LyrArc Article Gist
This opinion piece in DW.com says India's prime minister should not isolate prime minister Sharif of Pakistan, as he had no part in the escalation of tensions in Kashmir. Foreign and military affairs are now run by the Pakistan Army, and isolating Sharif only entrenches the Army it says, which has kept up tensions similar to the situation in 1999 with the Kargil crisis when the Pakistan Army initiated a conflict in Kargil region. At that time Indian premier Vajpayee and Pakistan premier Sharif were improving relations. 

LyrArc Article Gist
Only the week before Tuesday April 7 Pakistan Foreign Minister Dhar failed to convince China to get involved. April 7th Tuesday in the US 1.30 pm US time, 8 pm Islamabad Pakistan time, China finally decided to jump in to convince Iran to accept peace talks in Islamabad. It is quite possible that behind the scenes the US was talking with China which has a 25 Year Comprehensive Agreement with Iran signed in 2021 that is the main support for the Iranian economy. China acted to reassure Iran that talks in Islamabad would proceed smoothly, and persuade Iran to accept ceasefire and talks. Why? Knowing that brinksmanship by US and Iran would lead to unforeseen consequences and hurt China's economy with oil price volatility as well as  hurt the US economy, and hurt the prospects for the planned May14-15 visit by DJT to Beijing to improve economic and political ties, both China and the US wanted to do everything to prevent this from happening. The result a hastily arranged peace talks in Islamabad so that by 4 am Islamabad time on Wednesday or 6.30 pm US time on Tuesday evening the ceasefire had already been agree to by US and Iran, according to this report in The Guardian from Pakistan. The crux of the matter was that it would affect US and China's economy with oil volatility, and US-China relations by jeopardizing May 14-15 revised date for DJT visit to Beijing. This good sense prevailed over all the war rhetoric and the media information and disinformation. It is confusing because of all the misinformation, but becomes clear when one understands this in the context provided in this report from Pakistan by the Guardian. Why Pakistan? For Pakistan the missile attack the day before of a Saudi petrochemical complex by Iran was drawing Saudis into the war and Pakistan has signed a defense agreement with Saudi Arabia that requires Pakistan to support Saudi Arabia if it gets into a war. For Pakistan it was a fragile situation that would be a catastrophe with unforeseen consequences on its economy. Already schools are closed for 1 month in Pakistan and oil is in short supply, paying for it at $115 or $125 a barrel would put severe strain on Pakistan. Who wins, who loses is being told in the media- much less on the good sense that prevailed  the efforts and the predicament of the large powers China, India, the US, and Germany, European Union, the poorer countries, all hurt economically, caught in a war they do not want, do not need. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist points out (in this cover issue on India-Pakistan relations) several fundamental facts. The first is that the current state of relations betweeen India and Pakistan hurts Pakistan the most. It makes a much smaller country and smaller economy bear the burden of defense against a large neighbor- defense takes up much needed allocation of funds for infrastructure and development, education and healthcare. It also weakens democratic institutions and their development by an overdependence on the military for governance. Poor India-Pakistan relations have significant adverse effects on the U.S. In fighting the Taliban U.S. forces are fighting a force that Pakistan's military helped create and support from its early beginnings as a way to counter Indian influence. With an Indian-Pakistani peace settlement of issues in Kashmir and other outstanding issues the U.S. would be in a significantly better position to disengage from the region, especially when the entire Middle East is moving in a new direction in 2011. Consider the difficulties in establishing peace in Northern Ireland, and between Turkey and Greece, and the difficulties of establishing peace between India and Pakistan cannot be considered even more difficult. Pakistan and India muddle along- neither side is doing much to take the initiative. For the U.S. disengagement from South Asia can be best achieved by pushing for a settlement between the two countries. Pakistan and India have much to gain from a settlement. Considering the progress made in Ireland, such places as Yugoslavia, and in Turkish-Greek relations, there is a lot more that can be done and should be done to bring India and Pakistan together. In Ireland diplomatic efforts were made by U.S. envoy George Mitchell, and in Yugoslavia U.S. envoy Holbrooke made diplomatic efforts towards the Dayton accords. Greek-Turkish relations have advanced to the point where Erdogan and Papandreou, the Greek and Turkish prime ministers, discuss solutions to the Greek debt crisis. This includes options to reduce Greece's defense expenditures in the light of Turkey's new foreign policies. The lack of such efforts to break the deadlock between India and Pakistan by the U.S,. the U.K. and other countries involved in the NATO mission in Afghanistan, the emphasis on a military solution supported first by Gen. McChrystal, and then by by Gen. Petraeus, all show a lack of understanding of the real issues that need to be tackled- issues relating to a peace settlement between India and Pakistan....

