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 ›
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
DW.com's Ines Pohl says the U.S. presidential election campaign in 2016 with Donald Trump is a reflection of the state of American society today. She says lets not kid ourselves, what is happening is a reflection of the changes in society, demagogy as a reflection of the society we live in- people's lack of interest in serious issues, the loudest getting heard, less interest in checking the facts, and looking for a good show or entertainment in the debate. She points to problems in today's society, new technologies in media, that have fostered a new kind of shallowness. This includes fragmented social media groups, media that allows scapegoat theories to thrive, and elites or people in authority that lack the ability to respond to the challenges posed by this. She rightly points out that it goes beyond this campaign season and will continue into the future till it is resolved. What would Abraham Lincoln think of this, or what would George Washington or Thomas Jefferson think of this? LyrArc has frequently quoted these lines from a letter by Washington to Jefferson in Feb. 1783, and in the First Letter from the Editor- "To merit the approbation of good and virtuous citizens is the height of my ambition;  and will be a full compensation for all my toils and sufferings in the long and painful contest that we have been engaged." Washington told his countrymen in his draft of the First Inaugural Address that "there is no truth more thoroughly established, than that there exists in the economy and course of nature, an indissoluble union between virtue and happiness, between duty and advantage, between the genuine maxims of an honest and magnanimous policy, and the solid rewards of public prosperity and felicity." This has profound meaning and is truly applicable in meeting the challenges America and Europe face today.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This exceptional report from rural areas in France by Roger Cohen shows why the support is growing for the far right and the far left in rural areas and smaller towns outside the large cities which have suffered from high unemployment and neglected as technology and capital moved to other areas. Cohen talks to Nicholas Bay, secretary general of the National Front, who says this election is about patriotism, the nation state vs globalization, as the National Front tries to portray its opposition as being less pro-France, and less pro French culture. The centrist candidate Macron stands in front of a statue of Alexandre Dumas in Picardy, an hour northeast of Paris, and says he is for an "open patriotism" that embraces people of different origins and embraces refugees. Cohen attends a Le Pen rally in Metz, Lorraine, talks to a National Front mayor in Picardy and left party supporters in the town, talks to foreigners in the banlieu of Sevran. Cohen says a National Front victory is possible if enough voters who support the far left party of Melenchon do not vote for centrist candidate Macron, and enough voters of centre right Fillon supporting French culture and nationalism drift to Le Pen. As in the Dutch election with Moroccans derided by the far right the immigrant issue is a factor. Against this background is how events play out in the last weeks of the election. In March and April the events in the U.S. show a Trump administration moving to the centre, adopting a quieter and more constructive tone towards Mexico and immigrants. Relations with Russia have worsened after the U.S. response to the chemical attack in Syria, and the French public may now see this as a common threat to NATO and the European Union. As in the Dutch election a lot depends on the last weeks of the election and how well the centrist parties, the centre right and the centre left get their message across about what is to be gained by building anew on the foundations of the past without risking a lot on an uncertain path of referendums and exit from the European Union.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The European Recovery Fund package finally gets settled after long negotiations over the weekend. It is settled by lowering the nonrepayable direct aid to countries hardest hit by the pandemic of 500 billion euros the initial target to 390 billion euros. The change was made to meet Dutch demands that are based on right wing parties in Netherlands critical of the deal and upcoming elections in the country. Mr. Rutte of the Netherlands held on to the end. He has been in power for about ten years by following the Dutch mood carefully. This time both Merkel and Macron, both France and Germany supported the 500 billion euro plan for nonrepayable aid to countries particularly in southern Europe that took the brunt of the pandemic- Spain, Italy and Greece. The EU's executive branch will now for first time issue debt on a large scale to fund this nonrepayable aid and additional loans of 360 billion euros. There is also a multiyear EU budget of 1 trillion euros for 2021 to 2027 designed to meet the goals of European recovery. The way the EU is setup a lone holdout or a small country like the Netherlands with the help of two other small countries Denmark and Sweden could hold up the agreement against the interests of the larger nations Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Portugal. Poland and Hungary also strongly supported the 500 billion euro target for nonrepayable aid. The combined population of these countries is about 314 million compared to just 17 million for Netherlands, 10 million for Sweden, and 6 million for Denmark. In addition Merkel has recovered her footing in Germany after the pandemic and most right wing parties in Europe have lost ground during the pandemic. That Mr. Rutte could push this far in the face of the need to show solidarity at a time like this shows weakness in the fabric and structure of the EU, and its rules and organizing charter. Normally a blocking minority would need 4 countries and 35% of the population to block EU proposals supported by the majority. This could be used if the blocking is seen as not in the common interest. In recent years most decision are made with unanimity, but this is one in which solidarity needed to be shown without the long negotiations taking some of the spirit and vigour behind the earlier plan. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A government watchdog in Germany keeps track of what members of Germany's parliament the Bundestag earn in secondary income from speaking fees and other sources. The watchdog is called Abgeordnetenwatch or parliamentarian-watch. German parliamentarians are now required to list what bracket they are in with the highest at 250,000 euros with no ceiling set. One exception is for lawyers, consultants and farmers who can avoid transparency for upto 3.3 million euros. Unusually these professional backgrounds are left as exceptions. Still Germany is making an effort in this direction where such an effort is absent in the U.S. leading to a credibility gap for established parties and politicians, and leaving an opening for criticism from outsiders who can say they have no connection to lobbyists. German members of parliament earn an income of 9300 euros a month.

