LyrArc Article Gist
When asked what projects they wanted to see in Helmand province, ordinary Afghans said they wanted the repair of the main sluice gates that lead to the irrigation canals off the Helmand River. These were built with American aid in the 1950's, and its been 30 years since anyone did any work on that canal. See the link to India and irrigation, only 50% of the land is estimated by experts to be irrigated in India. WIthout irrigation, as the uncertain monsoon rains this year showed, India's agricultural heartland in the Punjab and Haryana would collapse. When other Afghans were asked they mentioned security, they did not want to see the Americans in tents, but in some sort of permanent presence. BUt considering the vast and undeveloped landscape of Afghanistan, one sees several differences from Iraq's insurgent dominated priovince near Baghdad. It has mountainous terrain, with no electricity, no roads, no water, totally desolate in most parts of Helmand and other provinces, and it is a vast country with illiterate people tired of war. Would America's 40,000 troops be enough, or would you need more and more. If McChrystal's strategy shown here is to occupy civilan areas and fight the Taliban, and the Taliban with the help of Pakistan's ISI dissident elements are getting more and more sophisticated with roadside bombs, there will be growing casualties. The Americans could hold their own if there was no outpouring of support because of unpopularity of the Afghan government, but throw that into the equation- something McChrystal has not thought through according to Dexter Filkins of the NYT- and things get muddied. And from his training as a Special Operations commander this is a problem McChrystal is not as well prepared to understand or tackle. Consider the implications if Afghanistan is not Iraq- where Shiites and Aytollah Sistani their spiritual leader formed a core of support that the US always had on its side once it supported a democratically elected government- and no core of support here in Afghanistan except an unpopular government. McChrystal may also not have factored in a key factor of the "allergy" of Afghans to foreign boots on the ground. With a largely illiterate police recruits and army recruits, would the idea of transferring the job become delayed and the American boots end up in an untenable position? See the link to Commander Adams and Khost province, where Adams points out its all about visible evidence of progress. For his 250 paratroopers of the 82nd Airborne this meant delivering on roads built in Khost province, and a spring water system for 12,000 villagers. Here Filkins starts with Afghan villagers asking for the repair of the canal leading to the Helmand river which has not been repaired since the 1950's. McChrystal could only say "it takes time." But the US has been in Afghistan for 8 years and as commader Adams says only fighting "one year wars." The other point Adams says is that an effort in Afghanistan only works by befriending the tribes, because its the tribes who will see that IED's are reported and any insurgents in the area are reported, and only they have the capabilities to do it, which no number of American troops can do. These are serious questions that need answers. See the groups for- Commander Adams, and for Dexter Filkins (the article on McChrystal's Long War), which touch on similiar development issues....

LyrArc Article Gist
The step by step process Mr. Obama used to arrive at his decision to send 30,000 troops to Afghanistan. The use of charts showing the buildup at one of the last meetings, and how President Obama expressed frustration at the length of time the troops would be there, and then says "I want this curve pushed to the left," pointing to the bell curve showing buildup and withdrawal after some years. This says Baker may be the pivotal moment for the expansion of the war. What he meant was something like a fast buildup and rapid draw down. He asks Petraeus how fast the Iraq buildup for the surge took place, and Petraeus says 6 months. The option being discussed was Option 2A carefully prepared to get a30,000 troop addition approved by Defense Secretary Gates and presented to Mr Obama on November 11, 2009. What Obama said at that point was according to NYT reporter Baker's sources is - "What I'm looking for is a surge, this has to be a surge." Gates was the seasoned person in saying the right things at just the right time and not sooner in these negotiations. The process had seen alot of back and forth swings, leaks including the McChrystal report leak and the Ambassador Eikenberry report leak, and the President preferring to keep his thoughts to himself and using University of Chicago law school style analytical thinking to wade through the swamp of issues in this place called Afghanistan. With that Gates shows how that curve can be moved up and gets the President to allow for conditions at the time to be the factor for withdrawal conditions. In effect the President's analytical thinking an approaches good for a law class in the University of Chicago and potentially very unlikely to allow for agrasp of the muddied details and complexities of social, political and historical type in Afghanistan, were being applied to a crucial mind decision that would have a mind boggling impact. Had Gates served the country well? Had Mr Obama served the country well with these analytics, when a more intuitive decision based on understanding of all the conditions on the ground by talking to different people who had first hand experience in Afghnistan and Pakistan- see the links here to first hand reports- would have accomodated the peculiarities of the Afghan situation better than some charts and numbers? Speaker Pelosi and Congressman Obey had indicated lack of support among Democrats. The Budget Office had provided a cost estimate of 1 trillion dollars for 10 years. None of this appeared to matter in the final decision. NATO would supply the additional troops to get the number closer to 40,000. Gates had been the most seasoned player through years of negotiating with Congress, and he helped formulate Option 2A for 30,000. The President makes one final Professorial comment at the final meeting on November 29, 2009, after announcing his decision to support Option 2A, -"but if you don't agree with me say so now" and repeats saying "tell me now." Gates signals to Vice President Biden who inquires whether this is a Presidential order that it is one. Mullen and Petraeus say "fully support." America had by using charts numbers and law school analytical processes turned the complexities of Afghnistan into something else, but these analytics had still to be played out in the vast mountainous spaces of Afghanistan and in the homes and workplaces of America in 2010 and beyond. It is hard not to sense that something serious was lost that day. