LyrArc Article Gist
 Harris's role for the Border was limited to telling Central American migrants to stay home. Much of the migration was a result of wars started in the Reagan years in Central American states of Nicaragua and San Salvador. This destabilized the region and led to gangs taking over parts of the country in San Salvador and entrenching Castro style regime in Nicaragua, leading to outward migration of young people. As this report points out Harris was supposed to take on decades of such misguided policies in Central America in a few months. A drought hit agricultural coffee regions of Guatemala increasing migration. Her role instead was to ensure several wins. Win No.1 to generate stability setting up the peaceful transfer of power in Guatemala, singling out corrupt regimes. Win No. 2 to generate jobs. US AID and IFDC loans were increased, foreign investment attracted to generate 250,000 jobs. Win No. 3 the increased stability led to gradually declining migration from Central America. What replaced it was Venezuela. And that is a repeat story of Reagan style wars in Central America. Under the Trump Administration the US did not take up the Monroe Doctrine and act directly to support a stable fairly elected government in Venezuela, an obvious solution. Instead going half way- destabilizing the government but then left it on its own. The result about a third of the population leaving the country in these years to Colombia and other parts of Latin America in a immense humanitarian tragedy.  In 2023 Venezuelans not Guatemalans entered at the US Border in large numbers, most of them middle class families that left Venezuela after hyperinflation and mismanagement of the economy. Realizing the danger by January 2024 Biden negotiated with Senate Minority Leader McConnell and his Republican representative Senator Lankford to pass legislation in the Senate closing the Border. All that was needed was the House to act and 30 years of Border problem would be solved.This was blocked in the House by new Speaker Mike Johnson on advice from former president Trump who chose to use the issue in the 2024 election. Biden then used his executive powers to close the Border leading to lower numbers of migrants under Biden by July 2024 than under Trump. Migration Border Czar was never a term used by Democrats in the Obama and Biden years. Biden who also served in a role given migration as one of the issues to handle under Obama, had this as only one of his assignments. Biden played more important roles in foreign policy with his experience as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for decades. Border policy was made by president Obama and his advisers. The same is true of Harris, Border policy being done by president Biden and his advisers. Similar to Biden's role as VP Harris was given assignment to cover foreign policy and was the US representative at 3 Munich Security Conferences in 2021-2024 following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Chancellor Scholz of Germany said of Harris last week that he had full confidence in Harris as both competent and experienced. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Yanukovych, the president of Ukraine, is from the industrial eastern part of Ukraine centring on Donetsk. He is intensely disliked by the protesters in Ukraine and unpopular with the western part of the country which favors joining the European Union. Polls show 45% of the people support joining the EU, and only 14% joining Russia in a economic union. Yanukovych failed to bring the country together. The EU had called for the release of a former prime minister Ms. Tymoshenko in prison for the last 2 years, and Yanukovych's failure to do this worsened relations with Germany. The U.S. sees Yatsenuyk 39, a economist who served in the Tymoshenko administration as economy minister, as a person with the credibility in Ukraine and the experience to be part of a transition government. Figures who are popular with protesters but have no connections with previous governments include Vitali Klitschko, 42, a boxing champion, who has his own party Udar, meaning punch. Tymoshenko, was popular during the Orange Revolution in 2004, but her two terms as prime minister came under criticism for mismanagement. Parliament selected the prime minister under the 2004 constitution, and the protests focussed on consolidation of power under the president, including the appointment of the prime minister. As a first step parliament took on powers to appoint the prime minister on Feb. 21, 2014, freed Tymoshenko from prison, and set a date for elections in May 2014. Yanukovych fled Kiev and left for the eastern part of the country as parliament began the transition to a new government. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
