World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
One needs to look at India -US relations over the long span 1900-2025  looking only at the long haul. In taking a look at the relationship in this way Gandhi's letter to FDR during the Quit India Movement from Wardha July 1 1941, and FDR's reply (with Churchill and FDR fighting Japan in 1941) ranks as memorable and long lasting, far likely to prevail as an idea that holds the imagination of it's peoples than the pulls and shifts of different administrations. Even in the  depth of the war against the Nazis in Europe, and the Imperial Japanese Army rampaging through China, Gandhi felt comfortable looking to America as a friend. Churchill was the antagonist at the time unwilling to let the British Empire fade, and FDR was a friend through the Second World War. Gandhi opens his letter to FDR saying "Dear Friend. I twice missed coming to your great country... I have profited greatly from the writings of Thoreau and Emerson..." And FDR writing back "I shall hope that our common interest in democracy and righteousness will enable your countrymen and mine to make common cause..." For India the powerful words of Cordell Hull his Secretary of State, were offered by FDR with unmistakable goals of freedom and democratic process for India. Eisenhower and Dulles support for Pakistan in the 1950's into 1970's, a period of China and India in the 1970's and 1990's shifting away from old economic arrangements, till India US under Biden 2020 where India as with FDR  was "the closest in the world" to the US, following China's shift to Communist rule and now competition with the US. Taking this long perspective India and the relationship with America will be determined by the 1.8 billion people of the two countries (with Indonesia 2.1 billion people), and the potential for this is vast and only growing by the year. There is a natural affinity and feeling that is only now coming into its own because of a shared responsibility, and a shared understanding, as parts of the former British Empire, separated in 1783 and 1947. And the mutual desire to build the modern world on the terms left by advances of science and technology combined with the ancient civilization of the Bible, Buddhism and the Upanishads. In this sense modern India is made with America and does not exist separate from America, and modern America forward is made with India and does not exist separate from India. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
BAE Systems has a $120 million contract to provide social anthropologists to the Defense Department of the USA. In December, L-3 Communications Holdings Inc. acquired International Resources Ltd, a Washington based economic-development firm which is different from its military advisory business. This is the way the Defense Department and the suppliers to the Defense department are changing in response to Defense Secretary Gates philosophy that economic development, rule of law programs and strategic communications and a whole host of soft power initiatives are essential needs, and to the new President's philosophy. Now US Defense suppliers Lockheed and Northrop are providing peacekeepers thorugh the State Department, and BAE SYstems is providing social anthropologists in addition to armored vehicles to go with US troops on village patrols. The State Department, Agency of International Development and a changing Defense Department are all getting the attention of suppliers who are building new relationships for new needs and new services tackle the issues of terrorism, poverty, drugs and crime that generate or exacerbate conflict in other countries. In the first budget presented recently Obama pledged $50 billion double the amount before for foreign assistance. A portion of the $130 billion requested for wartime operations in 2010 will be allocated to these new kinds of services which are more effective and generate better understanding and support for the US in other countries....
Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump announces the U.S. withdrawal from the Iran Nuclear Agreement of 2015 signed by president Obama. He calls it a bad deal and "a one sided agreement, that "didn't bring, calm, didn't bring peace, and never will." Since the signing of the agreement the conflicts in the Middle East have increased and relations between the U.S. and Iran have deteriorated under the Trump administration. During the election campaign candidate Trump and Republicans had criticized the deal and deal never gained Republican support. It was also not initially supported by France which called for stronger safeguards on nuclear weapons development. The appointment of John Bolton as National Security Adviser, and Mike Pompeo as the new Secretary of State, who were strong critics of the Iran nuclear deal also influenced president Trump. He was also influenced say aides by the success of his policy with North Korea of imposing strong bargaining pressure with tough sanctions on North Korea including Chinese sanctions, which led to the talks between North and South Korean presidents and the planned Trump meeting with Kim Jong-Un of North Korea. Iran's president Rouhani says Iran will stay with the agreement as the EU countries Germany, France plan to support the agreement. This could also leave an opening for future talks with Iran on a new peace agreement as  president Trump talked about Iranian people deserving a better deal at the end of his 11 minute announcement. As Stephens points out in a op-ed in the NYT Iran's economy needs the removal of sanctions so that focus could shift to economic development, as the lifting of sanctions have yet to result in increasing living standards and building infrastructure neglected during the sanctions years. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A detailed account by Thomas Schweich, a senior official and deputy in the law enforcement bureau to Anne Patterson, Assistant secretary of State for international narcotics and law enforcement affairs. He talks about how the Pentagon and the UK military have thwarted efforts for aerial eradication of poppy fields which has worked in other countries like Columbia. In fact Anne Patterson was an Ambassador to Columbia and knows about this first hand. He also talks about how through their efforts northern Afghanistan was cleared of poppy fields but how the cultivation has shifted to the south to Helmand and Kandahar provinces. The government officials in these provinces are actively involved in the poppy farms that are being setup there and support Karzai and help him organize the Pashtun vote for coming elections. So Karzai is protecting these officials and because of this opposes aerial eradication and does not support using Afghan Army for land eradication. The military in the U.S. and the UK does not want to take more casualties by turning against them the officials and farmers who support the government, but this is a short sighted policy because this helps make the Taliban insurgency stronger with access to cash and weapons because they also are actively setting up farms in their areas of southern Afghanistan. Aerial eradication takes care of poppy farms in all areas and has been effective in other countries. In the long run the military takes many more casulaties because of the bigger insurgency and Taliban they have to deal with. The military's policy is called "Sequencing," and its basically we'll deal with drugs later which is based on a complete misperception and understanding of the situation facing them. Schweich is in the thick of these battles and has fought them wit courage it appears from this account. He has the support of Secretary of State Rice but has not been able to get the Administration to get Karzai to change the way he is operating. It risks making the situation and insurgency in Afghanistan a lot worse if not corrected. Its a call for action and for educating the public and clearing all the misunderstanding and myths and fog about whats happening in Afghanistan....
Washington Post Original article ›
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. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Ukraine's conflict flares up again in Feb. 2014 with the flow of Russian arms and fighters into eastern Ukraine. The U.S., Germany and France call on Russia to respect an agreement made in September 2014 to end the conflict. Russian president Putin's proposal is for a new agreement that takes into account the new territory captured by the separatists, in effect creating a new conflict zone with which to influence the government in Kiev. U.S. Secretary of State Kerry says the great technology available today makes it possible to see the flow of Russian forces and arms into eastern Ukraine, refuting Russia's claims that it is not involved. Germany's Merkel and France's Hollande plan to visit Russia to discuss the crisis with Putin as the Americans consider sending arms to the Poroshenko government in Kiev. In Brussels NATO chief Stoltenberg announces the preparations for the new Rapid Response Force to counter Russia's aggressive posture in Eastern Europe.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How an outside director is heard at meetings of China Netcom Group (Hong Kong), in this case former Goldman banker Thornton. This is rare in Chinese board meetings. There is a story behind this and Jason Dean tells us what happened to bring Thornton, Roderic Hills a former SEC chairman, McKinsey, Qian, a governance expert at UC Berkeley, Tian, a US trained founder of Netcom, and Mr Zhang together to shape Netcom's corporate governance, as a model for the other state controlled Chinese companies. Especially useful is the insight from Zhang about the role of the Communist party committee in Netcom, of which he is party secretary, and its counterparts which really run state controlled Chinese companies. The communist party committee is responsible for six functions, not spelled out here, but probably refers to the social goals as perceived by the communist party. One of the goals is modernization- bringing Chinese company management to best practice standards in Europe and the US. Netcom's incentive is that it needs to stand out against its better positioned competitors China Telecom and China Mobile, which have a big share of the market. Zhang gives the impression of being a thinking type willing to try out new ideas to help achieve the goal of "catching up" to best practice governance....