LyrArc Article Gist
Pakistan prime minister Nawas Sharif's friendly overtures to India. The need for improved trade and economic relations with India to improve Pakistan's economy and fears that the military and intelligence services or extremist groups could torpedo these efforts.

LyrArc Article Gist
Pakistan issues Islamic bond at an interest rate of 7.95%, the highest it has paid on such a bond, for $ 1 billion loan. Pakistan's foreign exchange reserves have dropped below $17 billion. A Saudi loan of $3 billion has proved insufficient to build up reserves ahead of international payments coming due. Neighboring Sri Lanka also faces international payments difficulties and is receiving assistance from India. 

The situation in South Asia remains a strange one to someone from outside South Asia with trade and commerce between India and Pakistan missing. This comes as the global supply chain is being renewed along new lines and manufacturing is taking a new role under Made in India and Atman Nirbhar Bharat. Better trade and commerce and financial relations would improve the ease of living for people in all parts of South Asia, giving trade and commerce a chance to define relations and usher a new era of peaceful cooperation.

LyrArc Article Gist
In an effort to normalize trade relations Pakistan's government plans to move forward with a step by step approach that will end the restrictions on Indian imports by Jan 1, 2013. The first step is ending a system that allows a list of 2000 import items from India and replacing it with a list of 600 items from India that are banned, allowing the flow of all other goods. This negative list will be eliminated by the end of 2012 leaving in place restrictions on sensitive defense items and some staple goods. Ashfaque Khan, dean of Pakistan's National University of Sciences and Technology Business School advises the government on trade issues. The trade between India and Pakistan stands at $2.7 billion for the year ending March 2011. This is much smaller than the $60 billion in trade between India and China which is growing. The trade between India and Pakistan is likely to grow significantly in the next ten years as trade barriers are removed and normal trade is established.

