World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

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

All Topics Articles

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

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


The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Moon Jae-In of South Korea will meet Mr. Kim of North Korea in a summit in late April after envoys from South Korea visited Pyongyang, North Korea, for 2 days of talks. The talks come against the background of the WInter Olympics in Pyeongchang, South Korea, where the 2 Koreas sent a joint team as part of reconciliation efforts.  North Korea agreed to denuclearize said a South Korean government statement after the talks, saying- "The North Korean side clearly stated its willingness to denuclearize. It made it clear that it would have no reason to keep nuclear weapons if the military threat to the North was eliminated and its security guaranteed." Working level discussions will be held before the Kim- Moon summit meeting and a hotline phone connection will be setup between the two leaders. A recent report in the WSJ shows China for the first time tightening sanctions on the North. Japan has joined the U.S. in taking a tough stand and its foreign minister said that the offer for abandonment of nuclear weapons has come before and North Korea has resumed its nuclear weapons development each time. U.S. experts say that security guarantees were offered by the Clinton administration, including in writing, but this has not prevented the North from moving ahead with its nuclear program. This is the first time Kim, 34 years, has met with senior envoys from the South since assuming power in 2011. The WInter Olympics in Pyeongchang with Mr Kim's sister attending and bringing an offer for a summit meeting, were the first such contacts in years between the 2 Koreas. The new offer comes with an offer to stop nuclear tests, yet leaves open the manufacture of fissile materials say experts. The U.S. and Japan are deeply skeptical and insist on complete and verifiable proof of abandonment of the nuclear program. ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Leaders of North Korea and South Korea, Kim Jong-Un and Moon Jae-in meet on April 27, 2018, at the military demarcation line between North and South Korea.  After handshakes and Mr. Moon stepping onto North Korean soil for a few minutes, Kim Jong-Un visits Seoul for peace talks.  This is a historic moment for the two countries as this is the first time since the Korean War (1950-53) that a North Korean leader has visited the South. No peace treaty was signed after the Korean War. During the period of six decades that followed the Korean War, particularly the period after 1980, the South Korean economy recovered from the war and expanded following the Japanese export model with large conglomerates such as Samsung. The North Korean economy has struggled in the period and North Korea is one of the poorest countries isolated for most of this period like Burma from the rest of the world. The development of nuclear weapons was pursued to prevent any external threats to the government, and decades of sanctions followed with aborted efforts to denuclearize the Korean peninsula. Recent ballistic nuclear tests and the installation of a new anti missile system in South Korea led to tighter sanctions with the cooperation of China. This heightened tensions, followed by the tighter sanctions. Kim Jong Un and the government are looking for ways to win approval in the international community, and find a way out of the tight sanctions. South Korea, Japan and the U.S. government are not sure whether this will lead to any results in denuclearization. The summit with Moon will be followed by a summit between president Trump and Kim Jong Un of North Korea. If a way can be found for the North Korean government and party leaders to transition to acceptance in the international community followed by integration of the North and South's economies over an extended period, there is a possibility that denuclearization could work, because it is to maintain the current government in North Korea that nuclear development was pursued in the North. Ideological conflict is now less of a factor in the conflict between North and South Korea as it was in the early days of the Korean War with the Cold War and Communism's advances in Eastern Europe and Asia the big issue at the time. Today China itself is more of a state run economy under the Communist Party following capitalism with Chinese characteristics than the old Communist model, and ideological conflict is not an issue between the U.S. and Communist run countries. This leaves open the possibility of a solution particularly as at some point just as in the case of Vietnam and the U.S., North Korea could see its future more allied with that of South Korea than with China. That leaves an opening for a timetable of transitional actions plus effective implementation stages, with incentives for the U.S. and Japan to negotiate a settlement. ...
Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
With the arrival of Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State, and John Bolton as National Security Adviser, president Trump finds support for his own instincts on foreign policy. On North Korea, Iran, and China, president Trump takes charge of foreign policy favoring strong bargaining pressure to achieve foreign policy  goals in trade, containing nuclear weapons and reducing conflicts. He sees the peace talks with North Korea as moving in the right direction with his efforts, and makes the decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal of 2015 on May 8, 2018, as he leaves the door open for new negotiations with Iran for a better deal that achieves U.S. goals.