LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ looks at the 75 years of the US Saudi Arabia relationship that started when US president Franklin Delano Roosevelt met Saudi king Ibn Saud at Bitter Creek, Egypt, on a US Navy destroyer ship in 1945. It has gone through many phases over this period and mainly involved the Saudi kingdom maintaining its supply of oil to the US and Western Europe. This relationship went through an oil embargo during tense periods of Israeli Palestine conflict as in 1983 with an oil embargo that pushed up oil prices. What is different this time is the situation in Yemen where Iranian supported Houthi rebels near the border with Saudi Arabia are engaged in a conflict with the Saudis. Democratic administrations under first Obama and Biden today support reaching a deal with Iran on nuclear weapons development and limit US military support for the war in Yemen. The Saudis for their part are not keen on a regional war and turned down efforts by president Trump to respond to attacks from Yemen. Mr. Biden's envoy has arranged for a deal to reduce tensions between the Houthis in Yemen and Saudis. The diplomatic impasse in relations stems from the Kashoggi incident and president Biden's concern for the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia. Other factors making relations difficult are the economic interests of the two countries diverging. The relationship Roosevelt started in 1945 has changed in its fundamental character. Oil supplies for imports into the US is no longer a factor for the US which was the original interest of president Roosevelt in Saudi Arabia. This changed by 2015 as the US fracking industry enabled US to become self sufficient in oil and able to supply LNG to western Europe. Instead of the US Saudi oil now goes to China. Russian oil also goes to China as its industry expanded with American investment. This has led to a new Saudi relationship with China which has changed the dynamic of the American Saudi relationship. Some of the new aspects of this can also be seen in Saudi relationship with South Asia. Saudi ties have increased with India and India in 2021 was the first country to provide vaccine supplies to Saudi Arabia. Saudis, Qatar, United Arab Emirates are building relationships with India as a close neighbor in the region. Relationships are in some ways improving in the Asian region compared to the period when oil was simply exchanged as a commodity for defense supplies from the US without regard to cultural, educational and other changes in Saudi society. In a sense US and Western Europe paid little attention to the huge democracy of over 1 billion people right in the middle of Asia and followed policies that led to major investments in China and little or no investment in India, and without realizing it followed a policy that the British had pursued in the British Empire of treating different communities and religions as separate as opposed to one community of people in South Asia that were engaged in modernizing, building infrastructure and changing centuries old ways of living. The British Empire was sustained by this kind of thinking, and as long as Indians were complacent and lacked the will to make their aspirations for a better life and infrastructure for modernization this kind of thinking prevailed. The economic crises in Asia have reinforced the idea that there is one community entirely focused on development and modernization in South Asia. The people in South Asia care most about the cost of living and the infrastructure and services for the quality of life they live and their children can aspire for- same in European Union that chose the Greens and chancellor Scholz, and same in the US that chose president Biden to invest infrastructure and people, the same in China and the same in India and the rest of Asia. This is the situation that the US and Britain, and the European Union are now beginning to learn and adapt to that is a constructive aspect of these changes to rebuild the connections and supply chains that were sorely neglected before now. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
President Moon Jae-In of South Korea will meet Mr. Kim of North Korea in a summit in late April after envoys from South Korea visited Pyongyang, North Korea, for 2 days of talks. The talks come against the background of the WInter Olympics in Pyeongchang, South Korea, where the 2 Koreas sent a joint team as part of reconciliation efforts.  North Korea agreed to denuclearize said a South Korean government statement after the talks, saying- "The North Korean side clearly stated its willingness to denuclearize. It made it clear that it would have no reason to keep nuclear weapons if the military threat to the North was eliminated and its security guaranteed." Working level discussions will be held before the Kim- Moon summit meeting and a hotline phone connection will be setup between the two leaders. A recent report in the WSJ shows China for the first time tightening sanctions on the North. Japan has joined the U.S. in taking a tough stand and its foreign minister said that the offer for abandonment of nuclear weapons has come before and North Korea has resumed its nuclear weapons development each time. U.S. experts say that security guarantees were offered by the Clinton administration, including in writing, but this has not prevented the North from moving ahead with its nuclear program. This is the first time Kim, 34 years, has met with senior envoys from the South since assuming power in 2011. The WInter Olympics in Pyeongchang with Mr Kim's sister attending and bringing an offer for a summit meeting, were the first such contacts in years between the 2 Koreas. The new offer comes with an offer to stop nuclear tests, yet leaves open the manufacture of fissile materials say experts. The U.S. and Japan are deeply skeptical and insist on complete and verifiable proof of abandonment of the nuclear program. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ makes the America centric thinking mistake of forgetting where China started from in assessing progress and China's new priorities. In 1960 the World Bank shows China per capita at $90 which does not change much till 1990 when it was $300, the Deng opening to western technology and capital pushed it up to $3000 the year 2000 (US $36,000) and $4500 in 2010 (US $50,000) when the global financial crisis hit. Since 2010 the Chinese economy was burdened by high local government debt and struggled to get to $10,000 in 2020 under Xi Jinping's first two terms as president. Yet it paid a huge price for this -the chance of Bo Xilai (2014) upsetting the twin banners of Science and Modernization of the May 4th 1919 movement that set the course of China for 100 years uninterrupted through the Nationalists, the Japanese occupation, the Maoist CCP, the Deng CCP opening and Jinping CCP pullback. The huge inequality was seen as an opportunity for Bo Xi Lai or some other leader to capitalize on moving China in an unknown direction that posed risks for the future of China. Even then the first preference of Xi would be to carry on with what had worked after Deng. Yet it was clear that working class votes were shifting the dynamics of elections after the Trump election and closing the doors to open access to western capital, technology, and investment. With Trump in erratic and uncertain ways, with Biden after the elections of 2020 consistent and with single minded determination to limit flows. Not just Xi, any other Chinese leader would have had to have the internal discussions about the need to shift back to a model China was familiar with and one that worked before- that of state intervention in the economy, that of reducing the inequalities that posed risks for the CCP's survival as forging a path for stability to carry out the twin banners of the May 4, 1919 Movement - Science and Modernization as China's salvation. Unlike the hysteria about China posing a challenge to the US these internal debates of Xi and the party may have concluded that the US with about half the population of China's as it grows with immigration in the future and multiple times the per capita GDP was a country that no other country was going to come close to. In this sense the supply chains are deceptive as these are likely to be completely redone under the Biden administration to bring most important manufacturing back to China. It is in this context that Xi had limited room to manoeuvre and decided to focus on stability for the long term to fulfill China's dream of the May 4, 1919 Movement of the last 100 years for Science and Modernization casting aside the risks associated for instability of the inequality that comes with more of the western type of growth, and with the climate change risks also associated with it. Lower growth gives China a chance to correct some of the flaws of the hyper growth that was partly of its own making and partly thrust upon it by investors from the outside, so that the new climate would best serve the goals of the May 4, 1919 Movement of keeping high the banners of Science and Modernization. This kind of rethinking is also going on in the US in the same manner about inequalities and hardships for workers and families, with some of the anger directed at China as internal political sentiment- hence the trillions of dollars moved by the Biden administration to address the flaws of growth under free markets and intervene in the economy where needed as in climate change to give firm sense of direction. In a sense the direction taken in different contexts the American and the Chinese are the same - address the problems of workers and families, of the people, as Lincoln had pointed out and striven so hard for, so that Labor is the more important than Capital, and workers and families vital to the nation.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Boris Johnson leads a new British government that is composed mostly of ministers who want to see Brexit happen, and giving the positions of Home Secretary and Foreign Secretary to persons who do not care what happens as long as Britain leaves the European Union. Johnson's date is October 31st for leaving the EU. Sajid Javid, a former Deutsche Bank AG executive is the new chancellor of the exchequer. Priti Patel is new Home Secretary. Dominic Raab a former lawyer who has called for parliament to be suspended if need be so that Brexit can be pushed through is the new Foreign Secretary. Dominic Cummings who headed the Leave campaign for the Brexit referendum in 2016 is the new adviser at 10 Downing Street. Johnson's strategy is to pack the cabinet with people loyal to his vision of leaving the EU October 31st regardless of what the EU does.  