DW.COM Original article ›
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Merkel's leadership as Germany goes through the economic crisis. There is not much enthusiasm for further reforms among the Social Democrats or the Christian Democrats. Other than raising the retirement age to 67, the mood is not for any changes in that direction. The economy will contract by 6.1% but Merkel's decision is not to go in for a big stimulus under pressure from the US, and instead stay with the status quo combined with help to workers for unemployment benefits and for retention of workers by companies. As elections approach Merkel is considered favorably, and according to a recent poll by Forschungsgruppe Wahlen nearly 60% are satisfied with the grand coalition of the CDU and the SPD, 78% think Ms Merkel has done well as chancellor, and 58% want her to remain on the job. Actually Merkel's popularity is behind the CDU's prospects, the CDU itself is popular among only 35% of voters. Her analytical habits from her training as a physicist show in the way she is governing, which is thoughtful, and connects well with voters. Merkel benefits from the reduction in unemployment. Unemployment fell from around nearly 5 million in 2005 to around 3 million in 2008. The risk is that Merkel's popularity may be affected by an increase in unemployment to 5.1 million from the averaage of 3.3 million in 2008, according to an OECD estimate. Merkel stands behind a German response to the crisis which is to support the priciples of a social-market economy, make unemployment as least painful as possible to the jobless, to keep every job that can be saved in the nonfinancial sector with a 115 billion euro "Germany fund" providing guarantees and credits to companies that are in trouble because of the credit crisis. Stimulus packages of 64 billion euros supported the auto industry with subsidies to car buyers, and subsidies to keep workers intheir jobs. The idea was to come up with a German version of the response to the crisis by balancing the need to respond based on German conditions, and the concerns for inflation and the budget deficit, that is shared by most Germans. THe vision offered by Merkel is that of a physicist daughter of a protestant minister in East Germany, who is low on the rhetoric and good on substance, and willing to make decisions based on careful study and discernment rather than ideology, without sharp swings in any direction. Her vision comes from her days as environment minister, which is quietly pushing Germany into the forefront of countries developing renewable energy, moving ahead in energy efficiency, with anational goal of cutting emissions by 40% by 2020. The other areas are immigration and education, both key to the future of Germany because of the huge demographic change happening there. She has afamily minister Ursula von der Leyden, who introduced "parents pay", a14 month stipend for parents of newborn children linked to salaries, and to to improve daycare by providing places for 35% of children aged three or less by 2013. And Merkel has approved 18 billion euros of additional funding for research and universities. Says Leyden Merkel has made "daycare" an acceptable term in the CDU, and made Germans accept that they are an immigration country. Which tells you that you have to look closely to find the reasons for Merkel's popularity, which does not carry the rhetoric of an Obama, but is just as effective in German conditions. There are deepseated demographic changes going on in German society, which require a cultural change, and change in mindset, such as that for daycare, immigration, and blending the best of the old in the social market economy with the new like the changes in the educational system. The Economist says that in big cities today nearly half of the children under 15 are immigrants or their children and grandchildren, who are more likely to be poorer, unemployed and with less education. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Typical of so much of what is written about the World Health Organization and its role in the pandemic, this podcast in the WSJ fails to quickly convey the critical function of the WHO as an early warning system the world has depended on, including China. The H1N1 epidemic originated in Mexico. Asian countries including China and India depended on very quick response from the country where the epidemic originated  in allowing entry into the affected area for experts from advanced countries such as the U.S. The global response was then coordinated across countries quickly with complete transparency. The head of China's CDC himself faced a problem with transparency with the provincial authorites in Wuhan. 1.    Fundamentally this quick entry was denied the U.S. Request by U.S. to China was made on Jan. 6 for U.S. team to go to Wuhan, quick permission was denied and given only about 6 weeks later on Feb 16. This delay is the crux of the problem for the U.S.. Taiwan confirmed human to human transmission on Jan. 1, the WHO was saying this was not clear as late as Jan. 14. These costly delays are what the U.S.  letter is about.  