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mr. Moon Jae-in, South Korea's leader, emerges from this week of direct talks between president Trum and Kim Jong Un of North Korea, with many of his goals accomplished. During most of 2018 with threats and missile tests from the North relations with the U.S. had worsened, South Korea was left out in many developments relating to the Korean peninsula, and tensions had risen. After this weeks diplomacy in Singapore, the South Korean leader has reduced tensions, achieved the goal of direct talks between the U.S. and North Korea, and reduced tensions. Moon-Jae-in now has poplarity of 79% according to Gallup South Korea, and won in local elections. Even the cancellation of military exercizes by president Trump after the Kim meeting achieves a long standing goal of reducing tensions by moderating the exercizes- which are seen by North Korea as a threat. A Gallup poll shows 66% of South Koreans supporting the Kim- Trump talks. Conservatives in South Korea are still skeptical that this can last given past experience with North Korea. The consensus is still that reduction of tensions and dialogue is still the best way to resolve the disputes, with the added pressure of sanctions with China's active participation to make the effort work. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This inside account of the events leading to the cancellation of the meeting with Kim Jong Un of North Korea shows how quickly the idea of a meeting between the two leaders unraveled following Trump's statements about the Libyan example being followed by North Korea. Soon after the suggestion for a Trump meeting was made by Kim Jong Un to South Korean officials Mr Trump picked up and endorsed the idea. North Korea made a public announcement critical of Mr. Trump  and National Security Adviser John Bolton took this up with Mr. Trump at 10 pm on May 23, 2018.  This report says Mr. Trump fearing that Kim Jong Un was looking for a way to back out of the talks acted first- possibly sensing that Mr. Trump could be made to look weak and small if the situation continued to develop and the U.S. is seen as a desperate suitor. The meeting had been set for June 12 in Singapore.  In the end the South Koreans and the Japanese were the last to learn about the cancellation and were taken by surprise by Trump's decision. ...
Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump announces the U.S. withdrawal from the Iran Nuclear Agreement of 2015 signed by president Obama. He calls it a bad deal and "a one sided agreement, that "didn't bring, calm, didn't bring peace, and never will." Since the signing of the agreement the conflicts in the Middle East have increased and relations between the U.S. and Iran have deteriorated under the Trump administration. During the election campaign candidate Trump and Republicans had criticized the deal and deal never gained Republican support. It was also not initially supported by France which called for stronger safeguards on nuclear weapons development. The appointment of John Bolton as National Security Adviser, and Mike Pompeo as the new Secretary of State, who were strong critics of the Iran nuclear deal also influenced president Trump. He was also influenced say aides by the success of his policy with North Korea of imposing strong bargaining pressure with tough sanctions on North Korea including Chinese sanctions, which led to the talks between North and South Korean presidents and the planned Trump meeting with Kim Jong-Un of North Korea. Iran's president Rouhani says Iran will stay with the agreement as the EU countries Germany, France plan to support the agreement. This could also leave an opening for future talks with Iran on a new peace agreement as  president Trump talked about Iranian people deserving a better deal at the end of his 11 minute announcement. As Stephens points out in a op-ed in the NYT Iran's economy needs the removal of sanctions so that focus could shift to economic development, as the lifting of sanctions have yet to result in increasing living standards and building infrastructure neglected during the sanctions years. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
One foreign policy expert says president Trump tried to reverse everything in Obama's foreign policy almost to the point of an obsession. He visits Saudi Arabia before visiting Mexico and Canada, close neighbors, as other presidents have done. The relationships with Mexico and Canada deteriorated. Yet Mr. Trump has a good personal connection with Trudeau of Canada and Macron of France.  Taking the advice of advisers including Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, president Trump despite tough talk on the North American Free Trade Agreement, takes a moderate approach on NAFTA renegotiation. Trump also softens some of the rhetoric on China as he seeks Chinese help to restrain North Korea. An international coalition of states supported by the U.S. reverses gains by Islamic State, with Iraq and Iran gaining over Islamic State. President Obama's policy of not taking decisive action, reversed towards the end of the second term, had led to the rise of Islamic State and the refugee crisis in Europe as refugees left Syria and Iraq. NATO or the South Korean defense was not significantly weakened as feared at the beginning of the first year. Missile defense proceeded in South Korea with U.S. missile systems. The appointment of a senior senator from Texas, Kay Hutchinson, signaled that the NATO policy had not changed significantly. As a result it could be said that the year 2018 began with a bang about the risks internationally with president Trump's unconventional approach, and ended without some of the worst fears being realized. Relations between North and South Korea improved as Koreans decided to work together for peace in the peninsula- with North Korea agreeing to participate in the Winter Olympics in South Korea.