The EU has not changed its position and is even less likely to consider any new Irish border proposals. Three top ministers are opposed to Mr. Johnson's views and resigned. Treasury chief Philip Hammond, Deputy primeminister David Lidington, Justice Secretary David Gauke, all resigned in opposition to Mr. Johnson simply pulling Britain out of the EU. Johnson once said all he feared from Britain abruptly leaving the EU was a shortage of Mars bars. During the election in the Conservative party Mr. Johnson was mostly quiet and avoided any gaffes to sound statesman like, yet as the process unfolds Mr. Johnson is likely to face the same problems faced by his predecessor Mrs. May. Added to this is the new opposition of moderates like Mr. Hammond and Gauke in the Conservative party that could topple the government and lead to a general election with just three vote swing in the other direction doing this. Mr. Johnson has prepared for this by having Mr. Cummings as a top adviser in the event he faces a general election. Meantime the Labour party initially not favoring a second referendum with Mr. Corbyn's ambiguous views on Brexit, as shifted gradually to the leadership and the rank and file all favoring a second referendum and for Remain. As Greg Ip has pointed out in the WSJ this week the conditions have changed with protectionism, nationalism and hostility to globalization, and president Trump not planning concessions of any sort even for the UK in trade negotiations. This means to low productivity of less than 1% to support stifled wages, one would have to add a 3.5% hit to GDP from a no deal Brexit such as Mr. Johnson approves according to the IMF. With the migration issue not what it was three years ago and reduced to a trickle this new situation must be on the minds of Mr. Corbyn, Labour and Conservative moderates. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
There is a small opening for talks between North and South Korea after sanctions lead to an overture by the North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un. The Korean president Moon sees this as part of his campaign effort to engage directly with North Korea. This report points to considerable skepticism of South Koreans whether a new "Sunshine Policy" effort is likely to work as it was tried with little success by previous presidents Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun. Yet it offers an opportunity to calm things down after the volatile exchanges between Trump and North Korea.

LyrArc Article Gist
In a factory the size of 5 football fields located in Gurnee, Illinois, Abbott Labs makes its BinaxNow Covid-19 home tests. Abbott turned out 1 billion tests in 2021 and at one point had 80% of the market. Along with Pfizer vaccine, BinaxNow Home covid-19 tests are a dominant product during the pandemic. Abbott generated a fifth of its $43 billion in revenue from these home tests. Abbott faced several hurdles along the way. It gained when the US government authorized it to make the test. Yet after vaccination took off by mid 2021 the demand for tests declined and Abbott nearly idled its giant factory in Gurnee. Delta and Omicron variants led to a sudden reversal and surge in demand. Abbott developed its test based on an existing design it used in the US for flu tests, by a company it inherited by acquisition called Binax. To do that test one sends a swab up the nose, add that sample and a liquid mixture to a rectangular paper card, and close the card shut. The liquid then travels up the paper strip, revealing one or two pink lines, one for negative, two for positive. This is done in 15 minutes and the simple design described as a lollipop shape, put Abbott far ahead of competitors. The US FDA authorized Becton Dickinson and Quidel to make the tests before it authorized Abbott, but these rival companies had a poor and complex design. The Trump administration gave Abbott a $760 million contract to buy 150 million tests for distribution to health departments, long termcare facilities, nursing homes, and schools. And by October 2020 Abbott was already making 50 million tests a month. When it comes to distribution Abbott tapped into its pharmacy connections for baby products such as Similac baby formula. This gave it an advantage over Quidel and others who also lacked the manufacturing knowhow for large scale ramp up. The BinaxNow in pharmacies was sold at $24 for a box of two tests, while government paid $5 for one test. Abbott says it makes $ 7 per single consumer test. Yet there was one problem waiting to hit Abbott in 2021- demand dried up as the vaccination campaign took off. In fact the plant manager, Mr. Rodriguez, planned to move to another job inside Abbott as production declined. Then came the Delta variant and he was asked to ramp up production again. With Omicron demand soared. The Biden administration committed $3 billion to help boost test production and asked Kroger and Walmart to sell over the counter tests at cost for 3 months. Abbott had to lure workers from Amazon at $25 an hour for the Gurnee plant expansion. What was learned by the government and Abbott from this experience? The US government now looks for ideas in meeting demand volatility, supply challenges and production needs,. Sustaining production capacity is important for future virus flareups- a new government-industry partnership is required for maintaining test making infrastructure. With government help Abbott plans now to keep the facility at Gurnee operating indefinitely. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Chris Cillizza of the WP says there simply is no "new Trump," as mentioned in the meeting with president Nieto of Mexico. The speech on the same day in Pheonix, Arizona, following the meeting with Nieto, showed the Trump of the election primaries in which he talked about the criminal activities by undocumented immigrants and about building the wall on the Mexican border. Cillizza says Trump had left the impression that he was trying to expand his base with Hispanic voters through a meeting with Nieto, but it appears that it did just the opposite with Trump's reaffirming old positions on deportation and the wall in his speech. 