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.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Former prime minister Nawaz Sharif's PML-N party wins 125 of 269 seats in Pakistan's parliament. The Tehreek-e-Insaf party of Imran Khan won 31 seats and the PML-N party of the current president Asif Zardari won 32 seats mostly in Sindh province. Independents won 31 seats and some of these independents are likely to support Sharif in forming a new government. Election turnout of 60% showed a large degree of enthusiasm in this election and hopes for economic revival in Pakistan. The focus of Sharif will be on improving the economy, tackling electricity shortages, and building infrastructure. Sharif promised to pursue peaceful relations with India and Afghanistan, and keep the focus on the economy. Sharif and his advisers are bringing a new deftness in the dealings with the Army, the Pakistan Taliban, saying he would call for a halting of drone strikes, limiting the role the U.S. plays in the region, both positions popular in Pakistan, separating differences with former president Musharraf from the institutional role of the military. Small business owners and large business support Sharif's efforts to tackle electricity shortages, with an estimated loss of $12 billion in idled factories alone. The long period of political conflicts between the military, the judiciary and the political parties have led to neglect of Pakistan's economy, as neighboring countries in Asia surged ahead. The realization that popular pressure for improving standards of living and the economic opportunities are both huge has led to an extraordinary election, and put Sharif at the centre of an important new beginning for Pakistan. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Shehbaz Sharif 70,  is the younger brother of a three term prime minister of Pakistan Nawaz Sharif. He ran Punjab province, the country's largest state when his brother was prime minister. In this way he brings substantial experience to the problems of the economy that now face many developing economies such as Pakistan.  First on the agenda is to normalize relations with the US, rebuild ties with India, and restart negotiations with the International Monetary Fund. Pakistan faces severe inflation of 14% and devaluing currency that makes imports costlier as the foreign currency reserves have dropped to alarming levels of $24 billion when annual import needs are at about $56 billion. This has a direct impact on cost of living, standards of living and on industry. Shehbaz Sharif understands the situation and has said restoring the economy "will take effort, effort and more effort." A similar statement has been made by Mr. Modi in Hindi "sab ka viokas, sab ka prayas" which also mean effort, effort and more effort, which all of South Asia and Bay of Bengal, and South East Asian countries needs considering the impact of Covid pandemic, and now inflation from the war in Europe hitting food supplies. The situation is grim in other parts of South Asia- in Myanmar, in Sri Lanka, in Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia. The popular sentiment is also shifting as seen in the Indian part of the old British Punjab province. Mostly Sikh this part of old Punjab state in India made a complete change bringing in a new party Aadmi to improve the economy and provide good governance. In this situation all governments are expected to deliver on good governance and the economy.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
BBC reports on Iran protests January 2026. Protests happened with students, with women periodically over the last two decades. Iran over the years since the monarchy in the 1880's and democratic movements (parliaments) in 1900's, monarchy in the 1930's and 1960's, socialist governments 1960's. Cold War and restored monarchy in 1970's, religious theocracy 1990's till today has gone through many different governments. It was part of the British Empire (that included India/Pakistan) and Russia's buffer region in the 18th and 19th century.  After economic sanctions from US and Europe the economy depends on sanctioned oil exports. Its defense operations divert much of the funding from oil based resources away from economic development . Much of that was a result of the anticolonial socialist ideologies that spread from North Africa (Algeria, Egypt) to Iraq and Syria that led to wars in Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan- which also led to Iraq's version the Baathist ideology invading Iran. Russia and the US have extracted themselves at much loss from these conflicts by 2025 and are posed at a historic rapprochement in relations. For Iran there is today no danger from the region or from European powers, and like the US the people and the country are asking questions about the economic and living conditions from so much in resources now diverted to external conflicts- like the US the people in the region of Iran and the entire Middle East apart from a few small oil rich regions with a tiny part of the overall population- maybe 5% in Qatar and UAE, and Saudi- feel the impact of little investment in rapid economic development of the overall region. A region with a population close to the European Union of 500 million but a tiny fraction of economic development investment for the vast majority of people in Egypt and other parts of North Africa and regions of Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Sudan. Most of the investment of $1 trillion is concentrated in the 10% of the population of over 500 million people in oil resource Saudi Arabia, UAE/Qatar monarchies, the rest languishing in war, and now meaningless- in terms of living standards- of anticolonial ideologies or militant religious ideologies, or internecine/ethnic conflict. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
India agrees to an immediate ceasefire after a call from Pakistan's head of military operations for a ceasefire. The conflict started with attack on tourism that was reviving the Kashmir economy after three decades through a terrorist attack killing 26 tourists in Phalgam, Kashmir on  April 22, 2025 in the mountains near the Pir Panjal range. 24 million tourists visited Kashmir in 2024. Indian response was swift on May 7 early morning hours attacking 18 terrorist camps inside Pakistan occupied Kashmir and inside Pakistan. India called it a act of self-defense to Pakistan sponsored state terrorism going back to 1947. What is different in this brief 4 day war is that India made it economic with efforts at IMF to make terrorism an issue for loans to Pakistan, and ending the Indus Waters Treaty on water sharing. Pakistan economy is struggling with no debt relief from China, making it turn to the IMF, a politically split population with Opposition leader Imran Khan in jail, and continued domination by the military over civilian govenrment. On May 9 drone attacks were launched from Pakistan using Turkish made drones in large numbers on cities and towns in Gujarat, Rajasthan, Punjab. Blackouts were placed in India by May 8 in all cities in the north and in Pakistan. India responded with its own drones and missile attacks on three military airbases as the war broadened to military targets on May 10. US mediated a ceasefire through Saudis and Turkey. Earlier Saudis and Iran were in New Delhi with whom India has good relations to get a ceasefire. Mr. Trump's efforts behind the scenes secured an agreement. VP Vance had cut short an Indian trip in Jaipur on April 22. India and the US are allies in the Indo-Pacific, and India and Russia have decades of friendly relations. China now uses Pakistan as a proxy state, but does not provide the economic aid it needs, for which it has turned to the IMF.