German perceptions of Mikhail Gorbachev are shown here in DW.com. He is revered in Germany because of Gorbachev's efforts to end Soviet rule in East German state called the GDR, leading to the fall of the Berlin Wall. Gorbachev supported German reunification but did not do this is in a way that ensured that ordinary Russians and citizens of the GDR could make the transition to democratic processes in a smooth way. He also failed to grasp that economic transition could be difficult and would require extensive aid and grants from the west, and that safeguards and protections for retired pensioners and vulnerable sections of society needed to be in place. The following is a reflection of the background in political government and economy of the events in Europe leading to the war in Ukraine.  As a result Gorbachev's instincts were right by first 1956 as a student, and then 1979 as government official about the need for democratic processes to realize the real potential of Russia, just as has happened in many countries that lacked these processes for change in government- Japan, Germany, South Korea, India, Brazil and many countries in Asia and Latin America. But not realizing that these countries made the transition with considerable American and British assistance. Even where there was no direct assistance indirectly the British setup the first limited Swaraj or free rule in India, with elections and elected assemblies in Indian states in the 1930's, following the pattern in Dominion states Australia and Canada. Mohandas Gandhi negotiated within these processes for rights of South African Indians and Colored people, gaining experience, including study of British law.  A son of poor farmers in the agricultural region of North Caucasus, in Stavropol, it is relevant today that his maternal grand parents were from Chernihiv in Ukraine. He came to power in 1980 after entering the Politburo that year. These were the waning years of Leonid Brezhnev, president of the Soviet Union who followed Nikita Khrushchev (1953- 1964). Khrushchev was from eastern Ukrainian region near Donetsk. Leonid Brezhnev was a protege of Krushchev since 1931, from Kamianske, Ukraine.   Gorbachev was influenced by Khrushchev's speech that denounced Stalin in 1956 in favor of a freer and more open society. Khrushchev, became first secretary of the Communist party in 1953 after the death of Stalin and set the pace of post war Soviet society from 1950 to 1964. He removed the fear of the dictatorship of the proleteriat working class, increasingly dictatorial under Lenin, and blatantly arbitrary under his successor to make Soviet Union a freer society.  Yet his tendency to make decisions on his own without consulting others, and the failure of agriculture in the Soviet Union including food shortages led to his replacement by his protege Brezhnev. Brezhnev's whole career was built under Krushchev in Ukraine, in the army in Ukraine, and as a political leader in the Soviet 18th Army that entered Prague in 1945 defeating the Nazis. Why is this relevant? Gorbachev was educated at Moscow State University when the Soviet Union was in the Sputnik era, and felt at the time that it could reach the 1950's standard of living in the US- very different from the earlier leaders. Yet he may have been too much of an optimist and not hands on in understanding the working of a modern economy as large as Russia and the interests of different groups of society that had to be be balanced and protected. His understanding of the US and of how the US and British economies had evolved was limited or nonexistent. The isolation of the Soviet period may have compounded this. The Russian state in the Soviet Union could not simply unwind the power of the state and its intervention and everything would come out right of its own accord.   Leonid Brezhnev, the Ukrainian Russian who succeeded Krushchev from 1964 to 1979 let the system of Soviet rule remain as it was, in the Great Stagnation, leading to lethargy, lack of innovation, and a weak economy with military expansion. Gorbachev tried to regenerate the system by opening it up, but failed to see that there was a risk that it could come apart quickly as it did in just 4 years after he became president in 1985. Only the centralized power of the state had kept the Russian state together from the Tsarist period through the Communist period. The risks of this Gorbachev failed to grasp. What if it happened too quickly without a safety net for the people who could not make the transition. What lawlessness and failure of the rule of law could happen. The US and Britain had evolved their democracies over centuries. Wars were fought in the US and Britain over rights and responsibilities of kings and parliaments. In the US Lincoln fought the civil war not just for emancipation but to ensure safeguards for free white men on the farms so that Labor did not get disabilities placed on them by Capital (entrenched forces of Capital of which the southern plantation economy was only one aspect.)  Japan and Germany were set up as democratic states through American power and constitutional frameworks with Marshall Plans or agreement to take in unlimited imports from Japan. This bad scenario happened in Russia because Gorbachev failed to set the conditions first and work patiently to achieve them including introducing limited  elections and parliamentary processes first in Russia.  