LyrArc Article Gist
Pearlstein argues that the US and the Obama administration achieved most of its goals, even though the Europeans took the credit. On regulatory reform, Geithner's regulatory reform proposal he says, could well have been written at the French Finance Ministry, as at the US Treasury. And it gives Obama ammunition to prepare, as private equity, hedge funds, and banks try to water down his proposals for regulatory reform. By having member countries commit to adding $850 billion to the resources at the IMF, and regional development banks to provide help to countries in serious difficulties- and giving instructions that the money can be used not only for debt rollover, bank recapitalization and balance of payments support, but also for stimulus spending, infrastructure investment, trade finance and social support- the Obama adminstration has accomplished a great deal. It has succeeded in putting in place the necessary financial resources to support not only the financial systems of countries in Eastern Europe, Asia and Latin America that need help, but put emphasis on the need for resources to go for helping reduce job losses, create jobs, and provide some forms of income or support to people in these countries. This is a major step as it means the countries of Eastern Europe and other developing countries can deal with their crises in confidence. Mexico is taking loans from the IMF. Dominique Strauss Kahn had begun the policy of shifting IMF's focus to these social goals as significant parts of the recovery process in countries, but he faced the old mindset among the IMF staff, as when its reported staff wanted to increase interest rates in Pakistan by 10% instead of the 3% that was finally agreed to. That would have caused serious difficulty to the people of Pakistan, created chaotic situation and disturbed the social fabric of that country. See the link to this for S. Korea and for Pakistan. And as Gordon Brown put it the old conditionality that lay behind the IMF loans, is phased out. This makes it the new policy at the IMF backed by the G20 mandate. The Washington consensus which prescribed open borders, floating exchange rates and fiscal prudence is now ended. And to support this change the developing countries will have a bigger say in IMF policy and decisions. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
900 million eligible voters in India means this is the largest election ever. The election will take place in 7 phases in April and May from April 11 to May 19. Votes will be counted on May 23. The election is for 543 seats in parliament, the Lok Sabha. Turnouts are high with 66% turning out in the last election that brought Mr. Modi and the BJP to power.  Unlike elections in Britain a lot is spent in each election, about $5 billion in the last election and double that this time. The U.S. elections in 2016 had spending of $6.5 billion as a comparison. Women vote at about the same rate as men and more women than men are expected to vote this time. Prime minister Modi won the last election with promises of development and infrastructure. He is delivering on infrastructure but building manufacturing and generating jobs in the formal sector remains a tougher task for any administration in 4 years. During the first term Mr. Modi made needed changes including introducing the GST tax to integrate India's fragmented market and get rid of a patchwork of regional state taxes. He introduced a whole range of projects and yojanas which are setting the stage for widening the middle class, and improving living conditions. Some of the problems such as the bad loans in the banking system date back to previous administrations and the government has taken steps to clean up this problem by refinancing banks and introducing a bankruptcy law. This has slowed GDP growth to about 7%. However this would have happened under any administration.  The brief war with Pakistan in February 2019 has added another dimension to this election with questions about whether this may help Mr. Modi because of his strong stand against terrorism camps in Pakistan.  In the end it all comes down to whether the public still believes the BJP party under Modi is best qualified to develop the infrastructure to modernize the country and improve services, and whether it can create enough of the manufacturing capabilities to generate jobs needed. It may not be that the BJP under Modi has  not made mistakes in the process of learning how best to tackle development, but whether a patchwork of regional parties led by the opposition Congress party is in a position to provide the strong decisive direction to make quick decisions on development. Getting the agreement of a number of regional parties such as the party in West Bengal state or the Uttar Pradesh state when it was under a previous administration of Mrs Mayawati means an even slower rate of decision making as it leads to lack of speedy decision making. Whether voters have short memories and forget the slow rate of infrastructure development under previous administrations or have a