The head of the CDC China Gao Fu called Dr. Redfield head of CDC in the U.S. on the next day after he suspected Wuhan provincial authorites were vague about what was happening. Gao Fu was alarmed when scanning the internet on December 30, 2019, about rumors of a vaguely worded lung disease in internal memos of Wuhan. He called Wuhan authorites and was not getting clear answers on that day, then deciding on December 31 to send his own team to Wuhan, as reported in German magazine Der Spiegel- Hackenbroch, Zand, 05/20/2020.  Der Spiegel says in its special report on the early period in Wuhan that Gao Fu was so alarmed about what was happening enough to be in tears in his series of calls with Dr. Redfield in the immediate days that followed. The date was shortly after the GAO Fu sent the team to Wuhan, December 31 and New Years Day 2020, as reported in Der Spiegel. See the link to Lyrarc gist of Der Spiegel's "A Failed Deception: The Early Days of the Coronavirus in Wuhan."  2.  President Trump points out the standards of the WHO- in the concluding point of his letter to WHO- when a three time prime minister of Norway, Gro Brundtland was head of the WHO during the SARS crisis of 2003. She acted quickly and decisively and no time was lost. It is this failure of the early warning system under the new president of the WHO after 2017 Dr. Tedros that alarms the U.S.  with about 100,000 deaths.  3.  This failure it can now be said was partly a result of a election in 2017 for the position of WHO president which was flawed. This was the first time a WHO head, an important position was put up for an election. The Executive Board was responsible for this appointment since the founding of the WHO as part of the UN, based in Geneva, Switzerland, after World War II. This system worked. The election was clearly a bad process for appointing the president of the WHO which should be done entirely on the capabilities of the person holding this position not on a flawed voting process. It is flawed because India and Bangladesh hit by a cyclone during the coronavirus have suffered greatly, as have other countries, but had only 2 votes for 1.5 billion people, when Barbados (385,000 population) and Laos (7 million) which had less than one  hundredth the population had the same number of votes. The U.S. had one vote. The election resulted in lobbying and a process in which many candidates stayed away because they simply would not go through such a process. The position was too important to the world- most of the advanced countries had forgotten about the danger of epidemics to let this happen by 2017, as shown in the way the austerity years led to cancellation of the preparations for pandemic in France and Britain. The austerity years and neglect of public health during these tech boom years in the western world made it possible for this to happen. 3.   Along with the 1 month ultimatum action is already being taken to restore the effectiveness of the importance of the Executive Board. The head of the health ministry in India, Dr. Harsh Vardhan, has been appointed the new chairman of the Executive Board on May 22. This restores the voice of billions of people in Asia in the process, and brings the major countries with the greatest risk in a pandemic into the decision process for tackling the pandemic, this includes the rest of the world.     ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Former German chancellor from the SPD party, Gerhard Schroeder, is interviewed by Rayond Zhong of the WSJ. Here he describes his views on the way Agenda 2010 was implemented in 2003 in Germany to gain public support for changes to Germany's welfare state. He also talks about the eurozone crisis and how Angela Merkel has handled the crisis, and the right approach for an Agenda 2020 for Europe. The interview was made at Schroeder's law office in Hannover, Germany. This is a detailed and exceptional interview by Zhong covering all facets of the eurozone crisis and Germany's response. Schroeder says it was right to give Greece more time to make the reforms, so that the Greek people could see that this path would help in a positive way. In doing this he cites his own experience when as the reforms for Agenda 2010 to make Germany more competitive were taking place- including cuts in spending and lower taxes- he turned down his finance minister Hans Eichel's proposal in 2003 for an additional 20 billion euros in cuts to put Germany in compliance with EU law....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A Washington Post poll in September 2016 shows some surprising results with Clinton competitive in Texas and Arizona, long red states. It shows Trump's appeal to older white voters helping him in Iowa and Ohio. Clinton has a slight lead in Michigan. Clinton also leads in Pennsylvania, Nevada, and Colorado, and also in Florida.  