Leaders such as Yeltsin who succeeded Gorbachev in 1989, winning the elections that followed, failed to provide a safety net for the vulnerable in the 1980's. Unemployment increased rapidly, life expectancy dropped in Russia, and the economy failed in the early years after 1980. A Marshall Plan like that offered to Germany could have helped but Gorbachev's failure may have been his failure to provide this transition by arranging for West Germany and the US to support a planned transition, a kind of Marshall Plan of Aid, and maintaining a gradual move to democracy as the country was given time to learn institutions of American and British parliamentary democracy. No such Marshall Plan was negotiated for a smooth transition over inevitable obstacles, no safeguards were put in place for illegal efforts to control the state by rogue elements and to seize assets of state companies, no efforts to first introduce limited elections and parliamentary processes for learning democratic process in Russia, and the people of Russia were left with a memory of the this period as a bad lawless period from 1989 to 2005.  Leading to the situation today under Putin of aspiring to the Soviet period as a kind of period that had offered Russia the world recognition it had lost. And this had happened even though the Russian economy had recovered and the standard of living had risen under Putin. Putin's career spanned the period as a Russian official in Dresden, Germany Democratic Republic or Soviet period East Germany to working in the St Petersburg City Council under Yeltsin. He personally witnessed the fall of the Berlin Wall and the fall of the German Democratic Republic from Dresden and Gorbachev's refusal to build a transition period for the changes so that it would not be traumatic for the GDR. Even after reunification these traumas remain in some segments of the older population in East Germany that saw themselves as neglected and support extreme right wing parties in eastern German states by 2020- considering the Soviet period as one in which their lives were less neglected.  After three terms as president Putin with his own traumas from that period in Dresden, and with a mother lost in the period after the Nazi invasion of Russia, a father who survived the Battle of Stalingrad, saw the period of lawless behaviour in the collapse of the Soviet Union as the"greatest geopolitical disaster of the century."  Putin and people around him made missteps and miscalculations launching a war in Ukraine, leading to the situation today- jeopardizing hard won gains for the Russian economy. By 2022 Russian standards of living had risen and the economy was in the best shape it had been in the modern period since the Industrial Revolution. Yet largely exposed because of the dependence on oil and gas during a period of climate change and focus on building future economies free of fossil fuels.  Putin in his own peculiar logic may have seen this as the only opportunity in 2022 before deliinking from fossil fuel reduced the importance of the Russian fuel dependent economy to make some territorial readjusments in Ukraine with a quick war taking Kviv. That turned into a massive miscalculation with the emergence of nationalist fervor in western Ukraine spreading to the whole country of 40 million people. In the future to 2030 with phasing out of the fossil fuel economy, Russia without the connections to the US and European Union's technology and resources it had during Putin's three terms, and facing strict sanctions from US and EU, faces a difficult future. This has cautionary lessons for all countries- the US that read too much into the fall of the Berlin wall and indulged in a losing proposition with free markets that damaged its infrastructure and manufacturing with shifts to China, China understanding of how it to was dependent on the world economy for its future development, India that had to navigate a difficult period and what lessons to draw for building a bigger economy, the EU realizing the failure of its policies of depending on Russia for energy and China for manufacturing with fragile supply chains,  and Russia that there were twists and turns and the need for safeguards and experience building democratic processes before these processes would work for the economy, its people and for Russia as a nation. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
GDP expanded at 3.5% in the fourth quarter of 2016, according to the Turkey Statistics Office. This follows a contraction by 1.8% in the third quarter of 2016. For the full year the GDP growth is 2.9 percent, a decline from the 6.1% in 2015. In 2015 Turkey gained from lower oil prices. This was offset in 2016 by the politics in the region- the increased instability in the country following a crackdown on the opposition and media, internal conflict in the Kurdish region which appeared for a time to be leading to peaceful settlement. As a result tourism revenues declined by 30% and this was offset by increased government spending. The uncertainty before the referendum also leads to decline in foreign investment and investment by domestic firms.