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Agreement was reached for the civilian nuclear deal between India and the U.S. in all night talks, just as President Bush landed in New Delhi. Bush is changing the whole dynamic of India/Pakistan and U.S. relations in a manner comparable to Nixon's visit to China and handshake with Mao. It will never be the same. Divide and rule policies inherited from the British colonization period which pitted India and Pakistan in relation to western interests is put into the dustbin of history. A new period in the relations of the western nations with Asia is beginning, Japan in the Meiji period, China with its opening after the Nixon visit, and India now after the Bush visit. See the speech to the Asia Society by Bush. In this sense Bush and Rice are making huge farreaching changes coinciding with the changes they see in Asia, in a way not even fully understood by themselves and much less by the American press and even less by the American public.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist cites a think tank that says about 600,000 young educated Kashmiri adults are jobless. Kashmiri religious and political leaders worry that their youngest followers might take up radical positions. The violent insurgency has so far subsided but is now replaced with stone pelting and hartals (strikes). The fear is that the influence of moderate leaders such as Mr Geelani, who is in his eighties, will be replaced with leaders who would reignite tensions and an insurgency. Dr Mushtaq Margoob, of the psychiatric hospital in Srinagar, talks about the throngs of patients with stress and anxiety, with the youngest the most damaged. He sees "a collective anger, a traumatized generation." A three man team, comprising 2 academics and a journalist, was sent by the central government to Kashmir to prepare a series of reports by talking to all sides in the conflict The team has proved ineffective as the members do not carry political weight to influence decisions. A Wahhabi organization, al Hadith is using Saudi funds to establish itself as a strong welfare, religious, and cultural force. The non-muslim minority in Kashmir sees al Hadith as bringing Saudi Islamization to a region long known for its Muslim's religious tolerance, building community centres, mosques, schools and clinics. Are there creative better ways to bring peace to Kashmir and redirect the resources India has to commit to the region, Pakistan has to commit to its border with India, and the U.S. has to commit to its ground war in Afghanistan. For now India is locked into a silence about Kashmir in international discussions, Pakistan is playing out its own "security objectives" in Afghanistan, and the U.S. is locked into its anti-terrorism objectives in Afghanistan. Only by connecting all these dots can peace and redirection of resources be achieved. The U.S., Pakistan and India, would come up with a creative solution only if each side finds itself pushed to the point where continued commitment of resources is no longer tenable because of economic crises, or the US and the Western alliance see the need to pull South Asia together to act as a balancing element in Asia in relation to China and Japan; and push for negotiations with an offer of stronger economic ties. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Pakistan army and its anti India mindset is at the root of the problem Pakistan faces. The army has factions that support the Taliban. Its intelligence agency, the ISI, helped create the Taliban as a way to get strategic depth (as they called it) in Afghanistan, for it sees as a necessary perpetual conflict with India. And the failure in Pakistan, the crisis of Pakistan, lies in the failure of elected politicians, the failure of the army, to provide responsible government and peaceful relations with India and with Afghanistan. By pursuing a Hindu-Muslim conflict agenda, and a anti-foreigner agenda for Afghanistan, Pakistan has ended up undermining its own government, institutions, and sovereignty over tribal areas and the North West Frontier Province. The US by getting involved in the Hindu-Muslim conflict agenda, and the anti-foreigner agenda during the Cold War, by supplying weapons and aid for this to successive Pakistani military governments, now finds itself as the foreigner in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Pakistan army's anti-foreigner agenda, now that the Americans are the foreigners, is not something that even the army or the civilian governments can control. The only thing the army knows, and its raison-de-etre, is the protection of the state of Pakistan and an antiIndian, Hindu-Muslim conflict agenda. After 60 years of doing this since its founding the Pakistan army knows no other way. Failure to do what it is doing would remove it from its critical role as the most important institution in Pakistan, and relegate its officers and the army to a smaller role, with smaller committments of resources, a smaller army, and the loss of its privileged role in Pakistani society. This is the answer to Holbrooke's question to Pakistani businessmen, and civilian leaders, in Lahore recently, what is the crisis of Pakistan? And these businessmen and civilian leaders also touched on the army's role. For America as it sees the need to build a new economic partnership with Asia that would help revive economic growth, there is the need for deep soul searching. The Pakistan military sucks up resources that are so badly needed elsewhere, for the kind of construction the Obama administration sees for America, of roads, bridges, schools, new energy infrastructure. How can what is good and planned for America not be whats good for South Asia, for India, Pakistan, SriLanka and the entire region? The resources that are sucked up by the Pakistan military and its actions to foster aconflict atmosphere merely adds to the way resources are sucked for the military in India, when they are badly needed for development, economic growth, and the same kind of infrastructure building and education that the Obama administration plans for the US. Without correcting this flaw in its policies in South Asia the Obama administration cannot create a partnership with Asian countries that could play a critical role in America's own economic growth....

