LyrArc Article Gist
Chancellor Merz New Year Message to Germany 2025, reflects on the events of 2025 with the DJT US administration distancing itself from Europe in favor of a peace agreement in the Ukraine war- with Europe left to take responsibility for defending it's region. By December 2025 the US asserted the Monroe Doctrine and made securing the western hemisphere the top priority, not Europe. Merz and SPD's Lars Klingsbeil removed the constitutional brake on spending placed by Merkel and passed a bill in parliament by December 2025 for a one trillion dollar infrastructure buildup and defense buildup. “Germany is a great country that has, time and again, reinvented itself, emerged stronger from crises, given rise to new cohesion and offers all of its citizens a livable and lovable home.” “We are not the victims of extraneous circumstances. We are not at the mercy of great powers. Our hands are not tied.” A similar situation is happening in South Asia as India faces China over a long border in the Himalayas and India puts up roads, bridges, tunnels and airstrips in the Himalayan border regions.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Disengagement along the India China border in Ladakh in the Pangong Tso area. China withdraws from the area and both sides dismantle the border buildup in the region. 

LyrArc Article Gist
Tensions on the India China border as India builds roads and infrastructure in the mountainous Himalayan area close to the border in Ladakh to match the Chinese buildup of roads in the region over the last decade. India has also built up its troop presence in the region to match China's troop presence along the border in Ladakh.

India has supported a call from Australia for an investigation into the early origins of the coronavirus. The call was supported by many countries around the world and by the U.S., Japan and France. The 350,000 deaths from coronavirus and the 5.5 millions confirmed cases, the economic damage, most of them in western nations in North America and Europe, have  led to growing tensions between China and the rest of the world. 