As the race gets closer with about 50 days left Clinton's lead of 8-9 points is now about 4 points. Most striking this time compared to 2012 is that Clinton is polling way ahead with college educated voters. A race with libertarian candidate Johnson shows him getting 15% of the vote in 15 states narrowing Clinton's advantage, but also putting pressure on Trump to win undecided voters. Clinton has consolidated the Democratic vote better than Trump with 90% support in 32 states compared to Trump's above that in only 13 states, a key weakness because of dividing the Republican vote with Trump's crude and blatant attacks during the primaries that have left some Republicans thoroughly alienated. Unlike any previous election this one is dividing the vote based on gender and education. A big additional difference is college educated white women where the gap is the widest seen in any election- a 23 point lead for Clinton with white college educated women nationwide. In the midwest Michigan still has a history of voting Democratic especially after the auto industry rescue by Obama. Demographic changes not mentioned here also play a part such as in Colorado and Nevada long time red states. A Clinton edge in Texas is the most surprising result in the entire poll results showing the old red state blue state division is now replaced by women, minorities and college degrees as the dividing line. Part of the reason for this is that the losses due to globalization. And in this respect Clinton does better than Obama, but not as well as Merkel in Germany who has also suffered with people who lost out in globalization but not to the extent of Obama, and to a lesser degree than Obama for Clinton. Enough minority support, Republican support, and blue collar support, in addition to women voters,  may be the difference for Clinton in Texas. The other factor is the advertising campaign funding and the national security issue, on which Clinton does better than Obama in the latter a key factor in red states, and is similar to Obama in the former to tackle midwestern states. Such as Michigan and Wisconsin, liberal in history but with large shifting blue collar votes. Hurt by globalization, but in the case of Michigan helped by the Democrats rescue of the auto industry. In a way this could bring the country together after Obama with the disappearing North-South or red state blue state division, and with enough union or working class white support for Clinton in addition to dominant college educated voters to form a new coalition of support compared to a predominantly red state white state division of Obama years based on the minority vote.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Elected to the Politburo in 1980, Gorbachev became president of USSR in 1985. In the six year period to 1991 he launched a movement to free the USSR from the rigid constraints of communist party rule called Perestroika to improve productivity, freedoms and quality of life. He came from a peasant family with Ukrainian origins and was born in 1931 during the period of upheaval in Russia. The rapid removal of Soviet rule was something Russia was not able to adapt to in the early years with no experience in democratic process. By 2000 after drop in life expectancy and fall in the standard of living Mr. Putin emerged as president.  Russia's economy recovered under Putin's three terms till the miscalculations in the invasion of Ukraine in 2022, that were itself a result of a sense that Russia had lost something with the fall of the Soviet Union and the advancement of NATO and the European Union. Gorbachev's sense in his memoirs was that Russia would do best under democracy. Even in 2017 he wrote that Russia and its people were "ready for a real multiparty system, fair elections and a regular rotation of government." Yet he was too much of an optimist and not enough hands on to grasp that Russia was a large economy and safeguards had to be put in place for the rule of law to prevent lawless elements that could control companies, safeguards for the vulnerable sections of society such as pensioners and older people, and limited self government through elected assemblies and parliaments were needed for a decade before democracy to take roots. Gorbachev's knowledge of American and British democracies, constitutions and parliaments and their evolution over centuries was non existent, with little contact and education of this sort under the Czar or Soviets. The democracies in Germany and Japan were established with American power and extensive education, the Marshall Plan, and unlimited imports by the US from Japan to prevent economic catastrophes of the kind experienced by the Weimar Republic in Germany in the 1920's. No plan from western aid and assistance, limited self government of the people was introduced as training ground as in India. In India the British introduced limited self-government or Swaraj in the 1930's with elected assemblies in Indian states, in the pattern of Dominion states such as Canada and Australia. Mohandas Gandhi negotiated the rights of indentured Indians in South Africa in this arrangement and studied British law and constitutions. This led to the catastrophic failure of the rule of law in Russia after 1979, lawless elements emerging under Yeltsin  that controlled companies and the state, high unemployment, failure of the economy, and drop in life expectancy between 1979 and 2005. How this led to the Putin years and now led to the war in Ukraine is covered in more detail under the Lyrarc article on Gorbachev and how he is seen in Germany. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