LyrArc Article Gist
Russia's leading business paper Vedemosti summed up the situation on Dec. 17, 2014, in its editorial- "This is a very dangerous situation; we are separated from a fully fledged run on the banks by just a few days..If the currency market is not reassured right now, the banking system will require large external support." Warning signs were evident at a banking conference in Moscow in October 2014 when the Economy minister, the central bank head Nabiullina, and the head of the largest bank Sberbank, German Gref, expressed skepticism about the economic policies and the risks involved. Not until Dec. 17, was a decisive response evident and the risks of a collapsing ruble openly addressed with economic actions by the Putin administration. A collapsing ruble would have repercussions on the global financial markets and slowing global economy, increasing potential geopolitical risk, and adding to risk of contagion for other emerging markets, which was reflected in the nervousness of global financial markets on Dec 15-16, 2014....

LyrArc Article Gist
Ben Hubbard of the NYT describes the problems created by the Russian bombing campaing in Syria for the civilian population, and the lack of any changes on the ground. Russia may soon be looking for a way out from its involvement in the region, says Hubbard, because of the costs of such an involvement over time.

LyrArc Article Gist
This exceptional report by Chulov in the Guardian shows the changes in the war in Iraq and Syria in 2015-2016 since the downing of a Russian jet by Turkey in late 2015. It says that the Syrian government's future was uncertain in late 2015 with Turkish support for rebel forces in the north. During this period Russia curtailed trade and tourism relations with Turkey, and improved relations with the Kurds. Russia intervened in northern Syria directly to prevent a collapse of Syrian government forces in the north. Kurdish forces were already controlling large parts of the Syrian territory adjoining Turkey, and Turkey was concerned about the support to Kurds within Turkey from Kurds in Syria and a historical movement for  Kurdish independence. In April 2016 Russia made a move to win Turkish support by saying it would support the territorial integrity of Syria, so that no support would be given to the Kurds. As the U.S. consistently supported the Kurds in the fight against ISIS, Turkey under prime minister Erdogan changed its policy of support for rebel forces in Syria to focus on what it perceived as the threat fom Kudish control of the region at its Syrian borders. Rebel forces were told to focus not on the Syrian government forces but on ISIS, leading to withdrawal of support in Aleppo. What remains now of the war in Syria and Iraq is Iranian influence in Iraq, the Russian influence from support of the Syrian government in Damascus, and for the first time U.S. ground forces in the north with 900 troops supported by artillery on the side of the Kurds. The next stage in the war to take ISIS controlled Raqqa is being negotiated between Russia, Turkey and the U.S., according to this report.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The collapse of the will of people around Yanukovych, including a deputy interior minister, as fighting units moved with weapons taken from an armory in Lviv towards Kiev, may have been the decisive event that decided the fate of the Yakunovych government. The deputy interior minister then negotiated with a protest leader Levus realizing that other than the front line of police the rest of the police were ready to abandon the fight. Levus then negotiated a safe corridor for the police to withdraw. As the Polish diplomat Sikorski came out to the square he found to his complete astonishment the police simply disappearing from the Square in Kiev. Hours earlier he had warned protesters that a crackdown was coming and they would all be wiped out, according to a report in the WSJ by Benoit, Norman and Fidler, 2/22/2014, so that they should accept a deal which would set a date for new elections but not lead to the immediate resignation of Yakunovych. That deal it also appears came after a Putin call to Yakunovych and not simply from diplomatic pressures, and it is probable that Putin had realized earlier than the diplomats that most of the police were not going to fight. Bringing in the army would have had dangerous consequences for relations between Germany and Russia in particular- as German public and chancellor Merkel felt strongly about the situation in Ukraine- and relations with the European Union and the U.S. Putin, Yakunovych, and even the EU diplomats may have missed the depth of feeling in Ukraine and the organization of the protest movement. Germany and chancellor Merkel, with her determination to make things come out right in Europe after a flawed history, gave hope to the protest movement. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Inozemtsev of the Institute of Post-Industrial Studies in Moscow, asks the question wht if the Russian economy shows no growth in 2017, and 2015-2016 become the beginning of a serious downturn. If oil prices remain low for an extended period as now looks likely with factors such as shale oil technologies, Iranian oil, and Saudi policy, playing an increasingly long term role, Russia could face some of the problems former finance minister, Alexei Kudrin, other business leaders including head of Sberbank, warned about. A major problem that Inozemtsev points to is the change in the business climate for foreign investment in 2012-2016 as the Russian economy looks more inward, and the departure of many foreign companies. During the period 2000-2008, a major boost to the economy came from foreign investment which brought with it management and technological improvements. No emerging market country, including China, can have a bright future without access to new technologies and investments from foreign investment. The current period starting in 2009 stands in sharp contrast to the earlier period with the Russian economy lacking the boost from foreign investment, facing capital outflows, and international conflicts creating a long term effect on oil prices. Russia needed time to move its economy away from commodity dependence through technological improvements and investment, yet this does not appear to be happening, raising serious questions....

LyrArc Article Gist
A major shift in foreign investment may be taking place as the 2014 St. Petersburg International Economic Forum takes place in May 2014. Russian policy in Ukraine and tensions with the U.S. and Germany could lead to a shift in investment to other emerging market countries. China's tensions with Japan could lead to a similiar shift of Japanese foreign investment. At the same time India has elected a new government with an absolute majority and an overwhelming mandate from young people to accelerate development. The new government under the BJP party's Modi has a decade of experience attracting foreign investment in western India. Indonesia, Vietnam, Africa and other emerging market countries, could benefit from the shift in investment. Investment could also return to the home countries with lower labor costs in Southern Europe, lower labor/energy/transport costs in North America. For Russia the debate at the St Petersburg Economic Forum was about pursuing one of three policy paths with some riskier than others, or some combination also risky and uncertain- depending on state banks and oil windfall funds, increasing ties with Asian countries, continuing on the current path with lower foreign investment and continued capital outflows. The failure to use the time wisely to diversify the oil based economy which could have been better accomplished in an economy not overly dependent on crony capitalism and centralized economy, both current characteristics, will affect future progress. A key weakness for Russia compared to China is the centralization under one person Putin, more so in the third term. In China the two man team Keqiang and Jinping is part of a larger team chosen by consensus and negotiation and part of a rotational scheme. It has senior leaders who initiated the changes to a market driven economy in the nineties determined to see China on track....

LyrArc Article Gist
Government GDP figures show the GDP shrank by 1.8% in the third quarter of 2016 compared to the same period in 2015, the first such contraction in the economy since 2009. Household consumption was down 3.2%. The sharp decline in the value of the lira by 20% in 2016 makes imports costlier, in an economy dependent on consumption spending and tourism for higher GDP growth. Political uncertainty with instability in Turkey following a crackdown on opposition and media also leads to decline in foreign investment and investment by domestic firms.

LyrArc Article Gist
The slowing economy of Turkey as the wars in Syria and Iraq take their toll reducing demand for Turkey's exports. The conflict with Russia also affects Turkish exports. Growth slows to 2-3% a year in 2015-2016.

LyrArc Article Gist
Efforts to bring the textbook industry under state control by selling the firm "Enlightenment," which had a 30% share of the market, to Putin ally Rotenberg. "Enlightenment" has now received further support as other competitor's textbooks were not given approval by the Ministry of Education and Science. Apparently Putin sees western ideas introduced in some textbooks as harmful to the development of Russia's youth. All schools will now be given state inspections, and where textbooks are not on the approved list the schools will see cutoff of state funds. Putin was chairman of the publisher "Enlightenment" when it was under state control, Rotenberg is the new chairman. During Soviet times "Enlightenment" as a state publisher controlled all textbook publication. The industry was opened up after 1990, resulting in a large number of new publishers. Now many small publishers are being pushed out as the industry is being consolidated under the state's private sector allies with an educational agenda being set by Mr. Putin....