LyrArc Article Gist
Making some territorial concessions appears to be the only way for peace talks to succeed. For a long time there was insistence on territorial sovereignty of Ukraine by EU and NATO leaders. This appears to have prolonged the war- with needless loss of life on both sides, and costly damage to Ukraine infrastructure, a population that had to face additional winters and hardship in war ravaged areas. NATO's Stoltenberg from Norway, leaders of northern Nordic and Baltic countries, the UK, could take that position without having to face the hardship of the war. NATO had to be re-formed under a new name and new structure  following the collapse of the Soviet Union, with wariness about the possibility of centuries old since 1700 UK and Nordic historical adversarial relationship with Russia casting a shadow over that organization, and embroiling the US in conflicts not of its own choice or of wise leadership. This is the root cause of the Ukraine war. It would have been best to completely restructure NATO and give it a new name without Northern European nations leading it. Principles matter once soviet communism was no longer there NATO formed for its expansionism in 1950's had served it's purpose. Rasmussen from Denmark and Stoltenberg from Norway led the organization for the last decade and half from 2009-2014 and 2014 to 2025, with backing from Obama/Merkel for most of the period of the war in Ukraine. Also most of the period NATO expanded to Russian borders happened under Northern European leaders from Spain, Britain and Nordics (Solana, Robertson, Scheffer, Rasmussen and Stoltenberg) and the organization NATO getting the northern European slant based on historical adversarial relationship of Britain and Russia since 1700- for no other reason than the British wanting to protect its large Empire and commerce in India which in the 18th and 19th century included most of Asia. Under Robertson the UK Defense Secretary much of this transformation into turning NATO into something anti-Russian happened which was primarily because of British and Nordic perceptions of Russia as an adversary. Robertson added the following countries at the Prague Summit in 2002 to NATO- the Baltics, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. Russia faced internal upheaval in those years and Yeltsin in resigned in 1999, Putin was elected in 2000. It is clear that Russia had suffered severe economic hardship in that period and Putin's first goal in 2002 was to stabilize the economy.  It could be said that this turning NATO over to UK and Nordics was a huge mistake considering that Russia was still the largest nuclear power after the US, and British policy was now determining US policy. And Britain's Robertson/NATO should not have involved itself in the Afghanistan war using Article 5, as the US could have handled this alone and limited that engagement. It got US involved in another conflict, conflict with Russia that was to come in Ukraine on the side of the Baltics and Ukraine, without US clearly understanding what the roots of that war was about and implied confrontation with Russia 20 years after the Prague Summit in 2002 under George Bush junior. The incompetence of Bush and Obama/Merkel laid the seeds of the Ukraine war in 2022 following Robertson, Rasmussen, Stoltenberg, small Nordic nations and Britain creating a conflict that did not need to happen, with loss of hundreds of thousands of lives of Russian speaking fraternal peoples of both Russia and Ukraine. The Republican sentiment under DJT of the tragedy of such huge losses of young people, and desire to end this loss of life, can nowhere be seen in bellicose talk in northern European nations, that take the US for granted to fight their wars.  The wisdom of Washington, Lincoln and TR/FDR clearly caution in getting involved in European centuries old animosities. For the US it meant in practical terms that it could no longer carry out the Monroe Doctrine essential for peace and good governance in the western hemisphere as only a Russia desperate to make its views known about NATO would interfere in the western hemisphere against US assertion of the Monroe Doctrine with the US Navy. Instead drug trafficking gangs took over Latin American countries and created a flow of fentanyl and millions of people through migrant traffickers across the US southern border. As America has expressed its concern for loss of Russian and Ukrainian men in the war for the first time under DJT Russia has distanced itself from Venezuela, Mexico and Latin America. The loss of hundreds of thousands of young Americans to fentanyl is a shared tragedy with the loss of hundreds of thousands of young Russians and Ukrainians in the last decade. How reliable are Northern European countries when it comes to protecting the eastern seaboard of the US with the acquisition of Greenland? It is a policy pursued by presidents since the Alaska Acquisition from Russia. By Seward, Teddy Roosevelt, Harry Truman and DJT. Denmark the land where NATO secretary general Rasmussen was from followed by Stoltenberg from Norway  (for 15 of the years of the war in Ukraine 2010-2025) the US efforts to protect its eastern seaboard are rebuffed by both Denmark and Norway, and the US presented in a negative light as an imperialist power in the face of Danish East India Company's  colonial attitude since 1700 clearly imitating the colonial British East India company.  It shows Northern European nations looking out for themselves not for the US, and embroiling the US in their wars at the cost of the entire western hemisphere being destabilized. The population of UK, Denmark and Norway, Baltics is far less than the Mumbai, Shanghai, Sao Paulo , Berlin and Tokyo regions. Should the views of a small population in northern Europe of 2% of the total determine the future of US, Europe, China, India, Brazil, and other parts of the world with 5 billion people the 98%, when issues of war and nuclear conflict, nuclear buildup, the western hemisphere destabilized with drug trafficking gangs running rampant in countries, divide the world in opposing blocs, when the wellbeing of most of the world's people in Asia and Latin America, Africa is at stake by establishing a essential degree of cooperation by all sides. The US under DJT has chosen a wise policy of cooperation over conflict -with China, with Russia, with all the major powers, and with smaller powers. Reading the wisdom contained in the writings of Washington, Lincoln, TR/FDR confirms it is clearly the wise choice. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Nikki Haley is doing what has happened before, fighting for principles in her party and showing that a fully significant 40 percentage points of her party believe in the old conservative ideas, of the Republican party. That of the country club type, the everyman who happens to be conservative the core of the party, small and large business owners. The situation is analogous to the intraparty struggles that beset the Democratic party after the abrupt end after 1000 days of the John F. Kennedy presidency and administration. Since the 1920's and two periods of rising inequality accompanied by technological change from the 1870's that ended with the Great Depression, the US had experienced a great revival under Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman and Eisenhower. In 1960 a new future was articulated by Kennedy of the new world that lay ahead, one he had seen upfront in Asia before, during and after the war. How would we bring the post colonial world of billions of people into the modern world. Since then both a modern China and now modern India are part of this change. "Today our concern must be with that future. For the world is changing. The old era is ending. The old ways will not do." Acceptance speech for the Democratic nomination for President, July 15, 1960. It was interrupted after the intraparty disputes that began in 1968, Robert Kennedy challenging LBJ, leading to Richard Nixon, and Edward Kennedy challenging Jimmy Carter leading to Ronald Reagan. John F. Kennedy had articulated a vision that still is alive today based on an understanding of how America's needs fit into all humanity's needs.  In some ways the situation after 2024 or 2028 still goes back to the vision of a new order of the world with emerging nations in Asia with 3 billion people, and additional billions of people in Africa, Latin America. The Arms buildup promised by Reagan in 1980 has yielded little about 50 years later, not even the fall of the Berlin Wall which today has been replaced by another struggle in Eastern Europe in 2024. Truman tackled the Berlin Blockade,  Eisenhower had faced upto Soviet tanks in Budapest, Kennedy had faced the Berlin crisis in 1963 his ich bin ein Berliner (I am Berliner). What purpose would an orbital weapons program serve- and could the US ever be or even want to be  "only one superpower in a safe world," with an orbital weapons program as Reagan and Weinberger went out to do and failed completely. America faces a situation analogous to 1920's with increasing inequality and weakness in the social fabric, as a result of four decades of rising inequality accompanied by technological changes, and misguided Reagan programs that diverted from John Kennedy's vision that the "old era is ending, the old ways will not do."  The vision put forward by John F. Kennedy has more relevance today for the future. That vision he articulated in the First Inaugural Address in which he also said that this work may not be accomplished "in our lifetime on the planet." It is important to remember that John F. Kennedy connected his vision to FDR when he said in his State of the Union Address to Congress in Jan. 1961- In the name of a great President whose birthday we honor today, closing his final State of the Union Message sixteen years ago. "We pray that we may be worthy of the unlimited opportunities that God has given us." This is the vision that stands before America even today in 2024.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Note that Goldman Sach's analysts who first predicted that oil prices could reach $100 are now predicting that the downward momentum is building up. The prediction from them now is that prices may go up further than the $96 right now but should drop to $80 by April. Its not too difficult to see why. First on the supply side the momentum for downward shift is not so significant but still there are signs. The Iraqi oil flow disruption either from a Turkish invasion of norther Iraq or from internal disruption is shrinking as the Turks see this as a small operation at most, and the Iraqi law and order situation is improving. The Iranian situation may be stabilizing without US intervention possibilities shrinking. On the supply side the oil majors except for Total see their output shrinking somewhat, and OPEC has not increased supplies significantly as oil inventories have not built up as they do before winter. But overall the supply situation is stable. On the demand side is where the significant downward momentum exists. With the US economy slowing down amid the buildup of the housing tumble and the credit crunch which looks to get worse in 2008 before stabilizing in 2009 and a stronger euro and other factors affecting Europe's expansion oil consumption by industry in the industrialized countries is slowing. Much of the pressure on oil prices comes from increases in demand each year from China and India. Here gasoline is subsidized by the government and this reduces incenive for conservation. The policy of letting market prices be reflected at the pump to a limited degree so as not to seriously affect people is now taking hold in these countries. In China prices were raised 10% and there is likely to be further increase in the near future. This along with the increasing awarenes of the dependence on foreign oil and the need for conservation in both China and India should build pressures in both countries to make the best use of resoures and have users share some of the burden of higher prices. The American and European gasoline market is driven by a public that has not been too conscious of conservation especially in America. It appears that high oil prices have not encouraged conservation, witness that with rebates for higher oil prices and zero interest rates financing large pickups are still selling at levels of 2005, and there has not been a significant reduction in consumption at the pump. What may shift this equation now is probably government mandated fuel economy standards. Europe already has new standards and the automakers there are racing to meet it with new technologies, in America its now almost certain that public sentiment and congressional sentiment is likely to lead to similiar standards or at least significantly improved standard. Public sentiment is already pushing the automakers in the USA to introduce new models with higher fuel economy and use this as a n advertising and competitive edge. This reduction in gasoline consumption at the pump through new technologies in the industrialized countries and through price increases being allowed to flow through in the developing countries of China and India in a stable supply environment where the downward political risks are stable may be the pivotal turning point for the price of oil. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Mexico is close to becoming the U.S.'s largest trading partner. Trade increased by 17% between Mexico and the U.S. to $461 billion in 2011, compared to $502 billion in trade between the U.S. and China.