willingness to give the BJP a chance to show what it can do under Modi for development can eventually decide this election. An example of what this means is in how the Mumbai Metro is being pushed through to timely delivery- Metro Rail's head Mrs. Ashwini Bhide simply says she feels for the people of Mumbai who have suffered from delays in development of needed infrastructure for so long, with millions doing appalling rides in a creaky old rail system. In her view it should have been done yesterday. It is this attitude that can make or break the current administration, and whether it can get this message through to voters one more time. Most who have this attitude are aware that China is now laying enough concrete every two years than America did in the whole 20th century, as reported in the Guardian newspaper, and are equally passionate about delivery of services and rapid development of badly needed infrastructure.         ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A nuclear plant in a war zone with repeated shelling? This is taken up in this debate video of 44 minutes in FR24 which you can click on. The world has not seen this since the start of nuclear energy from plants in the 1950's. Calder Hall the first UK nuclear power station and the first in western Europe started in 1956. Eisenhower opened the first US nuclear power station Shippingport on the Ohio river in Pennsylvania, 50 kilometres from Pittsburgh in 1958 as part of the Atoms for Peace Program. The US built 54 nuclear plants that are operating today in 2022 generating 50% of the renewable energy in use today in the US. The question is what does the unthinkable conducted by the Russians and Ukrainians, by weaponizing a nuclear plant do to public perception of the safety of the Atoms for Peace Program initiated by president Eisenhower in 1954? What does this damaging of public safety perceptions after Fukushima do to the Atoms for Peace type of programs in China India, and European Union that are part of the emissions cutting programs in the world? These are serious questions at a time when climate change is not simply a word but means floods, fires, drought, and declining food production all over the world from Spain to Pakistan, from Germany to China. China and India are affected. China has 53 nuclear plants in 2021 with 50 GW and plans to double this by 2030. India has 22 nuclear plants  with 8 GW in 2021 and plans to triple this to 22 GW by 2030. How will climate change be tackled with public safety perceptions affected with another nuclear accident like that in Fukushima arising from shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant. As the president of the UN Security Council Zhang Jun of China clearly stated at the UN SC meeting last week that China opposed use of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant by Russia (or Ukraine) in any way that could lead to damaging nuclear safety leading to an unintended accident. China only gets about 5% of its energy from nuclear, India about 3%, and this will need to increase multiple times to tackle climate change. France gets 70% of its energy from nuclear, the US 20%, by comparison. Nuclear energy safety and clear rules to prevent weaponizing of nuclear plant zones is essential and a solution like that developed for the food grain shipments from Odessa through Black Sea to the Mediterranean has to be arranged quickly. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Muhammad Azhar Ali, factory manager for National Foods plant near Karanchi, Pakistan, describes what it is like running a manufacturing operation in Pakistan. National Foods is the largest manufacturer of pickles and other spice products in Pakistan. A big problem is the lack of security and terrorism. This remains a constant cause of anxiety for business people in Pakistan. Its like being in a war zone says the National Foods chairman Abdul Majeed. Another major problem is lack of reliable electricity supplies. Supply of electricity is only one third of national demand in Pakistan. Larger companies such as Lucky Cement generate their own electricity, with Lucky Cement producing 150 megawatts from its plants. Smaller companies like National Foods rely on diesel generators. To conserve electricity many factory, floor office and bathroom lights are turned off. For workers the lack of electric supplies and high inflation affect lives in many ways. National Foods has a weighing department and assesses workers picked up from many parts of Karanchi to see if they are fit for work or are unduly stressed from poor living conditions. This is a side of Pakistani life that is rarely touched on-the daily lives of workers and managers. Ali works harder than other production managers in other countries because of the power shortages and lack of security. He would like to devote time to increase productivity and be more like other production managers. The war with the Taliban has cost Pakistan $68 billion in destroyed infrastructure, security costs, lost foreign investment according to one estimate. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The treaty of handover by Britain of Hong Kong under one country, two systems was flawed in the way it was negotiated. French commentators looking at the problem say the city is caught between its past in the British Empire and the new monolithic state that China represents. Under the British French visitors looked at the city and wondered how there was freedom but no democracy, people were just selfishly just interested in making money. Chris Patten, Britain's administrator of the territory tried but failed to get democratic process, During the negotiations in 1984 for handover the chief British negotiator, Percy Cradock, a former ambassador to China, tells the Australian Broadcasting Corporation that - In Hong Kong where there is such a disparity in strength between the two sides, you go for the best you can get, I take the simple view that half a loaf is better than no bread." Britain had very little leverage to secure a separate future for Hong Kong because it was small compared to much larger China resulting unequal negotiations. The same is true today as the best Britain could do is to get out a joint declaration with Australia and Canada saying that it did not approve the new security law, that it violated the treaty signed by Britain and China. The French view expressed by the editor of La Croix is that hasty poorly planned British exits- as happened in British India -have led to crises and conflicts for postcolonial generations, a legacy of British colonial rule. India and Pakistan still sorting out Kashmir, and India and China still fighting about the McMahon Line border area. The situation is very different for the U.S. which now has to respond in some way, and this comes as trade tensions and coronavirus tensions about its origins in China and the failure of Beijing to allow quick entry for an American team into Wuhan. This being for 7 weeks between Jan 6 request and February 16 permission. America sees this as losing 7 precious weeks to make up its own determination of the dangers when every week health experts say means saving or losing tens of thousands of lives. With loss of 100,000 lives the Trump administration has a sense of being misled. This French report in FR24 points out that the lack of a strong response from the U.S. would be something similar to letting the Berlin Wall happen without a response. Both sides in a situation where the territory of Hong Kong remained mostly about money and with a disproportionate influence of business interests similar to its founding under the unequal treaties of the 1850's. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ podcast looks at the Fedspeak, the language, the use of specific words that telegraph the US central bank's carefully thought out message to markets. Th topic is inflation. Is it persistent or transitory? Fed chairman Powell's word for it was "transitory." Then transitory" but longer than we thought, because our Fed models did not include supplychain bottlenecks.  In reality every new variant brings new lockdowns and slows the rise or reverses the increase in gas and fuel prices that are a main driver of inflation. Wage increases are a good thing after decades of lack of leverage of workers and economic distortions from this, this may be termed constructive inflation.  Supplychain bottlenecks are likely to ease and not be permanent so that the Fed could be right on that point. A less noticed aspect of the Fed's decision to raise interests without careful thought is that this will impact the ability of poor and moderate income countries to afford medicine and food as exchange rates make their currencies worth less. At the time of variants this is both a practical and a human consideration. What are called emerging markets in finspeak (financial language) are really countries that Stephanie Nolan is writing about on the frontlines of the pandemic in the NYT- South Africa, Zambia. Then there are other poor or moderate income countries- Brazil, Mexico, Russia, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia. Today the Fed needs to think about them also. How much vaccine, medicines, or food imports can they afford with weakening currencies as the Fed raises interest rates? At the same time some accomodations for inflation are necessary, but carefully thought, with a lot of thought given to the current state of the world with new variants and weakened economies and no stimulus payments in large parts of the world to offset weakness. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Admiral Mullen and General Petraeus have grown impatient with Pakistan's and the ISI's support for the Haqqani network, a Taliban ally that works as a proxy for Pakistan's military and intelligence services. Recent disclosure of Pakistan's military and civilian leadership's effort at a Kabul meeting to have the Afghanistan government distance itself from the U.S. have added to concerns. The appointment of Gen. Petraeus to lead the CIA, including direction of the drone campaign, is expected to continue the tension in the relationship.