LyrArc Article Gist
This opinion in the Hindusthan Times points out that prime minister Modi's speech at Kozhikode following a militant attack in Kashmir in September 2016, reflects a long standing policy since the late 1970's of Congress party and BJP or Janata party administrations. The idea is to encourage cross border exchanges to reduce tensions. The emphasis in back channel talks between India and Pakistan also emphasize the idea of CBM, cross border movement. The prime minister of Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif, has also expressed in the past the importance of cross border movement and trade as ways to improve the economies of both countries. The idea of building up trade and increased exchanges between the two countries is supported also by the U.S. and other western countries. The example of Ireland and Northern Ireland where trade and cross border exchanges are considered important by all parties after Brexit, is an example of how important this is.

LyrArc Article Gist
US differences with Pakistan are based on two different perspectves that are not reconcilable. Recent events and the relationship between the US and Pakistan's army chief have confirmed that this is not going to change. US sees militants and Taliban inside Pakistan as havens for the short term as the US disengages from Afghanistan, whereas Pakistan's army sees them as useful elements in Pakistan's security interests in relation to India for the long term. Whe Kayani met with Obama in Washington, he handed Obama a 13 page document showing Pakistan's strategic perspective and emphasizing the gap between short term US interests and Pakistan's long term interests. The Wikileaks cables show Kayani discussing with US officials a possible removal of President Zardari and his preferred replacement. This made Kayani, normally reticent, to rant for hours on the irreconciliable differences between the US and Pakistan with a group of Pakistani journalists. He described Pakistan as the US's "most bullied ally," and said the frames of reference of the US and Pakistan regarding regional ssecurity "can never be the same," according to news accounts. And added that "the real aim of US strategy is to de-nuclearize Pakistan." Holbrooke and Admiral Mullen had hoped to reverse "a trust deficit" between the two sides. But this has not happened. General Petraeus is taking a tougher attitude and patience is thin on both sides. According to a Kayani friend, air marshal Chaudhry, Kayani is always asking Petraeus what the strategic objectives are in Afghanistan. US officials say they have given up on changing Kayani's thinking and that Kayani has told them: "I don't trust you." Kayani's position makes sense when one looks at the strongly anti-American public in Pakistan. Pakistani military and intelligence officials say a campaign against militants inside Pakistan incites domestic terrorism and uproots local communities. And by following Pakistan's own interests and frames of reference Kayani sends signals that win esteem among the Pakistani public. Opinion polls now show the military held in higher esteem than the Zardari administration. This puts the US in a no-win situation in Afghanistan with no clear objectives for the long term. This leaves the US in a time of tight budgets stretched thin to meet the needs in other defence areas that need attention, such as modernization of forces, trouble spots such as Korea, Iran and elsewhere, and resources needed for modernization of US infrastructure and supporting new technologies and industries. The lasting solutions that will take time, careful thought and preparation would be to integrate South Asia as a whole into an economic zone, extensive infrastructure building, and bring India and Pakistan closer through diplomacy and negotiations. See the articles by Richard Haas and others on the need to redirect resources. ...

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. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Bhutan is a small mountain kingdom in north eastern India, bordering Tibet. Historically close ties with Tibet continued after China's takeover of Tibet following the coming to power of China's Communist Party in 1949. This led to a friendship treaty with India in 1949. A narrow piece of terrritory with 34 square kilometres is part of the dispute between China and India. India opposed the move to build Chinese roads in the area leading to a standoff that is now over 50 days. This territory is significant because it connects India's central plains to the northeastern states. Bhutan opposes the Chinese road work but tries to maintain friendly relations with China. The close relationship between India and Bhutan is part of the situation that emerged after China's takeover of Tibet. The Royal Bhutan Army's salaries are paid by India, road construction is done by India, and subsidies for food and kerosene were provided by India. A parliamentary democracy with a monarch was established in Bhutan under king Jigme Wangchuk, and elections were held in 2008, 2013. This has led to more openness towards China, leading to concern in India.  Bhutan is a popular destination for Chinese tourists who pay $250 for a visa. Indians do not need a visa. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The fact that Osama bin Laden was in Abbotabad, near the Pakistan military academy and military facilities, and was probably sheltered by the ISI, raises the issue of Pakistan sheltering the terrorists who planned the Mumbai attacks. This increases pressure on the Indian government to take up this issue and affects efforts to improve relations.