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Oil supplies are not expected to go up with Mexicio and Russia's aging fields crimping production, non opec production barely budging with 1% increase this year according to IEA. Indonesia production down by half from its peak. Countries in the middle east like Iran are consuming more and have less available for export. And the Saudis plan to build huge chemical aluminium and other plants as well as cities in the desert, and increase electricity production. This will take up some of the oil production and make less available for export. Militant strikes have shut down over 25% of production of Nigeria's 2.5 million barrels a day of production repeatedly in the last few years. And Saudi Arabia has according to CERA only 2 million barrels a day of spare capacity or 2.3% that it can add, all of the safety cushion in one country according to Daniel Yergin. Yergin sees prices up to $150 barrel based on the supply constraints. The demand side is showing declining consumption in the USA but not by enough to compensate for growing consumption in China by 5% this year, and the increase in consumption in India, Russia, Brazil and other developing countries including Middle East. The reason for continuing consumption increases in the rest of the world is that price impact has been less severe in Europe because of the strong euro and oil priced in US dollars, and in China because Petrochina is required to put price caps so gasoline price increases are not that harsh. And India also cushions the price impact to some extent to protect consumers. And autos are just taking off in large numbers in China, Russia, India, Brazil and other countries. The drop in consumption in the USA has to be large enough to have an impact. And the shift to fuel efficient targets in the new fuel efficiency regulations in the USA are too modest and over a number of years to have any impact in the short term or in the next 1-3 years. In February US oil demand dropped to 19.7 million barrels a day, down 1 million barrels a day from the US average for 2007, but this insufficient conservation to impact price. Even though new cars are shifting to higher fuel efficient small cars the impact on the total fleet is gradual as cars on the road purchased in the last 5-10 years are still on the road. Even as the consumption falls in the US the offset is occurring in the other countries like China, Russia and India. Some of this is due to the euro and some to speculation but the supply constraints are real and demand momentum is still there in China, Middle east, Russia and India to keep offsetting savings elsewhere and keeping supplies tight. The euro increased in value by 2% while oil prices increased by 10% since the 1st week of April so there is more than the weakening dollar and some speculation to this surge, which may be why the normally cautious Yergin says the price rise to $150 is realistic and says, its not just that the genie is out of the bottle, a hundred genies are out of the bottle. That is to say for the immediate future of demand momentum and supply sluggishness which could run 6-24 months, to the Olympics and maybe a year or so from then. This ties in with the thinking behind the Goldman's estimate and CERA's estimate. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Jose de Cordoba of the WSJ provides this excellent story on the nature of the migration crisis in the U.S. that is creating political divisions in the U.S. What is causing this surge in migration to the U.S.? Cordoba provides some useful insights to understand the nature of this problem. Nine out of ten migrants in Guatemala which sends most of the migrants from Central America are moving north from Guatemala through Mexico to the U.S. for financial reasons, it points out. Only 10% are because of violence in the region, the rest for financial reasons according to the United Nations International Organization for Migration The jump in apprehension of Guatemalans at the American border shows a surge from 15,000 in 2007 to 236,000 in 9 months of 2019, according to U.S. government data. The surge began in 2008 and jumped in 2014 after U.S. court rulings that first required migrant children to be allowed to join relatives in the U.S. followed by a ruling in 2015 that allowed a parent to join the children and allowed court proceedings to take place that takes years. The result was that smugglers advertised on radio and families sold small plots of land to join relatives in the U.S. who had gone before them. The migration is also specific to certain areas hit by damage to crops, including coffee crop from drought, or certain towns that simply sent more people simply for financial reasons advertised openly.  For 8 hours of work a migrant could make at $12 per hour amount of $96 per day, in Guatemala the daily wage would be about $5.  