C-SPAN.org Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US president DJT said today Feb. 13, 2025, as he introduced the new Health Secretary of the US-  "There's something wrong, and I think it's it's something that can be found out. In 2022, more than 40% of children had at least one chronic health condition, and today, nearly 80% of young adults do not qualify for military service in large part for health reasons. We're, ah, think of that 80%. Something is wrong and that's why immediately after Bobby is sworn in, I will be signing an Executive Order establishing the President's Commission To Make America Healthy Again. We have some great people on that commission chaired by our new secretary. This groundbreaking breaking commission will be charged with investigating what is causing The decades long increase in chronic illness, reporting its findings and delivering an action plan to the American people, and it's going to be a plan that people are really waiting to hear. Bobby, ah, I want to thank you. You've gone through a lot. It's taken great courage. You've been amazing actually. I'd call him and say, You're gonna be OK. And he said, I know, I really do. "Perhaps most importantly though, Bobby created a nationwide movement made up of millions and millions of mothers and fathers and young people and concerned citizens of every background who want to end this horrible chronic disease crisis that exists, exists in America. He's absolutely committed to getting dangerous chemicals out of our environment and out of our food supply and getting the American people the facts and the answers that we deserve after years in which our public health system has squandered the trust of our citizens, and they really have, they didn't, they don't trust us. They don't trust anybody, frankly they've gone through hell. There's no better person to lead our campaign of historic reforms and restore faith in American health care, and Bobby's going to do it. The United States spends more money in health than any other country on Earth, but we're growing sicker every year. We're not as healthy as countries that spend just a fraction of what we spend, so there's something wrong. He's going to figure it out. In recent decades we've seen staggering increases in cancer rates across all age demographics, including more than 40% increase in childhood cancer since 1975. Who can believe that? And an explosion in other chronic childhood illnesses not long ago, 1 in 10,000 people, children had autism. Now it's 1 in 36. Think of that 1 in 10,000, 1 in 10,000. Now it's 1 in 36. Who can believe that there's something wrong. There's something wrong, and I think it's it's something that can be found out. In 2022, more than 40% of children had at least one chronic health condition, and today, nearly 80% of young adults do not qualify for military service in large part for health reasons. We're, ah, think of that 80%. Something is wrong and that's why immediately after Bobby is sworn in, I will be signing an executive order establishing the president's commission to make America healthy again. We have some great people on that commission chaired by our new secretary. This groundbreaking breaking commission will be charged with investigating what is causing The decades long increase in chronic illness, reporting its findings and delivering an action plan to the American people, and it's going to be a plan that people are really waiting to hear. Bobby, ah, I want to thank you. You've gone through a lot. It's taken great courage. You've been amazing actually. I'd call him and say, You're gonna be OK. And he said, I know, I really do. He's really, ah, been supported amazingly by Cheryl and his family. And it was a very tough. It was a very nasty group of people that were after him, but he was tougher and he was smarter than they are, and that's why he's here today. There are very few people that could have withstood the, ah, the assault, but he was able to." ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This NYT report by Thrush, Shear and Sullivan, looks at retired Marine general John Kelly, the head of Homeland Security till he was made the new chief of staff at the White House. He replaces Vince Priebus, who was the Republican National Party chairman during the 2016 election, becoming the new White House chief of Staff in January 2017. Priebus lasted only 6 months. This report points out that presidential family members Kushner and Ivanka Trump now report to Kelly, as part of the new discipline imposed by Kelly in an effort to reverse the chaotic situation in the White House with different quarreling factions. Kelly made this a condition for his taking the position, which Trump accepted as he was keen on firing Vince Priebus and had asked Kelly to take the job since May. Kelly is shown here as monitoring the contacts of Cabinet secretaries with the president. Who sees the president and for how long is now determined by Kelly to impose rigorous discipline. Kelly supported McMaster in the dismissal of a National Security Council member supported by Bannon and Kushner, in an effort to bring discipline. There is one area Kelly does not get into- the tweeting and personal affairs of the president. His job as he sees it is to put some bureaucratic competence around the president. In doing this he takes a tough approach that so far is respected by president Trump, as the presidency suffered from repeated setbacks from infighting and leaks. Will Kelly last where others have failed is a question posed in this report. Two people who were superiors of Kelly give their opinions. Kelly reported to Leon Panetta, a former chief of staff under Bill Clinton who was Defense Secretary, and to Robert Gates,  a Republican who was Defense Secretary. Panetta may know him closely as Kelly was his chief military aide as Defense Secretary. Panetta says of Kelly, that Kelly never minced words, said what he thought looking at you in the eye- if he thought a proposal was nuts he would say it right out. The big question Panetta says is whether president Trump will give him the authority for long. Also stated in this report is that Kelly called Comey when he was fired as FBI Director, and that Kelly even considered resigning in protest.  Less noticed even in this report is the way in which a team of experienced politicians and the senior most officials in defense and national security are working together in August 2017. In an interview with Washington Post editor Ignatius broadcast on PBS, Republican Senator Corker described how he works closely with them, and how the key people in defense and national security work together before they see the president. The appointment of Kelly helps to create a core independent group of advisors around the president, which is positive in the event the U.S. has to respond to a crisis. ...

