrants at German borders today. Even if the AfD anti immigration party joins the CSU the percentage of the vote for the AfD is mainly in the eastern part of Germany, and CSU in Bavaria, with 12.6% voting AfD in 2017 elections, and about 7% voting CSU mainly in Bavaria. This compares with the Left at 8.9%, Greens at 9.2%, and SPD at 20.5% for a combined 38.6% of the vote that favor Merkel's new coalition policies. This combined with the 25% of the vote gained by Merkel's CSU party gives it about 64% of the vote and about 489 seats in the 709 seat German parliament. A test of Merkel's authority is not likely to be sustained. By making this a pro-European position Merkel has shifted the issue from one of immigration which is now minimal and one on which Merkel has adapted her policies to a stand on Germany as leader with France of the European Union. At this particularly sensitive time when Germany and France are negotiating with the U.S. on trade and Britain on Brexit, German public opinion is likely to consider the impact of new elections and more uncertainty as not good for Germany. With the SPD, Left, Greens and CSU having 64% of the vote, and the anti immigrant parties CSU, AFD about 20% concentrated in the less economically developed eastern part and in Bavaria, the chances that Merkel's position would be weakened or her authority challenged is very unlikely.   ...
The Financial Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
There is a sense of cognitive dissonance in the states of former East Germany, known as the GDR or German Democratic Republic in the Soviet Union period from 1950's to 1990. The 5 states that formed the GDR continued to build close ties with Russia after the fall of the Berlin Wall, in the perception that this would build good long term relations. The crisis in Ukraine with border states of the Soviet Union opting in favor of close ties with the European Union and not Russia have disrupted the economic relations between the Federal Republic of Germany and Russia. As long as Russia needed the economic ties to build its economy and standard of living the political issues posed by NATO expansion and EU expansion were set aside by Putin and political parties within Russia. The very ties that were supposed to usher in an era of peace in Europe helped strengthen the Russian and Chinese economies. Leading to a point where these two economies were strong enough by 2021 in the midst of the waning pandemic to  assert themselves on political issues where serious differences existed such as expansion of NATO and Taiwan. When the economic relations such as making China a manufacturing powerhouse  was the path taken by American and European business in 1990's, business interests were focused on the declining quality and high wages demanded by unions and workers in the US and Germany. This could be personally witnessed at Apple's factory in Colorado Springs where quality was failing badly in the 1990's. Apple when Steve Jobs returned in 1997 adopted a China manufacturing strategy when its manufacturing operations in the US failed to deliver the quality and cost structure needed for it to expand. The high margins with low costs of manufacturing in China was the strategy adopted by Steve Jobs to compete with Microsoft and turbocharge its expansion. Soon other companies followed. A similar process happened in economic ties with Russia on a smaller scale. Two decades of such expansion whittled down American manufacturing, hurt American workers, hurt European manufacturing and European workers.  This process could not continue- yellow vest protests in France, the protest vote in US midwestern states in recent elections, the protest votes in German elections and fragmentation of parties, made this clear. The US imposed trade tariffs on Chinese products and moved to restrict flow of technologies to China under the Trump administration, accelerated by the Biden administration. President Xi was once of the view that China's ties with the US were important "thousand fold" in the period as late as 2010. Yet this lopsided trade relationship was not beneficial to American workers or American interests as a technologically advanced leader. It is true that American workers and engineers at Apple had failed to ensure American quality competitiveness in the 1980's into 1990's, yet no advanced country or its business can come up with a false narrative that cedes its manufacturing leadership and jobs for the working class of its country. That false narrative is being challenged today by Mr. Biden, Mr. Scholz, and all American and German political parties, and by Mr. Modi with Atman Nirbhar Bharat for local manufacturing. The integration one sees of the port of Hamburg as Chinese export hub with China's economy is one aspect of what has happened. A new leadership is taking its place in Europe and in America that sees clearly the false narrative. The visit of the new Danish prime minister to India is the beginning of the effort to set up a new logistics relationship with South and South East Asia, as Denmark's Maersk is a world leader in shipping logistics for exports and manufacturing. The planned Noida logistics center outside of New Delhi under Gati Shakti integrated development is part of the change happening today as a new supply chain is being built. The unwinding of the one sided trade relationship with China, and its related relationship on energy with Russia, led to the changing perception in Russia and China of the value of the relationship. Political relations superseded economic and cultural relations during Putin's second phase and Xi's second phase with assertive attitudes on NATO, and on Hong Kong, Taiwan under Xi and Putin 2.0. As could be expected Germany and the US were caught flat footed as leaders who were cast in the mold of Putin as a Soviet representative in Dresden, and Xi with his father leading the Communist struggle in the 1930's and 1940's against Chiangkaishek, acted in ways that reflected the Soviet period. Chiang left for Taiwan in 1948 when Mao-tse-tung setup the People's Republic of China. Taiwan and Hong Kong remained important in the perceptions of Xi 2.0, in the effort to build "China Dream" and erase last vestiges of what in Soviet times were seen as western colonialism. US and EU particularly Business and the new IT telecom Business failed to grasp these matters, and historical events such as the opium wars of the 1850's. Business and cultural interests lacked both the inclination to learn and the knowledge of these events in Chinese history and its relations with colonial powers Britain and Japan, and also Russia. In 1900 the Boxer rebellion against ceding Chinese ports to colonial powers Britain, Japan, Russia, ended with permanent colonial settlements in Hong Kong, Shanghai, Tsingtao, other Chinese ports. Chinese rejuvenation in the mind of leaders such as Xi from the second generation of Communist leadership, means putting this behind, leading to the action taken in Hong Kong. In some ways as some observers have commented it is as much a problem of the sluggishness of American and European thinking, particularly business interests including in Taiwan, post British Hong Kong, and ignorance of recent Chinese history which was mistakenly thought not to exist or forgotten. This is as much of a problem as the action taken by Putin and moves by Xi Jinping. The great democracies such as India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, were ignored as American and European business interests integrated the American and German economies with China's. In terms of population the population of these regions and related parts of South East Asia such as Malaysia and Vietnam which have a shared cultural history is about 1.5 times the population of China. Travelling through the parts of India's largest state Uttar Pradesh, an Madhya Pradesh one finds how much American and European business interests have failed both their own interests, their own workers and failed the great democracies of the world, by not only not investing in the democracies of Asia, and also of Africa and Latin America and bought into a narrative of China which no longer holds true and may never have been true all along. This is starkly evident in a once in a century pandemic in these great democracies of the world. These democracies have been left to fend for themselves during the pandemic and their leaders facing false narratives in the media such as the BBC and American media outlets even on issues such as vaccination of the largest part of the world's people.           ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
France's Foreign Minister Ayrault says of Boris Johnson: "He lied a lot to the British. Now, he is the one with his back against the wall." He sees missing in Johnson the "clear, credible and reliable" person with whom he can negotiate. Ray Stegner, deputy chairman of Germay's Social Democrat Party says "May looks weaker after such a choice of personnel. Now he is negotiating Brexit. Enjoy the trip." In China he is seen as a celebrity not a serious person. Bildt, ZDF, see in this a part of British humor. Jurgen Hardt, foreign policy spokesman for Christian Democrats Party in Germany had a different take on Johnson- seeing this as an astute move because if the government one day comes to conclude that Brexit should not be completed then having Johnson on board to explain it to the people would guarantee support in her party and with the people of England. In her first speech May emphasized that she was a "Unionist." Her first important meeting was with Nicola Sturgeon of Scotland and made Scotland's agreement necessary before invoking Article 50. Her talk of "burning injustices" for the poor and the underprivileged also goes to address the root of the problems behind the Leave vote. By having Johnson on board she can focus on the issues that really matter and which were on the minds of people in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland- to ensure that the economic system works for all.   ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Chris Cillizza of the WP says there simply is no "new Trump," as mentioned in the meeting with president Nieto of Mexico. The speech on the same day in Pheonix, Arizona, following the meeting with Nieto, showed the Trump of the election primaries in which he talked about the criminal activities by undocumented immigrants and about building the wall on the Mexican border. Cillizza says Trump had left the impression that he was trying to expand his base with Hispanic voters through a meeting with Nieto, but it appears that it did just the opposite with Trump's reaffirming old positions on deportation and the wall in his speech. 