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Sanger and Broad report on the move by the Trump administration to go ahead with the overhaul of the U.S. nuclear deterrent,  with programs that were started in the Obama administration. With the more aggressive posture of Russia in Europe, the Trump administration is left with little scope for further advances in nuclear arms negotiations. A new technology based cruise missile system is now being built for $25 billion with contracts given to Raytheon and Lockheed Martin. Experts at Harvard's Belfer Center say that with the North Korean nuclear threat these programs to modernize the nuclear deterrent are getting the go ahead with little resistance. Another program modernizing the land based deterrent and replacing the Minuteman missile system is also expected to push forward at a cost of $100 billion. The Pentagon under Obama had pushed for these systems, yet there was discussion about ways to limit these programs in the hope that nuclear arms control talks could take place. The North Korean missile tests and Russia's posture have changed the discussion. By the end of the Obama's second term, a president who came into office in 2008 with hopes of nuclear weapons reduction had already lost much of the momentum he had in 2008. The situation changed with Russian intervention in Ukraine in 2015, and the North Korean long range missile test in 2017, to where the modernization of the nuclear deterrent was quietly accepted, without alternatives through negotiations. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
It is hard to imagine that one is even writing about this, as shocking as it is- the 4 or 5 minutes between a decision to launch nuclear weapons and the end of life on this planet earth as we know it. Here Sam Nunn, a U.S. senator who was part of the negotiations for arms control and who is the leading American in this field talks about the unimaginable danger. He says the strategy from the Cold War where Russia and the U.S. put their nuclear forces in a position to be launched within minutes, 4 to 5 minutes, is outdated and needs to be changed. Hillary Clinton described the issue in the television debate. Yet this was not discussed because of the nature of the 2016 presidential election with lack of serious discussion.  And both Nunn and Clinton emphasize that once the missiles are in the air they cannot be ordered to go back. Accidental error, judgemental error, informational error in which one side thinks the other has launched a missile, a firing by mistake, are possible. In this situation Nunn says Trump is temperamentally unfit, and Clinton is fit to take on the responsibility. Yet the question this raises is as Nunn signals- is anyone but God fit to make this decision to launch nuclear weapons. Nunn says it is outdated and wrong to have only a few minutes, as such a decision cannot be made in a few hours or days, much less in 5 minutes. Nunn brings up a discussion he had in Moscow when he brought this up with Russians and president Putin. Russian president Putin told Nunn that he was fully aware of this. Putin's response was- "Senator Nunn, at some point it becomes automatic."  Nunn does not clarify what this means, or what Putin means to say. For people on the planet it is not enough to have Reagan, Gorbachev, Clinton, as Nunn mentions being responsible people for a nuclear decision. The current state of affairs is simply shocking and the lack of attention to this is also shocking. Equally dangerous is that 20 countries have weapons usable nuclear material, and sophisticated hacking of command and control processes is another danger.       ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The new South Korean government proposes a resumption of military dialogue with North Korea in an effort to bring down tensions in the region. A military hotline existed between North Korea and South Korea till early in 2016. North Korea cut off the hotline after relations with the South Korean government of President Park Geun-hye deteriorated following a missile test in January 2016 by North Korea. By May 2016 the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un proposed military dialogue and talks, an offer rejected by the Park government. With the impeachment of president Park the newly elected government of president Moon proposed improving relations. The recent series of North Korea missile tests was a setback for that effort. With China the new U.S.missile defense system called THADD that was installed in 2016 for South Korea was seen as a setback for China-South Korea relations. As a result the tensions are high in the region. The rhetoric and tone deteriorated after the Trump administration took office in the U.S. in early 2017. After the last missile test the South Korean government of president Moon is now reaching out to the North especially for restoring the hotline that connects the two governments in the event of a crisis, so that a disaster can be avoided on both sides. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
The Guardian Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This article in NYT by a China expert based in Hong Kong points out that a key driver in the current developmetns in Korea are not understood. With the growth of China's influence in East Asia and a decline in American influence many of the countries in the region are rebalancing. Vietnam and Singapore are pushing back. In the same way North Korea under Kim Jong Un is concerned about its dependence on China with 90% of its trade conducted with China. The Chinese participation in the strong sanctions introduced by president Trump has increased this awareness of its dependence on China. President Xi Jinping has also ignored North Korea as China focuses on larger issues in international relations, including its relationships with the U.S., EU and India. This strategic development is what drives the current meetings between president Moon of South Korea and president Kim of North Korea, and the planned meeting of Kim with president Trump.  This China expert says the shift in better relations could be part of North Korea's effort to open up to the U.S, South Korea and Japan, in an effort to diversify its relationships to reduce dependence on China. This does not mean the unification of North and South Korea, he says, because it would mean loss of power for the Kim regime and would be too costly for the South. The nuclear missile development was part of an effort to preserve the Kim regime. The Kim regime is also focusing efforts on economic development which would be better achieved by opening up to the U.S., South Korea and Japan. ...