Winston's Hiccup

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Jacobs takes us back to a time in history when Winston Churchill, as colonial secretary for the British Empire, created countries and geographic borders simply by drawing this on a map. The collapse of the Ottoman Empire during the first world war provided the opportunity to create the borders and states that we know today- Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon. This part of history is important to understand what we see today in the Middle East- as it was the first step in the evolution of British, French, and later American policy in the region. Britain's oil interests in Iran determined policies pursued first by Britain, and later by the U.S. in the region, and which reverberate to this day in how Iranians see the world.
WSJ Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A partnership between rivals and the movement towards the 2016 U.S. elections.
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Condoleeza Rice, former U.S. Secretary of State, who insisted on meeting opposition leaders in Cairo during the Mubarak regime (in Condoleeza Rice, Washington Post, 2/16/2010, The Future of a Democratic Egypt), reflects on the situation after parliamentary and presidential elections in Russia in March 2012. She says that the growing middle class in Russia seeks respect and participation in how Russia is to be governed. She thinks Russia's dependence on oil and commodities for revenues fosters a climate of corruption and it should move faster in the direction of diversifying its economy. Russian entry in the World Trade Organization, fostering a climate for Russian engineers and scientists to work inside Russia and start new companies, and building U.S. and European business and private ties with Russia's public and private sectors, should be promoted to help the Russian economy diversify. Resetting Russian relations or depending on the U.S. government to come up with solutions appears to be the wrong answer, Rice points out, because resetting is still based on internal politics in Russia. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Did U.S. Treaury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, ignore a key request by President Obama to present plans for the restructuring of Citigroup after the government bailout of Citigroup? Ron Suskind says this is what happened in his book on the Obama administration and how the White House operated to make key decisions. Ron Suskind, intervewed key members of the Obama White House economic policy team, Lawrence Summers, Christina Romer, Peter Orszag. In all Suskind conducted 700 hours of interviews for his new book in Sept 2011: "Confidence Men: Wall Street, Washington and the Education of a President." According to the book, in early 2009 after Obama authorized a series of stress tests for banks he told Geithner to develop a plan for restructuring Citigroup. A month later at a meeting not attended by Geithner Obama raised a question about the status of the plan. He was told by Romer that no restructuring plan had been developed for Citi. Suskind says Geithner disagreed about a plan to restructure Citi and decided to ignore the request. Geithner and the Treasury Department say Obama asked Geithner to develop a backup plan to overhaul banks if the government was forced to keep a big ownership stake in the companies, and "there was fortunately never a need to put them in place." Geithner told Suskind that he doesn't slow-walk the President on any matter. Other aspects of the operation of the economic policy team that Suskind covers are a series of memos from top aide Pete Rouse raising questions that ongoing communication between some members of the economic team and Summers was giving Summers power to shape policy. Summers, Director of the National Economic Council, is shown as trying to keep out the views of Romer and budget director Orszag from reaching the President without going through him. When Orszag gives a private report to the president on the deficit, Summers objects saying that this was immoral. Obama lacked the fresh ideas needed to tackle the problems created by the mortgage and banking crisis of 2008, when he used the Clinton administration economic policy team of the 1990's- Rubin, Bernanke, Summers and Geithner. Fresh approaches were needed two decades after Clinton's election in 1992, and the Bush administration that followed, as many of the problems developed during this period. The similiar embedded thinking was shared during the Clinton and Bush administrations and the economic advisors about dealings with the banking sector, but the situation for deficits, unemployment, housing, and the economy had completely changed requiring fresh approaches. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
As the deadline of July 22 approaches for the 160,000 members of the UK Conservative Party to elect a leader, former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and the current Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt are running for the leadership position. Boris Johnson has 68% member support with Hunt at 23%, according to YouGov survey. Both candidates are in favor of Britain leaving the European Union without an agreement. Hunt has stated he would cancel leave for Britain's 16,000 civil servants in August to prepare for the departure of Britain from the EU by October 31.  