For the approaching US midterm elections president Biden seeks to draw a sharp contrast with Republican Senator Rick Scott's Plan which he says would worsen inflation and increase taxes on working class families. Mr. Scott's plan is for sunset on all federal legislation and president Biden says this would include Medicare and Social Security. Mr. Scott also wants all Americans to pay some income tax to have skin in the game. At this time about half of all Americans pay no taxes says Mr. Scott. Former US president Trump continues to lead the Republican party in 2022  yet he faces a very different Democratic party under president Biden. Mr. Biden's focus is on his $2 trillion plan for Workers and Families, rebuilding American manufacturing and renewing supply chains, unlike Hillary Clinton whose lacked such a focus. Leading to Mr. Trump's appeal with working class families and disdain for traditional Republican policies that secured him the presidency in 2018 by defeating Hillary Clinton. The changes with president Biden's focus on workers and families are happening also in the European Union. Scholz and the Greens in Germany, Macron in France with potentially Melenchon as prime minister, and similar changes in Denmark and other EU countries suggest that there is a renewed focus on infrastructure, rebuilding manufacturing and supply chain renewal, rebuilding incomes and lives of workers and families, in Europe and the US. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A vote on Brexit giving parliament a bigger voice if no deal is reached with the EU was defeated narrowly in parliament with 324 for and 298 against. Tory members led by Mr. Grieve called for parliament to take part in future strategy if no deal is reached by March 2019. British prime minister Theresa May argued that this would weaken Britain's negotiating position with the EU in Brussels. Mr. Grieve and Tory dissenters agreed to support the government. The recent election with Labor winning 40% of the vote leaves the Conservative Party's Mrs. May dependent on a small number of MP's from Northern Ireland for her government to survive. Some members of May's cabinet feel cutting off Britain from the EU market will hurt the economy in their districts, and a junior minister resigned. 

The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This leader in The Economist magazine says a hard Brexit of the sort announced by Theresa May at a Conservative Party conference is clearly bad for Britain. It also point out that half of British people voted to remain. It is not clear that voters have voted for a hard Brexit, a soft Brexit, or voter alienation with elites and effects of years of austerity since the financial crisis have helped tilt the vote to Brexit. It points out that the rhetoric may be damaging Britain's chance of negotiating a Brexit that limits damage to GDP, which the Treasury estimates to be nearly twice the loss in GDP if a member of a single market as compared to leaving it. British government leaders may be overestimating the willingness of leaders of France, Germany and other countries to make concessions. By talking up to their party base politicians such as May may be putting German and French leaders to also toughen their positions on free movement as an integral principle of the European Union, and consequently of membership in a single market. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Christoph Hasselbach of DW.com says the idea of European Union brings so much good for Europe that it should not be diminished by use of pressure or punishment. He refers to the firm opinion in Brussels, of Mr. Juncker and Merkel, that there can be no cherry picking when it comes to remaining in the EU. This led in Jan. 2017 to British prime minister May saying Britain would not go begging to Brussels, and would simply opt out of the European Union and the single market. Hasselbach offers an interesting and plausible explanation for the Brexit vote shifting by a small margin to the exit side. He says rightly that uncontrolled immigration fears were used by the politicians supporting exit. Interestingly he says the worries in the UK were not just for current people but for future citizens from the hundreds of thousands of refugees who would become German citizens in a few years. Would they try to settle in the UK- prime minister Cameron failed to provide a convincing answer, says Hasselbach. He is right to point out as we have at Lyrarc that it is healthy to have questions and even some skeptical views about Brussels, that the appeal of the EU must depend on not being dogmatic about it, but being open and willing to accept questions.   ...