Overwhelmingly it is financial reasons or economic opportunity that sends migrants north. After it became known that kids could help migration the people in family groups apprehended at the border jumped from about 40,000 in 2015 to 390,000 in fiscal 2019. Smugglers charge $8600 per adult and half that for a child and an adult that can be dropped off at a checkpoint. The efforts of president Trump to close the border to this migration include having Mexico sign an agreement to police its southern border with Guatemala using its newly setup National Guard. As a result the migration has actually surged in 2019 with migrants seeing this as their one last opportunity to join relatives in the U.S. or to migrate to the U.S. The Trump administration tried separating families because of the loophole in the law that allows children to be not deported and parents to join their children. But this created a public outcry and the effort now is to close the loophole in the law. It is also strange that as many migrants are coming from one town Joyabaj  with population 100,000 as from Guatemala City the capital population 2.5 million. In fact the economy has grown by 3.4 % a year in Guatemala and efforts have been made to improve conditions with the help of donor countries in the West for several years, though the drought conditions exist. The situation is similar to that in Europe. If one looks at the violence by gangs in central American region after the end of the guerilla wars and compares it to the wars in Syria and Iraq, one can see how humanitarian concerns preceded what eventually turned out tobe a full blown migration for economic reasons. Initially chancellor Merkel adopted a humanitarian stance but failed to recognize that there was another side to his situation that would attract a wave of economic migrants from places as far apart as North Africa to Afghanistan. Poverty has existed in these regions for many many years before the current migration, with drought and lack of economic opportunity going far back in time. Merkel only recently recognized this problem and the new CDU leader Kambrauer has clearly recognized this. CDU policy shifted in 2018-2019 with curbs on economic migration that has reduced it to a trickle. This process is underway in the U.S. at its border with Mexico and for Mexico with its border with Guatemala. In the short run Europe and the U.S. are paying a price. Not just in the way it has divided each country with a far left and a far right eroding the centrist parties that existed before. In some cases centrist parties that were popular on the right and the left now hve leaders from a far right or a far left faction within the centrist ruling parties. Boris Johnson in Britain, Trump in the U.S., leaders in Italy, Austria and Hungary. Or as in Germany and Spain new far left or far right parties causing the centrist parties to dwindle in influence or as in Germany this combined with a shift to the Green Party in Germany and Liberals Party in Britain as a show of disapproval for how the migration issue has been tackled.  The Economist in a July 2019 issue also points out that the country's own citizens have fared worse with migration. It shows how the Conservative Party's austerity cuts for welfare budgets was popular in Britain as long as eastern European migration at high levels in Britain were allowed starting with the Labour party under Blair. This disproportionately hurt the middle class and the poor after the hit already taken from the faulty banking caused recession. With the drop in migration it is now felt by a majority in Britain that the austerity cuts have just gone too far and a mood is set in to restore many of the cuts and fund public services. Meantime some of the damage has been done and will take a decade to correct as the issues that mangled the centrist parties and led to fragmentation on views of what society should look like have taken place with Brexit and high levels of poverty, income inequality in Britain, lack of investment in infrastructure with overallocation to tech with declining productive benefit for every additional dollar spent. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A Syrian opposition group describes the mislabeling of opposition groups in Syria by the Obama administration.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Arab League votes to impose sanctions on Syria with a vote of 18 of its 22 members.

LyrArc Article Gist
Lower oil prices in June 2012 with slowing growth worldwide and a planned buildup of inventories by Saudi Arabia and western nations. U.S. crude oil prices dropped to $83.23 a barrel on June 1, 2012.

LyrArc Article Gist
Bernie Sanders with 46% of the delegates, 13.4 million votes, 22 states, and many of the young people in the U.S. behind him, told a news reporter at his home in the final sprint two weeks before the election- he plans to see the major planks of the Democratic platform implemented. He said Clinton is progressive on a number of issues, but the platform is more progressive with upward mobility a critical concern. Sanders played a critical role in shaping the platform. He says he opposes someone from Wall Street in positions of Treasury Secretary, Trade Representative, and will make known his views who would be best in these positions, including Attorney General. Sanders is supported in the Senate by Senators Sherrod Brown, Jeff Merkley, and Elizabeth Warren. Warren has campaigned with Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, and both support minimum wage, women's rights. WIth a win for Democrats in the Senate Sanders will become either the chairman of the Budget Committee, or with his preference chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. His main goal now is to see key economic Cabinet positions that affect upward mobility, intergenerational mobility, which is damaged today for the middle and working class, go to persons who would do the most to improve it.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This was one of the last reports written by Anthony Shadid, New York Times foreign correspondent, before his death in Syria. It covers the Islamist movement's shift to modernism and incorporating an outlook that includes ideas of liberal democracy from Britain, as seen from Tunisia. No longer is the main source of ideas coming from Egypt. A diverse group of thought is being developed in Arab and North Africa, and in places like London, where emigres from the Middle East during the years of repression gathered to discuss ideas for the future. Said Ferjani's as one of these emigres is one of sources of the new thinking and approaches of Islamist thought.