Only 27% of Conservative Party members believe Mr. Hunt can do the preparation needed for an abrupt exit after 45 years of economic integration with the European Union. By contrast 90% of members think Johnson would do the preparation needed. Preparation is needed because of food and medical supplies trucks and in flights awaiting customs at border points. The result could be chaotic without adequate preparation. Under a Johnson government many ministers would leave the government including Mr. Hammond who runs the finance ministry. He is expected to join rebel ranks in the Conservative Party that does not think an abrupt exit like this is good for Britain. If these members in the House of Commons join Labour party members they could vote to block this from happening. Britain's opposition Labour Party led by Jeremy Corbyn has finally decided to call for a second referendum if Johnson pushes to leave the EU abruptly, and to campaign wholeheartedly this time for staying inside the EU. During the last referendum Labour leaders did not push hard for Remain, and David Cameron as prime minister and head of the Conservatives proved to be a weak and ineffective leader using the promise of a referendum as a ploy to win votes for the Conservatives in an earlier election and then finding himself stuck with promises made in the election with his party's right wing led by Johnson. Years of austerity policies promoted by Germany in the EU after a flawed entry of southern European countries with faulty not transparent finances such as Greece too early  into the eurozone had soured Britons on the EU. The friendly migration policies of German leader Merkel for economic as well as war torn country migrants from North Africa finally not just soured Germans on Merkel policies but also soured British working class families struggling to make ends meet and seeing migration as taking British resources that were needed at home. This has split most of Europe including Britain along lines of the major cities and the rural areas plus smaller towns, and in Eastern Europe, East Germany region along the lines of the old Soviet bloc countries which with deeply conservative thinking do not favor such migration policies. These divisive changes have taken place over along period of decades and will take time to heal through economic recovery and a fairer distribution of wealth, better investment in infrastructure, health, education, public services, neglected during the Tech driven flawed investment diversion of economic resources. Yet the hope of this type of change if grasped by Britons as well as Europeans could bring new life and revive the vision of a Europe with shared benefits for all Europeans, not just a French-German project. For this to happen new leaders have to rise to the challenge inside Britain and the rest of Europe.      ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
O'Malley, Sanders and Clinton agree that the media has spent much too much time on the Hillary Clinton email controversy. The first Democratic party debate also puts Sanders on the defensive on issues such as using force as commander in chief, gun control, and foreign policy including a no fly zone over Syria. Clinton defended her positions as consistent and having the same values throughout her political career, on the Patriot Act which she supported, and on other issues such as the Keystone pipeline, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership which she opposes because it does not do enough to protect U.S. jobs. Clinton emphasized her flexibility by saying that- "But like most human beings, including those of us who run for office, I do absorb new information. I do look at what's happening in the world." The debate was a win for Hillary Clinton because it helps to put the email controversy behind her, puts the focus back on her story and work as Senator and Secretary of State, and showed her ability to take on the many questions about her credibility....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Rumsfeld talks in this interview about the conflict between the US State and Defense Departments about a post war Iraq that delayed decisions and gave time for the Iraqi insurgency to develop. Colin Powell at the State Department, and Condoleeza Rice as National Security Advisor, let Ian Bremmer continue for too long as the sole authority in Iraq operating from one of Hussein's palaces, giving the feeling of a foreign occupation force and fueling insurgency. Rumsfeld favored letting one of the Iraqi exiles provide interim leadership, wheras Powell felt the exiles did not have the legitimacy in Iraq that was needed. The result was indecision that left Bremmer in charge for too long. Asked why Rumsfeld did not fire Bremmer, he says Bremmer acted as the Presidential envoy. His criticism of Rice and Powell centers on their not letting the President decide by providing the options and the pros and the cons. He says the surge was more psychological in its impact and less significant than its made out to be, because the Anbar Awakening had already led Sunnis to move away from Al Quaeda. The insurgency came in stages, first with the Baathists and thugs from the old regime, then the foreign elements and Al Quaeda through Damascus, and then the Mohtada Sadr Shiites, it was not a single enemy or a single event. The memoir is not a defense of the Bush Presidency or decisions, but takes the kind of look at events that is reminiscent of Dean Acheson for the events of the Cold War under president Harry Truman....