LyrArc Article Gist
The increasing competitiveness of Mexico compared to China and India as an investment destination in 2013. Foreign companies are investing heavily in Mexico because of investment advantages in labor cost, supply of engineering and management talent, and proximity to the U.S.

LyrArc Article Gist
An indepth look at Mexico, its assets, its huge potential and what is holding Mexico back. It ranks much higher than Brazil in many respects- higher investment as a fraction of its GDP, technical education, an easier place to do business, less regulation, better management talent, more industrialized. In 2010 Mexico had $400 billion of business with the U.S. With rising Chinese wages Mexico is an attractive place for foreign investment, with a hardworking and educated workforce. Mexico suffered badly during the 2008 recession in the U.S. It is trying to reduce its dependence on exports to the U.S in key areas such as the automotive industry. Exports to the U.S. by the automotive industry are now 65% of the total, and the auto industry association in Mexico is working to bring this figure to 50% by exporting to Latin America and Europe. Economic growth was 5.4% in 2010, and expected to be 4-5% in 2011. Drug violence may have reduced the growth by one percentage point according to some estimates. The think tank, Mexican Institute for Competitiveness, estimates that economic growth would be 2.5% percentage points higher if labor market and competition laws are changed, and the oil industry is opened up to foreign investment as happened in Brazil. A study by OECD and the Federal Competition Commission (CFC) of Mexico has shown that 31% of Mexican household spending goes to products operating in high price monopolistic or oligopolistic markets. The bottom ten percent spend even higher proportion of incomes, around 38%, for products supplied in such markets. This includes pharmaceuticals, airline travel, banking, and electricity. Taking on these cartels is a difficult task. The CFC is beginning to take the first steps in this direction, in what will be a long road to fair prices for Mexican consumers. Banking was opened to Wal-Mart. The collapse of Mexicana was an opportunity to auction landing slots to other airlines. An auction system has been developed by CFC for drugs. A new competition law sets penalties for collusion in pricing, with upto 10 years in jail. And Carlos Slim's telephone monopoly was fined $1 billion for its telecom monopoly practices. In 2009 the Calderon government shut down Luz y Fuerza, a state electricity company costing the governmment $3 billion in subsidies for an highly inefficient operation. ...