LyrArc Article Gist
A rapid increase in the number of Russians with favorable views of the US going up past 30% as one sign of the effort to improve US Russia relations by Trump and Putin is seen in March 2025. A call by Trump to Putin will take place March 18, 2025 to start discussions on how to settle the Ukraine conflict including land, power plants and exchanges and getting to the root cause of the war- NATO expansion. Some solutions include NATO being disbanded in its current form as archaic as there is no Soviet Union, its original goal being stopping Soviets from setting pro- Soviet governments, setup in Czechoslovakia and attempts to do this in Greece and Turkey. Truman formed NATO for this purpose in 1949 after the Berlin Blockade by Soviets. WIth nuclear arsenals being replenished in Russia and China, India, Japan, small nuclear states such as North Korea, Pakistan, the situation is different today with responsible policies needed today on this issue which are impeded by the idea of NATO on the borders of Russia and the Eastern European and British view of Russia as the pre-eminent threat not shared by India, Brazil, China and the new administration of DJT in the US. A long period of peaceful coexistence and arms control developed in the late 1960's, 1970's and 1980's between the US, German Federal Republic and Soviet Union/ GDR Germany. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Lally Weymouth of the Washington Post interviews Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak on June 20, 2012. On the negotiations of the P5+1 countries with Iran in Baghdad, Istanbul and Moscow, Barak says the Iranians are simply buying time, hoping that by being a little forthcoming they can delay giving up nuclear weapons programs capabilities and see if the situation changes with a new President in office in the U.S.. The Iranians are trying to reach a "zone of immunity," the way Pakistan and N. Korea did, and it will take a resolute determination on the part of the U.S. the Europeans, the Russians and the Chinese to prevent a nuclear Iran and nuclear proliferation. By the third meeting in Moscow it should be clear whether the Iranians are willing to give up capabilities that lead to nuclear weapons. Ayatollah Khamanei is the person in charge in Iran, but decisions are made collectively with the moderate Ayatollahs still ayatollahs, says Barak. The addition of the Khadima party to the coalition government of prime minister Netanyahu increases Israel's desire for dialogue and seeking progress on a peace with the Palestinian Authority- if not a peace arrangement then even unilateral steps towards peace by both sides. The way forward in Syria is for the U.S. to talk with the Russians about a new government. The important thing is for the removal of the Assad family, the entire Syrian state does not need to be dismantled as happened with the Baath party in Iraq. Israel continues to build a fence in the Sinai facing Egypt, as it fears infiltration during the period of civil strife in Egypt. Israel views Egypt from the standpoint of any future Egyptian government honoring its treaty committments with Israel, otherwise says Barak it is upto Egypt to decide its future government....

LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman highlights the importance of an interview with President Obama by Atlantic magazine's Jeffrey Goldberg. In this interview Obama gives a thoughtful understanding of what it means if Iran acquires nuclear weapons. The greatest danger is in nuclear proliferation. Obama brings to this an understanding of this issue from the time he focussed on this issue as a student at Columbia University, when he described the risks of nuclear proliferation in the Columbia student newspaper. There is the risk of an escalation in the development of nuclear weapons in the Middle East first, and then elsewhere. And there is the risk that nuclear weapons fall into the wrong hands. The situation would create problems like that faced in North Korea or in the India-Pakistan region, but increased by many times the current dangers. The entire nuclear de-proliferation effort and the efforts to de-nuclearize weapons stockpiles that took decades to accomplish with the Soviet Union could come undone- and it would then be necessary for all countries to invest in advanced technologies for defending against nuclear weapons, setting in motion another arms race. The current situation reminds people that the issues raised by nuclear weapons development will always be with us, and require a worldwide concerted effort, at official and public level, bringing in scientists, public opinion worldwide, and educating the public in all countries of the larger danger to mankind. The issues need to be put in the right context beyond nations and politics, beyond international conflicts and competing interests or ideologies, including Israel, Iran and any other nation looking for nuclear weapons as a solution for conflicts. Shultz, Perry, Kissinger and Nunn after a series of meetings at the Hoover Institution called for the update of the old policies of nuclear deterrance based on mutually assured destruction used with the Soviet Union, to reflect the new threat of terrorism- in an op-ed NYT 3/7/2011. The focus of this effort is on a new Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty, with all nations giving up nuclear material to an international nuclear material bank. Senator Obama strongly supported the efforts of Senators Lugar and Nunn in de-proliferation work after the collapse of the Soviet Union and joined the senators on one of their trips- Broad and Sanger, NYT, 7/5/2009. A major effort to reduce NATO, U.S. and Soviet nuclear weapons is called for to lead by example, providing a framework for other means of settling regional conflicts and educating public opinion in these countries, and moving forward the negotiating of the Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty. In many ways public opinion will have to lead the way in all countries as governments can lag behind- the efforts of Sam Nunn and Dick Lugar and the many unnamed people in the Soviet Union who aided their efforts show the importance of this....