LyrArc Article Gist
Defense Secretary Gates does not see Russia as the threat it was in the Cold War, first because Russia's conventional forces are a "shadow" of what they were during the Cold War, and Russia has adverse demographic trends that will diminish Russia's ability in conventional forces. He sees the Georgian war in the context of Russia's seeking to exorcize, as he puts it, past humiliations. And Gates sees opportunities in the relationship with Russia. Such things as Russia's willingness to work with the US on Afghanistan. Evidence of this is Russia supporting the renwal of the UN resolution on Afghanistan. Another indication is that Russia he says is very worried about the drugs coming out of Afghanistan, and has been supportive to provide alternative routes for Europeans to get equipment and supplies into Afghanistan. These views come across in an interview on December 17, with Charlie Rose, a five time elected Congressman, for the PBS Charlie Rose show. They are also reflected in an article in Foreign Affairs journal's current issue. Gates was a CIA analyst and has some insightful observations. Gates told Charlie Rose that he does not see the Islamic radicals and violent Islamic extremists as a threat in the same way as the threat in the Cold War years. This threat is not as big as the threat to freedom during the Cold War. He says the failure in strategic communications was huge as agencies of the US government engaged in activities in other countries, like the Agency for International Development and the US Information Agency, were neglected starting in the in the 1990's. Communications in other countries of what the US represented and stands for was left to the Pentagon, a role the Pentagon was ill-suited for. He sees the Islamic terrorism as more of an ideological conflict. Speaking at a town hall meeting at the Balad Air Force base in Iraq, in December, Gates pointed to these communications failures as a real challenge for the new administration. But he now sees a huge opportunity in this past failure, and ways of addressing it creatively, in addition to commiting resources and people to this effort. Walter Pincus wrote this article, and its part of the fineprint analysis effort at the Washington Post in which speeches, reports, and other documents are examined by people like Pincus, to catch the really important things, uncovering the fine print that really makes the headlines. Another aspect of this fineprint effort is that there are a huge number of reports, and speeches and documents that had a tone reminiscent of the Cold War during the Georgia war and yet they do not correctly reflect the real situation about Russia, as Gates sees it from his analysis of what is actually happening. Gates has used Foreign Affairs, the Dec 17 Charlie Rose Show on PBS in which he was interviewed, and the speech at the Balad Air Force base in Iraq, to communicate his views and analysis. They are important to underline and emphasize precisely because they show that all that cold war hysteria reporting and speeches may be misleading and lead to improper conclusions and mistakes in policy, wasted effort, wasted resources, and lost lives. And just as the US strategic communications was starved of resources and effort, so also this necessary work to retrieve and give emphasis to the important things is neglected. One additional link to this is the speech, discussion, and QA session in Washington DC at the time of the G20 summit in which President Medvedev and the new administration's elder statesman and diplomat Marilyn Albright, former secretary of state, expressed their hopes and plans for a new era in Russian-American relations. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A open conversation with the NYT's Baker, Schmidt and Haberman by president Trump in mid July 2017. This conversation of the president with the NYT is remarkable for its frankness about people close to the president during the election campaign, particularly Jeff Sessions of Alabama. Sessions was the only leading Senator in Congress who supported Mr. Trump from the beginning. Southern states came out heavily for Mr. Trump as part of the traditional Republican base. Trump says of Sessions that had he known Sessions was going to recuse himself from the Russia investigation he would not have appointed Sessions as the new Attorney General. About Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein Trump says he should never have appointed Mueller as Special Counsel. The president also says Mueller should stay only with information related to Russia and not stray from that to delve into Trump's finances. During the election efforts were made to get Mr. Trump to disclose more about his finances as a real estate businessman- most of these efforts failed and not much is known about president Trump's finances. The president says he never said he would order the Justice Department to fire Mr. Mueller, yet he left open this possiblility, according to the NYT, as the president feels it has affected the first 6 months of the Trump presidency. This interview with president Trump was published on July 20, 2017, the day after an editorial in the WSJ by the Editorial Board of the Journal on July 19, 2017, calling for transparency from president Trump on the Russia investigation. This was an exceptional and powerful editorial by its editorial board telling president Trump that he must tell everything he knows now or face the risk of losing public confidence, and risk his presidency. It said that president Trump was wrong to think that his larger than life personality and social media role could insulate him from the effects of this lack of transparency. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The boost to investor perceptions for India with Modi's election, and to Indonesia with Widodo's election are major changes in the second half of 2014. The first half saw the dented confidence in Argentina, Venezuela, Turkey and South Africa. To this can be added Russia with Putin's response in Ukraine and western sanctions. China with Jinping's response to pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong for restoration of the pledge of free elections by 2017, appears to be losing investor confidence, especially with investors seeing this as adopting the Putin Way. This is happening with a gradual movement towards restoration of trade relations with Iran.