Washington Post Original article ›
DW.COM Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This Weekend Essay in The Times by Tom McTague looks at the European Union skepticism about the US after the failure of three administrations under Bush, Obama and Trump to extricate America from wars,  concentrate on building its infrastructure and manufacturing, renewing the lives of workers and families that were neglected. That skepticism came from administrations in Europe that also failed the Europeans in much the same way with the neglect of infrastructure, manufacturing, and little done for climate change under Schroeder and Merkel, Sarkozy, Hollande and Macron. The dependence on China for manufacturing and on Russia for energy for the EU and Britain made the situation even worse than in the US.  Al this has changed with the election of president Biden in the US, and Scholz with Habeck- Baerbock in Germany and with the recent elections in France upholding workers and families, acting on climate change. A false idea is presented about the Europe vs US and dominance as each is part of the free world alongside India, Australia, Japan, South east Asia, Latin America, French and English language Africa. This is why one has the G7 and G20 with countries like Argentina, Brazil and Indonesia critical parts of the free world. It is the ignorance of many officials in the EU more than the sentiments of the people of the free world in all these countries that leads to these false ideas about which country is dominant and skepticism - none are dominant it is through the unity of all and a shared vision in international rule of law, fairness, humility, respect for poorer nations. It is this that Kipling talked about in his poem "Intercessional," the lines repeatedly calling for the Lord's grace and for man to merit that grace with "a humble and contrite heart." It is also the spirit that so recently Mohandas Gandhi grasped and put forward for India and the world. Europeans talk about dominance- think about this for a moment, Gandhi merely asked for the right to move freely for Indians and Asians including Chinese at a meeting in 1908 where he gave a speech. The speech was on May 18, 1908, at the YMCA in Johannesburg and it debated the question "Are Asiatic and colored Races a Menace to the British Empire."  Not a word of ill will was uttered by Mohandas Gandhi even when talking about segregation in the speech. It is a humble and contrite heart that the Lord listens to. Both India and South Africa found a way out in a different way with faith in a higher authority, that even the British had not failed to address as Kipling clearly shows. ...
The New York Times Original article ›

Support LyrArc

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

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


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