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The American Treasury Secretary who handled the 2008 financial crisis, Henry Paulson, gives the new US financial reform legislation an incomplete grade. His main concern is that the too-big-to fail risk in the US banking system continues, and without clear rules a lot depends on the regulators. He does not see higher capital requirements doing much to ease that problem, and sees another crisis in a few years as inevitable. Former SEC chief, Harvey Pitt, gives it an F for failure or an I for Incomplete. He sees it as a boon for lawyers, because it is not clearly written and leaves so many loopholes, to a degree that is simply astounding. He says it does nothing in the way of preventing another crisis. Does nothing for transparency, nothing for monitoring and action by regulators, all factors that led to the crisis of 2008. Nouriel Roubini gives it a C+, because it does little to fix the reasons why securitization failed and caused the crisis, and in this way will keep credit creation and expansion in a weak state. He sees this financial reform bill as a failed effort that is laying the ground for the next crisis, with little action in the "too-big-to-fail" area, a huge dilution of what former Fed Chairman paul Volcker had advocated in the Volcker rule, and no real impact on the risky trading of derivatives. Bill Gross of PIMCO gives his frank assessment in no uncertain terms. A D+ for this bill. It shows how lobbyists for the banks still control Congress he says. It would have been better to let Paul Volcker take charge completely, than to have the lobbyists dilute the critical reform proposals. Simon Johnson gives it the lowest passing grade at MIT, a B. The only large change he says, is the Kanjorski Amendment, which give federal regulators the authority to breakup the large banks. But he cautions that it may require another crisis for the regulators and Congress to "get it," and do what they should be doing....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In 1980 Jeb Bush 27, was looking for a place where he could make a fresh start away from the Bush name in Washington and Texas. His father was making a run for president that year. Miami with its bustling Cuban American community seemed a perfect place for Bush with his fluency in Spanish and his Mexican born wife Columba. The co-chairman of the Bush campaign in Florida was a Cuban American, Armando Codina. He set up Bush Realty, making Jeb Bush a partner with a 40% stake in the firm. In this period 1980-1992, Bush's gross income averaged 107,000 for the 6 years before the elder Bush was elected president to $1.6 million in 1990 half way during the elder Bush's term as president, according to a WSJ analysis of tax returns. This was also a period when Jeb Bush while engaging in business deals, was also running for office- first as Commerce secretary for 2 years in 1987, making a unsuccessful run for governor in 1994, and a successful run in 1998, 2002. He helped boost the Republican party in the Miami area, bringing together Republicans and the Cuban American exile community, during the anti-communist mood of the Reagan period. As Miami-Dade county Republican party chairman he helped boost voter rolls for the party, which had a 2 to 1 Democratic party advantage in earlier years. Stewart and Reinhard document the situations in which the Bush connections at the White House helped Jeb Bush in his real estate business....
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Amy Chozick of the NYT describes the puzzling idea of a Methodist do-gooder, with serious concern for injustices in the South, making an effort to accumulate money. Especially considering that Hillary Clinton must have known that speechmaking fees would come up in a presidential election campaign. Chozick describes in some detail the two years Hillary tried to shore up the family's finances after Bill Clinton's defeat in the 1980 election for Governor. Following the defeat Bill Clinton went back all over the state to voters to hear their complaints, sometimes for hours at a time. It was upto Hillary to shore up the family's finances. Hillary had to stretch to buy a $112,000 home in a better residential neighborhood. Family friends say Bill was never that interested in money, and never worried about the family's finances. Things were so bleak according to this account that Hillary worried about how they would pay for daughter Chelsea's college tution, as her own mother's experience has always remained with her of being denied a college education because of lack of money. During the Democratic Convention this comes up in the video introduction, something that most people are unaware of, which must have been difficult for an intensely private person like Hillary. Her mother is described in that video as having to go to the corner grocery store as a child with coupons for food. The income of the Clintons as professors in the years around 1975 was $18,000 each. As governor Mr. Clinton earned $33,519 in 1978 with combined income at $51,173 adding Hillary's work at the Rose law firm. A one time deal in the commodities market made 100,000, and an investment in land in the Ozarks led to losses- all at a time when other highly educated people in Arkansas were doing extremely well, including the Walton family. It wasn't until 1992 when Bill Clinton was running for president did the couple make higher income of $297,177 reported in 1992 tax returns. At this time entering the White House, of recent presidents only Harry Truman had lower net worth. Hillary donated her book proceeds for "It Takes a Village," to charity, and turned down an advance. By the time they left office the couple were faced with legal debts, owing $5 million in legal fees- Hillary Clinton saying they were "Dead broke." The former president now sought help to buy a Dutch Colonial in Chappaqua, New York, for $1.7 million. President Jimmy Carter was also facing large losses in his peanut business in Georgia when he left office, only to turn to writing books to salvage his finances. Hoover, FDR, Kennedy, George Bush, George W. Bush, were from families with great wealth or built their fortunes, including candidate Trump, sometimes using influence or connections or in the case of Kennedy's family gaining from the end of Prohibition. Eisenhower, Reagan, Carter were of more modest wealth. Only Harry Truman remains the awesome exception of dignity with extremely modest wealth, a small house in Independence, Missouri, no presidential pension, only an army pension of $112.56 a month in 1953. Truman's story also offers another aspect of public service of an exceptional kind and its value to the country for people to reflect on. A presidential pension of $25,000 was set up one year after Truman left office.  