LyrArc Article Gist
Elliott Abrams quotes former President George Bush from November 2003 when he asked the question: "Are the peoples of the Middle East somehow beyond the reach of liberty? Are millions of men and women and children condemned by history or culture to live in despotism? Are they alone never to know freedom and never even to have a choice in the matter?" Abrams, former deputy natonal security advisor for President Bush, says the autocratic regimes and dictators of the Middle East have offered a false choice to the US- its us or the Islamists. Roger Cohen also points this out in a recent article in the New York Times. For Tunisia he says this was never defensible. It is a largely secular nation with a literacy rate of 75% and per capita GDP of $9,500, and Ben Ali, the dictator of Tunisia, jailed moderates, human rights advocates, editors, anyone who represented hope and change. Abrams says Mubarak has done the same in Egypt. And he warns that if you make moderate politics impossible as Mubarak in Egypt and Ben Ali in Tunisia have done, then you make extremism more likely. Ruling by emergency decree for decades creates a real emergency, as has happened in Egypt. Bush made that speech at the 20th anniversary of the National Endowment for Democracy, and he reminded Americans that "sixty years of Western nations excusing and accomodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe- because in the long run, stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty." He admits that the Bush administration did not always conduct US diplomacy in this vein, but the President took the lead and the Obama administration's abandonment of that mindset is nothing short of a tragedy. Obama's policy of "engagement" actually endangers the US position as a supporter of liberty and freedom wherever it is stifled or muffled, because it turned a blind eye to the people themselves as it engaged with the dictatorial regimes in the Arab world and other countries. When the elections in Iran were stolen the Obama administration hesitated, waffled in its committment to liberty, fearing that it would affect nuclear negotiations. Obama did not -as of late Friday night Jan 28, 2011- call for free elections or clearly demand democracy. The law school analytical processes that Obama brings to the presidency and the demands of geopolitical diplomacy are impervious to the loud voices demanding freedom in countries denied liberty. Obama has forgotten the very same voices he passionately heard when he wrote in his first book that in the words "we hold these truths to be self-evident" he could hear the spirit of Douglas and Delaney, as well as Jefferson and Lincoln, the struggles of Martin and Malcolm and unheralded marchers to bring the words to life. He could hear the words of interned Japanese families, the voices of Russian Jews in lower East side sweatshops, of dust bowl farmers during the depression, all these voices clamoring for recognition and asking the question about what is community and how it can be reconciled with freedom. This failure to recognize these voices clamoring for freedom and economic opportunity is all the more striking because it was vision and a bold sense of purpose that energized the Obama campaign and both the vision and the bold sense have eluded the administration. Abrams calls for a clear unequivocal committment by the US government in favor of freedom and peaceful efforts to achieve it in the Middle East, because he says that as the demonstrators are telling the world outside supporting freedom is the best policy of all. ...