LyrArc Article Gist
The new prime minister of Pakistan Abbasi consults with former prime minister Sharif in Murree, Pakistan, after the Supreme Court disqualifies Sharif from the position. Sharif's brother, Shahbaz, the chief minister of Punjab province will contest a by-election for parliament to replace Abbasi.

LyrArc Article Gist
Boosting vaccine production for the Indo-Pacific region that includes Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Philippines, Vietnam with production done through Biological E in Hyderabad will be discussed at the meeting with Biden. Japan will fund the project, and Australia will handle the distribution. This will be part of a followup to a March 12 virtual meeting of Quad leaders. This effort to meet the vaccine supplies challenge for the Asian region covering south east Asia and its population of 600 million will be one of the major outcomes of Quad countries collaboration, making it a peacetime collaboration that supports development in the region without burdening the financial position of any country.  The other part of US- Indian collaboration and Quad collaboration centers on two related themes after healthcare and pandemic. The immediate challenge is to tackle the breakdown in the supply chain for semiconductors. The US and Europe can no longer depend entirely on a supply chain based in Taiwan. The narrowest part of the Taiwan Straits which separates Taiwan from the Chinese mainland is only 81 miles wide, which makes continued dependence on chip production on Taiwan an unreliable option and the need to build a new supply chain for Japan, EU and US. Plans will be made to address this in the talks. The Biden administration has already taken action with Intel Corp making a U turn and bringing chip manufacturing back home to the US with $50 billion investment planned. India and other Asian countries may form additional options for semiconductor manufacturing. The third part of the Quad effort will center on US and Japan ramping up infrastructure building capabilities with India to build infrastructure across Asian countries and in Africa that will be financed in a way that will not have some of the liabilities of the Chinese initiative called Belt and Road. Loans given by Chinese state banks and contracts including manpower from Chinese contractors are now seen as not meeting the needs of Asian and African countries. These loans most of the time cannot be repaid as in Zambia, and other parts of Africa, and in Pakistan, leading to interest accumulating on debt and making future infrastructure development extremely difficult. The use of manpower from China also means no learning curve for infrastructure is formed for local companies and infrastructure comes without new jobs jobs being created.  For most of the period 1900 -1950 the British built Asian and African infrastructure. During the period 1950 onwards the US assumed a major role, as did the Soviets. This changed after belligerent Reagan administration policies and wars in the Middle East sapped the funds that could have gone to infrastructure building that would improved living standards in Asia and Africa. Mr Biden wants to see this change and this is what he meant when he said at the UN General Assembly today- " we want relentless diplomacy to take the place of relentless wars." He means every word of this and the diplomacy is between allies and also adversaries, but mostly with allies such as Japan, the EU and India to build a better world. That he has to do this quickly Biden is aware of that, which is why he said "the next 10 years will determine our future."   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Bret Stephens on the foreign policy debate about supporting or not supporting dictators. On the big one today of Iraq after the large gains with Maliki in Iraq it could be said that its not an easy path either way with each path fraught with dangers, but in the long run if one perseveres and again in the spirit of democracy and with the people in the region themselves and their leaders having good sense and good judgement and putting the interests of the whole region before their personal interests, given this you are always going to do better by your people and the people in the region affected, by respecting democratic ideals and principles. Pakistan is not a good example because its leaders have put their personal interests before the interests of their people but even there things are changing. Zardari's dirtier and clumsier hands are mentioned by Stephens but even here this time the opposition led by Nawas Sharif decided that its more important to respect the electoral process and democratic ideals and let Zardari run Pakistan. Administrations like the Bhuttos and Zardari's have alway been corrupt so there are no high expectations but even here the