Experts say Truman's Senate Committee over 8 years 1941-1948, helped save billions of dollars in waste, fraud, and in faulty airplane as well as munitions development during the war effort, including saving thousands of lives.  In his farewell address in January 1953, Truman said he had spent 17 hours a day for eight years with no payment for overtime. In the address he correctly predicts that the Cold War would be won and he set the course. It also happened as predicted in that address with changes in the Kremlin and failure in the satellite states. Hillary Clinton put in these 17 hours and gained unmatched experience as Secretary of State, and is in a positon to set the course ahead in a manner that Truman once did in a complex world where careful policy, good judgement and in some situations strong action is needed. Such invaluable public service has never really been rewarded in the way business leaders are, not by a small fraction - too long simply taken for granted.  Considering her life story Hillary Clinton appears to have struggled with this all her life, to create a safety net that too often cracked, sometimes suddenly and unexpectedly. Has this concern sometimes gone too far, could better judgement be exercized. Perhaps or probably. Should it be seen in the context that Truman's situation reminds us. Probably.         ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Gates, U.S. Defense Secretary from 2006-11, says the West should provide a strong response to Russian president Putin's actions in Ukraine. He says settling old scores is not the way to peace in Asia or Europe. He describes Mr Putin's resentment of how Russia has been treated since the disintegration of the Soviet Union, and the desire to prevent the EU and NATO from coming too close to its borders, and especially Ukraine which is linked he says to the beginnings of the Russian Empire centuries ago. This could only lead to worsening tensions. Actions include bolstering defenses in Europe and reducing economic vulnerabilities of the Baltic states, restoring the defense budget to the levels of the 2014 budget proposed by the Obama administration in 2013, cutting overhead at the Defense department to add Navy ships, and urging the EU to grant associate status to Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine.

Why India avoids alliances

The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This Economist article looks at India-China relations and the Wuhan Summit between prime minister Modi and president Xi Jinping. It sees India's reluctance to follow a containment strategy in an historical light from the period in which India followed a non-alignment policy in the early post independence period under prime minister Nehru. During the period of the Eisenhower administration with Secretary of State John Foster Dulles India adhered to a strict nonalignment policy avoiding choosing sides in the Cold War. As a result U.S. policy tilted towards Pakistan during the Eisenhower administration. A balance was restored under president Kennedy, with Adlai Stevenson a close friend of India.  The short Sino-Indian war of 1962 led to a situation in which the U.S. backed India and improvement of relations. A semblance of non-alignment in foreign relations continued under Nehru's daughter Indira Gandhi. By 1990 with the opening of the Indian economy to foreign investment, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the integration of China into the global economy, a new period of good bilateral relations with the U.S. and Europe was maintained. In 2017 the potential for a conflict in Doklam, Bhutan revived fears from 1962 in India. In 2018 After the U.S. administration of Donald Trump and Trade Representative Lighthizer imposed trade tariffs on China and restrictions on export of advanced technologies China pursued a policy of conciliatory relations with India. China's relations also improved with Japan and South Korea as the U.S. policy was unanticipated and seen as a significant change that would seriously affect China's economy. India's response was to pursue a policy of good relations with China and the U.S., even as the economies of the U.S. and India were drawn closer in India's pursuit of modernization.  ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In the third Democratic presidential debate in Dec. 2013 Hillary Clinton came out looking much stronger than Sanders and Malloy. She described the Sanders government programs to make helath care and college free as too expensive requiring a 40% increase in federal spending, or $18 trillion-$20 trillion. Clinton said "we have to be really thoughtful about how we're going to afford what we propose." And said she would not increase taxes on those making less than $250,000 a year. On foreign policy issues she differed with Sanders and Malloy on the Assad regime and civilian deaths in Syria, saying Sanders had supported the removal of the Qaddafi regime in Libya. She used her long experience as Secretary of State to display a better command of the issues. On Hillary Clinton's comment about Donald Trump's statement for barring Muslims from entry into the U.S., that it was becoming a recruiting tool for ISIS videos, a NYT fact check shows no proof of this. Clinton said she preferred not to turn the issue of terrorism into a clash of civilizations with Islam, as her Republican opponents have done....

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