LyrArc Article Gist
Russia experts Robert Nurick of the Atlantic Council, and Graham Allison of the Belfer Center of International Affairs at Harvard, see a sea change in attitudes to Russia following the interventionist policies of president Putin. The Obama administration will now focus on limiting Russian influence for the remaining two years of Obama's second term. There is a loss of faith in Putin on the part of Obama and close advisors. Russia is seen as a regional power, and the Ukraine crisis is seen as having a serious impact on the Russian economy through decline in trade, foreign investment and capital outflows. Russia is a regional power because it is not the same as the old Soviet Union, it is much smaller, with a declining population, and dependent on oil revenues, and in this sense not the Russia U,S, president Truman and Kennan faced during the Cold War. Obama advisors see Putin's actions as counterproductive for Russia, as the economy is now seen as contracting in 2014, making its actions in Syria, and in Ukraine, unwise foreign policy moves that hurts Russia's economy and future prosperity. Democratically elected leaders in Turkey and Russia with control over the media and shutting down the opposition using control of the judicial process, have shortchanged democratic ideals, and in the process concentrated powers in one leader. This creates risks of arbitrary exercize of power without the checks and balances that are built into a truly functioning democracy, with foreign policy errors eventually leading to a resolution of the conflicts created as these policies are increasingly called into question. Putin and Erdogan were reelected because of economic growth- a contractionary economy or steep declines in growth put everything at risk. A footnote on Kennan, American diplomat and linguist, is appropriate. A quick reading of Wikipedia's excellent account of Kennan will show that Kennan was in favor of a nuanced approach to Russia based on changing conditions. He observed that policies that were seen as anti-Russian actually helped Russian leaders throughout history solidify autocratic type rule, which actually hurts Russia's normal evolution and development. Normal development and evolution similiar to ways Germany and other nations left behind Prussian history and traditions for a open, free society, and in the ways even the U.S. left behind older practices such as slavery in the south and limited representation democracy. In fairness to Kennan it should be said that containment of the Cold War was more a Truman-Acheson doctrine- continued under Eisenhower by Dulles-Nitze, and under Kennedy by Rusk-McNamara- which has roots in Soviet intentions of destabilizing war ravaged western Europe starting with Greece, following similiar efforts in Eastern Europe. Truman was right in aiding Greece, but the U.S. needed to be aware of changing conditions and not take a rigid stance, and get locked into supporting client states just because they were "our guys," a lesson Kennan emphasized throughout his life. Putin and Erdogan use appeals to Russian and Turkish nationalism to improve electoral support and stifle free expression of ideas necessary for growth in any society. This also provides a way to have a discussion with our German friends on engagement and economic relationships, without the rigid outlook of a Wilsonian or Acheson-Dulles kind. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Romney promises to focus on everyday concerns of jobs, family, and budget deficits with his 5 step plan to revive the economy. He says he will not raise taxes on the middle class. The 5 step plan is to make America energy independent by making full use of domestic oil and gas resources, create jobs and provide skills for new jobs, make trade work for America, support small businesses with fewer regulations and smaller tax burden and smaller burden of healthcare, and reduce the deficit. His plan he says will create 12 million new jobs.

LyrArc Article Gist
Tom Brokaw is perplexed by the absence of the war in Afghanistan as a campaign issue in 2010 US elections. Especially because the war is in its 9th year, has caused 5000 dead, 30,000 wounded, and cost over $1 trillion dollars. He reasons that this is because the vast majority of Americans can opt out of fighting the war on the ground. The all volunteer service draws from 1% of the population, with the majority from working class or middle class backgrounds. This has an unintended effect in making the costs of the war less visible, when actually it is taking a toll in other ways. The US is short of funds to build much needed infrastructure or update infrastructure. States and local governments are laying off teachers because of budget shortfalls, and the national budget deficit makes less money available for solving pressing problems in carbon emissions, energy, and infrastructure. Only recently New Jersey Governor Christie put on hold a new tunnel into New York City because of a lack funds. Pressing infrastructure issues elsewhere will be postponed in this manner. And the outlook for the next 20 years, according to Robert Gordon of Northwestern University, is not going to be better with slower growth at an average of 1.5%, leaving less money for the kinds of projects that defined America from the Erie canal to interstate highways. Brokaw says, the country would benefit from an effort to discuss what happens next, in the continued expenditure of blood and treasure. A discussion of what happens next in this effort to deal with Islamic rage....