people of Pakistan will find a way to make the progress they desperately need and find the leadership that can provide it. The military muffling and jailing dissent and not respecting the independent judiciary may not affect the person on the street in Des Moines or Delaware but for people in Pakistan who have suffered under military rule this may be a different story. And in the Middle East things were not that much better with dictators in power either in Palestine and its an area where the conditional part of leadership in the region having good sense and judgement should be considered as well as history. In Iran its not between the Ayatollah and the Shah, before the Shah an elected government in Iran was overthrown when its anti western oil company stance was seen in the light of the cold war. It was the overthrow of that government that brought the Shah in. Had it continued the internal politics of Iran would have been resolved by the people there. In other words western oil interests and lobbies and the cold war distorted the process there. Without the two Iran's politics would not be of much interest to people in the USA and governments there also would have no reason to be especially friendly or especially hostile to the USA. So once one removes the distorting factors and takes out the countries which cannot be used as good example like Palestine and Iran, on the big one Iraq where the people and the leadership in the region did not fail even in very difficult situation and the US persevered, respecting democratic ideals and principles was the best course with the best results. The improved Libyan relations should not be chalked off as a point in favor of dealing with dictators. With better or worse relations with Libya it made little noticeable difference or probably no difference to the people in Des Moines or Delaware. For Iraq it makes a big difference to get it right by both peoples. Libya which had closed itself off from western technology and ideas now opens itself up because this way it can improve life for people in the region, this may be the only thing that has changed. And Stephens puts it another way its more sustainable. But why is it more sustainable to respect democratic ideals and principles given that the leadership of people in the region affected and the people themselves have good sense and judgement? Because in doing so one is respecting oneself one is more true to one's own people's idea of a good and just society and one is respecting other people....

LyrArc Article Gist
The decision to replace Gen. McKiernan with Gen. McChrystal and to have Lt. Gen David Rodriguez as his deputy, was made by Defense Secretary Gates and Jt Chiefs chairman Mullen, after thinking about this during the transition to the new Obama administration. The failing war effort in Afghanistan with the Karzai government controlling only pockets of Afghanistan and Kabul and leaving the countryside to the Taliban has alot to do with this. Gates feeling is "we can and must do better." That it took so long, with the Taliban only 50 miles from Islamabad, Pakistan, and the question of Paksitan's nuclear weapons falling into thier hands vexing the adminstration, shows that things slowed down with the transition and the economic crisis. The decision was not adifficult one considering that McKiernan had little to show for his efforts, and the rapidly deteriorating situation by all accounts. McKiernan was a senior officer who spent his entire military career commanding conventional forces, serving in the Balkans and the Iraq war in 2003, and has the wrong midset and background for counterinsurgency warfare. McChrystal has experiences suited to counterinsurgency warfare, having commanded commando teams that took out leading insurgents. He is also director of the Joint chiefs of staff, so known to Mullen for his abilities. Rodriguez commanded the 82nd Airborne Division in eastern Afghanistan, is seen as aleading expert in counterinsurgency warfare. He is also Gates's senior military advisor so known to Gates for his abilities. The new strategy is to go with counterinsurgency warfare to turn this thing around. This puts 2 commanders with this kind of experience in Kabul, and close communication with Gates and Mullen because they worked together before. With additional troops, and shift in resource acquisition at the Pentagon that Gates is trying to secure for this kind of warfare, this creates the kind of combination that could help the US in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and achieve more modest goals. See the links to Gates's and Petraeus's more modest goals....

LyrArc Article Gist
The Afghan government says the U.S. helicopters took off from Jalalabad 170 miles away. But this cannot be verified as the helicopters would have to go through Pakistani airspace.