LyrArc Article Gist
Lt. Gen Trainor and Michael Gordon describe the situation during the last months of U.S. presence in Iraq. President Obama is ambivalent about the size of the military presence he would like to leave, settling for 3000 troops and a few F-16's from a inital figure of 10,000. Obama sees the presidential election approaching and sets an objective of keeping it minimal. The military cooperation treaty with Iraq has to be approved by a Iraqi parliament with different factions in parliament not likely to approve it. Prime Minister Malliki decides not to move ahead. In the end no military cooperation treaty is signed after 8 years of war and a date is set for a complete withdrawal. Iraqi airspace is used by Iran to ship supplies to Syria's Assad regime, and the U.S. has less leverage in the region as the Arab world goes through a transition to popular government and elections. The Obama administration shifts most of its attention to Afghanistan where the U.S. has no vital stake in the long run compared to the Middle East region, with its large population, growing economies, move towards democracy and meeting the aspirations of hundreds of millions of young people. One Middle Eastern leader says the U.S. had no long term policy under the Obama administration for Iraq, and this applies also to the rest of the Middle East region, and mostly reacted to events as they happened. The Obama administration's committment to the war in Afghanistan, just as it focussed on winding down the war in Iraq, responded to the American public's waning support for the war in Iraq. It did not reduce the total cost of the conflicts because of the initial escalation of the war in Afghanistan and later slow progress towards a negoiated settlement to that conflict. A negotiated settlement is the best the U.S. could achieve, and the best desired objective considering the limited interests in Afghanistan. In Afghanistan most of the dynamics would be determined in the long run by the situation in Pakistan, and India-Pakistan relations, which the U.S. could influence constructively only through dialogue, promoting cooperation between the two countries, and economic relations....

LyrArc Article Gist
Michael Boskin, the elder president Bush's chairman of the Council of Economc Advisors was instrumental in setting up the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Here he points to the dire need to open up trade between India and Pakistan. Trade today between the two countries is $2.7 billion. Under trade models Boskin says the trade could be 20 times larger, about $50 billion. This would increase benefits and wages in both countries and is badly needed and long overdue.

LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump outlines a plan for Afghanistan that increases the U.S. troop presence from about 8500 with an addition of 4000 more troops and advisors, in addition to a counter terrorism force. To war weary public in the U.S. he says: "I share your frustration over a foreign policy that has spent too much time, energy, money- and most importantly, lives- trying to rebuild countries in our own image instead of pursuing our security interests above all other considerations." About his criticism of the war when president Obama was in office as a huge costly waste of resources Trump said: My original instinct was to pull out, and historically I like to follow my instincts... I heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk at the Oval Office." After resisting the advice of his own advisers Trump decided to fire Bannon who had supported use of American private security contractors for the war in Afghanistan, and used parts of the media to question national security advisor McMaster's views on this. Gen. Mattis, completed a strategy review that showed the mistake of creating a vacuum would repeat the situation of Iraq where president Obama withdrew forces in 2011, leading to a sequence of negative events- with Russia, Iran and Islamic State moving into the vacuum, making American intervention in the war necessary, increase in terrorist incidents worldwide, and a flood of refugees into Europe. Ironically clearing the path for an outsider's bid for the White House, with Brexit in which refugee fears and uncontrolled immigration played a part, and the news of terrorism and the war in Syria-Iraq creating a sense of insecurity. A key difference in the Trump approach with Obama's approach is that "conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables will guide our actions from now on," in line with Trump's criticism of Obama's approach. The military in the U.S. has long maintained that the best approach would have been to insist on U.S. presence in negotiations with the Iraqi government under the sectarian prime minister Nouri Maliki. Gen. Mattis was head of Central Command under the Obama administration and must have pushed the view of the military to president Obama to no avail. Failure to do so led to the growth of Shiite militias and the alienation of Sunnis in Mosul, leading to the fall of Mosul to Islamic State thus creating the current crisis. Gen. Mattis and Lt. Gen McMaster are intimately aware of the problem and must have convinced Trump that this is what really happened, that a repeat would waste the sacrifices of American soldiers in the twin wars. Trump gave this as his reason when he said in his televised speech to the nation- essentially a criticism of Bush that he expanded the conflict too quickly, and Obama exiting too quickly to create a void. Trump call his policy "principled realism."  The roots of the crisis are in the India-Pakistan conflict. Like the conflict in South East Asia the conflict in South Asia extending from Iran to India and Pakistan, may take a generation to overcome. A rapprochement between India and Pakistan, beginning with trade and economic relations, is not only in America's interest, it also provides the basis for a realistic American withdrawal. ...