SPIEGEL ONLINE Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Even though U.S. president Trump has singled out countries such as Mexico, South Korea and China for trade practices, the U.S. today faces stronger competition in trade from Germany. The trade surplus with Germany for 2016 was $297 billion for Germany compared to $245 billion for China, according to Ifo economic institute. China's trade surplus according to the World Bank was down from 10% of gross domestic product or GDP in 2007 to 3% in 2016, while Germany's has gone up to 8.5%. The Chinese currency is seen as not being undervalued by some experts, while the euro has lost a quarter of its value in the last 3 years, giving Geman exporters an edge. The U.S. also competes with Germany in nine of the 10 export categories such as machinery and electronic equipment, according to the Peterson Institute. Then why is the focus under U.S. president Trump not including Germany? One reason is that China's products have put a downward pressure on U.S. manufacturing wages, and the the speed with the Chinese manufacturing has grown in certain industries. Germany has very few of the manufacturing subsidies that China provides to its industries. And the depreciation in the euro is not favored by the German government as it opposes the policies of the European Central Bank. Germany also has a higher propensity to save about 10% of GDP compared to about 3% for the U.S., according to OECD. As a result Germany is accumulating foreign assets at a faster rate than any other nation, while the U.S. is borrowing capital from overseas. Ways to change this are minimum wage regulations introduced by the government, but larger measures such as increasing government investment in the economy are not supported as the country prepares for the future with an aging population.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
DW.COM Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The European Central Bank left all its interest rates unchanged on September 7, 2016. No changes were made to asset purchase program, which will run until March 2017 or beyond as needed. The ECB left interest rates at 0% for its lending operations, and for overnight deposits at 0.4%.  Inflation is a special concern, as inflation was at 0.2% for August. Business activity and investment in the EU and in the U.S. is weak, and Brexit is still a concern.

ZEIT ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This response by experts on transatlantic relations rejects the other view expressed in Zeit Online that the U.S. under Trump remains estranged from Germany and the EU. These experts from the American Institute for German Contemporary Studies, American German Council, and Centers at John Hopkins and Georgetown for German Studies, reject the view that the Trump administration and Germany are that far apart on many issues as it appears from media coverage.  Foremost it points out that civil society relations are sound and growing. About 50 million Americans trace their descent to Germany, including president Trump, much larger to over half the U.S. population considering European descent. Much larger is the sense of a culturally shared future with the European Union, with the nations of Europe including Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the nations of Eastern Europe, and Britain. The civil society relationships run deep in a way that is hardly affected by the Trump administration. Within the Trump administration the policies to Europe these experts remind the reader, are determined by the "adults" in the administration, who are senior members of the administration. This is a crucial point as Trump administration policy is not determined by the president's liking for tweets as much as by senior cabinet members Tillerson at the State Department, Gen. Mattis at Defense, Kelly at the White House, and senior members of Congress including Senators Corker and other senior committee members. This is why Republican Senator Kay Hutchinson was chosen as Ambassador to NATO. It should be noted in this context of German-EU relations in president Trump's first year that there was a period of German disillusionment with president Obama, exacerbated by the NSA spying on German chancellor Merkel and on the EU delegation to the UN, with president Obama's failure to offer any apology. Relations recovered from that low point. No one suggested that there be a German led decoupling of the EU with America at that low point, or at another low point in German-U.S. relations with the setup of American Pershing II nuclear missiles on German soil under the Reagan administration when there were large scale protests.  The American view that the U.S. should not have to shoulder major responsibilities for defense and foreign relations by itself is not new say these experts, and goes back to earlier administrations before Trump.  The experts argue for an active role by Germany with its partners in Europe for defense and foreign relations, which should not be seen as a result of U.S. pressure, only responding to the situation as it has evolved upto this time. Views on immigration are also changing with effort by the EU and Germany, France, to reduce immigration from the source countries in Africa, and the changing perceptions about uncontrolled immigration in Germany and France, say the authors. A coordinated policy towards Russia  is seen as not having changed. And much as a reset in relations was advocated by Obama in the first year of his first term, the current policy of the Trump administration to work with Russia to lower tensions can be seen in the same way say these experts, and not as a fundamental shift in American policy. The deep relationship of Germany and the EU with China is another positive aspect that will also help the U.S. in framing its own policies towards China. The German-American relationship, and the European Union relationship with the U.S.  is seen as basic to the values and interests of the U.S. and Europe. This relationship is too deep and supported by civil society and Congress, the Republican Party, and the Democratic Party, by large trade relationships, to be affected by temporary differences under any one administration. Even these differences are part of a larger debate that is part of dialogue on issues in a democratic society, sometimes raucous and loud, and could be welcomed and carefully channelled in constructive ways.     ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman sees France has a fairly successful country with a strong safety net, contrary to perceptions. He asks then why the vote for Le Pen of the National Front, with its perceived racism and ideology. He points to the bureaucrats in Brussels and how they are perceived in Britain, the way austerity policies were favored by the European Union and Germany. Much of the reporting to date shows the effects of neglect for rural communities and small towns and the loss of jobs as the reason for discontent with established parties. It appears that this has affected the vote more than the anti-European Union message. During the last debate Macron was more effective in showing that there were advantages for France in remaining connected to the global community and to remain in the eurozone, calling it a huge mistake to follow Le Pen's policies. 


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