LyrArc Article Gist
In exceptional reporting from Seoul, WSJ's John Lyons shows how the opinion has shifted in a matter of months in South Korea over installing the anti-missile Thaad system provided by the U.S.  Gallup South Korea polls show that since the election campaign earlier in 2017 opinion has shifted sharply, from 52% supporting Thaad to 72% support after the July 28, 2017 North Korean launch of an ICBM missile recently. When he took office president Moon halted installation of 4 addition Thaad anti missile launchers, now Moon supports installation. and it is moving ahead.  Anti-war activists earlier protested the installation at a golf course in Soseong-ri, and formed a group supporting Moon. Now only a few protesters are to be seen, says Lyons. 

LyrArc Article Gist
In his second part of the series on Capitalism and Globalization Schieritz says Trump's arguments have backing, and goes back to the studies done by David Autor of MIT on the adverse impact of free trade on communities across the U.S.. Lyrarc has covered this issue since 2006, and the reality is that this issue was brought up long before the Autor study gained prominence. On Nov. 12, 2010 Robert Lighthizer, Deputy Trade Representative under U.S. president Reagan wrote an op-ed in the NYT titled "Throwing Free Trade Overboard," that made a strident and strong case for what Trump says 5 years later, and from no less than a top trade official under Repubican Reagan.Trump comes late to this in 2015 when it was already amply clear what was happening. It is not so much Trump having discerned this, than others who should have paid attention, including Lew and leaders in both parties, and the business community,  who for too long ignored it. Or as Hilsenrath in a recent WSJ report says, simply said we have seen this before with Japan's entry into the American market, not realizing the speed and widespread impact of the changes in trade with China, that are unprecedented in history- evident just from the great speed of urbanization and manufacturing work force growth in China, policy rapidly impacting vulnerable communities across the U.S. The corrective course has to be credible which is why it has to come from a a reawakening among leaders such as May, Merkel and Clinton, who are keen students of change, and capable of designing and executing a corrective course of action, and winning the popular support and patience needed to stay the course which could run for most of the next decade. It would also provide leadership and show the way for societies in Brazil, China, India and other countries facing similar problems.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This article in DW.com cites experts who point out that the Republican Party always had tensions within it because of the diverging interests of three groups that have allied together to form the party- Wealthy businessmen and corporate interests, evangelicals, and white working class people who have seen their incomes decline for several decades. The interests of each group have some overlap, are sometimes masked but frequently they diverge. Nigel Bowles, former director of the Rothermere Institute at Oxford University, says there is no particular reason that this coalition would hold together, that it was unstable to begin with, a wonder that it did not split up earlier. Scott Lucas, an expert on American Studies at the University of Birmingham, says that Reagan showed great skill in holding this coalition together, and Donald Trump has taken it apart by mobilizing only one constituency of white working class voters and leaving out others. The break between Republican party leaders Ryan, McCain, and state party leaders, with Trump is unprecedented in post war American politics, and putting it back together now looks like a lost cause in the medium term.  ...

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
The Republican party (GOP) chances with Trump as the candidate in 2024 are seen with much skepticism by Karl Rove in the WSJ. Republicans need to keep the presidential field of candidates not too crowded for too long, as pluralities in primaries led to Trump winning a large share of delegates even with about one third of the vote in the early primaries for the 2020 election. Another challenge is the work of Trump supporting leaders in states such as Michigan who want to select delegates by convention and not through primaries. Ron de Santis, Governor of Florida, is seeking the Republican nomination, and faces a strong challenge from the former president. De Santis, 44 years, is from Dunedin, Florida, His mother was a nurse and his father installed Nielsen TV rating boxes, with great-great grandparents immigrating from Italy Benevento, Avellino) in 1904. He studied history at Yale and went to Harvard Law School, Navy Justice School after joining the Navy. De Santis was elected to the US Congress in 2014 and 2016 where he served as the chariman of the sub committee on National Security. He founded the Freedom Caucus in these years. In 2018 he ran for Governor of Florida winning by 0.4%, running again in 2022 he won by about 20 percentage points. ...