LyrArc Article Gist
With so much coverage of other aspects of China,  to really understand China and Xi Jinping one has to understand the rural urban situation in China. Xi's long experience as a teenager in the cultural revolution of Mao was in rural areas, the 8 years he spent there till the age of 22, as this report by James Areddy with help of Yijun, Cheng and Qi aptly shows. It traces the shift and mass migration to cities starting with Deng's modernization drive in 1979. This shift of labor to city and town factories as the U.S. and Europe shifted factories and production to China is the story of our times. How it has both helped and hurt China and how it has become the dominant issue of our times, and a lesson for India in the middle of its own modernization and shift of labor to cities. It has helped China modernize with the shift during 1979 to 2016 and run into a road block with president Trump leading a movement in the U.S. of people most hurt by the outsourcing of factories and production to China. It was not meant to be this way. Yet the shift also led to ripping up the fabric of communities and towns with loss of factories across America over three decades. Because China is a large country the impact was huge decade after decade, leading to a backlash against lost jobs in the U.S. and in Europe.  Xi Jinping has romantic view of rural China as he spent 7 years in Shanxi province rural areas during the cultural revolution under Mao. During this period he toiled as part of farm labor alongside villagers which allowed him to get to know villagers and farmers in the countryside well, and formed his view of the world around him. As it is described in a description of the man in Chinese sources- "He arrived at the village as a slightly lost teenager and left as a 22 year old man determined to do something for the people."  China's system separated migrants from city dwellers not  giving same rights to better education, to schools and housing, and official documents separating the two, city dwellers and migrant populations from rural areas. As a result as China modernized and population shifted -shown here in excellent graphic charts over four decades- in 1979 from about 80% in rural areas and 20% in urban the shift goes to 50-50 by 2001. Today it is 40-60 with 60% in rural areas but a population of 40% suffering from severe inequalities and  low incomes. So that GDP per capita of $10,000 for China is deceiving. The real incomes in average disposable income is about $4300 in urban and $1700 in rural area, according to National Bureau of Statistics. High school education is hard enough to get in rural areas, medical care is very basic and the $1700 would hardly get a room in low income housing in a large town in China, says premier Li Keqiang. Keqiang did his masters thesis on urbanization and has studied this shift from his college days. Just as in Gandhi's India, Mao's China is the story of the villages, with 128,000 villages for 600 million people in Mr. Xi Jinping's anti-poverty drive. Hong Kong other issues have to be understood in the context of these concerns of China's leadership today- the sense that strong central leadership alone can keep the country together and bring a decent life to the people in the villages and in the countryside outside the cities.  Modernization of cities still set in the context of China's vast rural population and essential to its full uplift and progress. Xi has allocated $80 billion each year to bring roads, schools, medical facilities, and other amenities including electricity and modern heating. The idea now is to shift people back to the villages, find opportunities for jobs and livelihoods in farming, tourism with guesthouse facilities, and other occupations in the villages. The villages are being turned into attractive places to live one by one in this party drive and providing new enthusiasm and support for the party's efforts. India can learn from this experience in China. The western nations of the U.S. and Europe can no longer and will no longer undertake the wholesale shift of factories with loss of jobs to China or India to offer the prospect of bringing these countries to the kind of urbanization and overall prosperity of small nations like Japan and South Korea, which are a tiny fraction of the population of China and India+ Pakistan + Bangladesh. As a result China is changing strategy now with a return to some aspects of the informal economy in Chengdu with street peddlers and tiny retail, and return of migrants back to better built and improved villages in the countryside. A better life than in cities is possible this view says for people from these rural areas, if the rural areas are given modern facilities and construction and resources are allocated, job creation locally tackled. The villages can offer better air quality, better quality of life where villagers who earlier migrated to cities with ownership of land, when they are modernized with better roads and have better facilities for education, housing and healthcare, better amenities. The new approach is to strike a good balance for urbanization, by modernizing and investing in villages and small towns, so that cities can cope and overall life can be better than with mass migration and wholesale urbanization. It is also a balance that works well for the U.S. and Europe which can redirect manufacturing to their home regions as part of a better distributed and balanced supply chain than the one that was unwittingly built over the last three decades.    ...