Israel's Best Friend

New York Times Original article ›
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....
Economist Original article ›
The Guardian Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the New York Times is strongly critical of former president Barack Obama for accepting $400,000 in speaking fees from Wall Street for a single speech. It says the news is causing people to question the ideas and words presented by Obama in his books about the dangers of losing sight of the interests of ordinary people. It gives the impression says the NYT, that Obama is cashing in like everybody else, and that his talk was empty. The editorial says the millions raised by Hillary Clinton led to her defeat in the election. Obama is reported to plan a foundation with the work of training a new generation of political leaders. This NYT editorial says it would be better to stay true to vision and purpose, to walk the talk for president Obama, especially now that a recent poll shows two thirds of voters, including about half of Democrats say that the Democratic Party is out of touch with the interests of the American People. By associating this closely with wealthy donors leading Democrats contributed to this. During a period when some of the remarkable achievements of the last fifty years such as the European Union are being called into question, when ordinary working people, young people and older people are struggling, this is all the more a tone deaf approach by politicians. The idea of helping train a new generation of political leaders through a foundation sounds bizarre in this context, and seems to suggest politicians believe there is always a solution through marketing their audacity and money.   ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Six cities have rejected the Olympics, with Calgary in Canada being the last one. The problem with hosting the Olympics is how much it costs. Cost overruns are common. 20141 Sochi WInter Olympics estimated budget was $10 billion, in the end it cost $51 billion. 

Brazil is the latest example of the problem. With huge needs in sanitation, epidemic prevention, infrastructure and public services, the country did badly by spending money on new soccer stadiums in the northeast which were not used after the World Cup soccer championship, and in the summer Olympics. 

Learning from these lessons voters in Calgary, Canada, rejected hosting  the Winter Olympics. Voters or local councils in Innsbruck, Austria, Rome, Italy, Bern, Switzerland, Hamburg, Germany, Oslo and Stockholm have rejected the idea of hosting the Olympics. Other problems are the environmental impact with deforestation to create Olympic sites.

 

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A slight shift in American opinion favoring a deal with Iran is shown in a WSJ/NBC poll in July 2015 compared to the poll in April 2015. Support for reaching a nuclear deal with Iran remains stable at 36% in both polls, the opposed drops by 6 percentage points to 17% from 23%, and the percentage of people who say they do not know enough to formulate an opinion goes up to 46% from 40%. The intricacies of a nuclear technology deal and the sites involved lead to a high percentage of don't know enough to give an opinion. Factors hindering a deal include inspection of military sites, and Iranian intentions. Factors favoring reaching a deal now is the risk that this would mean Iran would go back into isolation and the opportunity to work with moderates might be lost. The Rouhani administration was an effort by voters to elect a government that could ease or remove sanctions to improve the economy and living conditions- its failure would lead to Iran losing an opportunity to open up to the world. The pressure from the U.S. Congress and Israel served to push for a verifiable and effective agreement to control development of nuclear technology for weapons systems. Behavioural factors involved are the very young population in Iran which has no memories about the period before the revolution in 1979- 70% of the population of 74 million are people under the age of 35. This group is eager for ties to the outside and could change Iran's outlook and policies int the future towards moderation. Risks in not reaching a deal also include the possibility of the Saudis developing nuclear technology and nuclear proliferation. Winners from a deal because of the flow of Iranian oil to world markets and a period of extended low oil prices are the U.S., Europe, China and India. Germany gains new markets to replace the growth in the Russian market after sanctions. Lifting of an arms embargo, an added risk in the last days of the talks, would be mitigated by making the lifting of that embargo very gradual....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
David Gelernter, Yale professor of computer science, says above all things Steve Job was designer-in-chief. At his Stanford commencement address in 2004, Jobs recounts his experience in a calligraphy course at Reed College as one of the singularly important experiences of his life, and something he carried over to the the revolution in portable devices- portable Macs, iPod, IPhone and iPad. The search for and building of elegant, easy to work, fun to use devices. Job was able to grasp the potential of such devices, says Gelertner, from his very first visit to the Xerox research labs in Palo Alto in 1979. In doing this he gives credit for long forgotten pioneers of the personal computer, who were just as important perhaps even more so, Douglas Engelbart and Alan Kay. At Xerox, Kay built on the earlier innovations of Engelbart. Engelbart was first to develop the mouse, onscreen window, and the concept of computers doing more than just computing, such as controlling machinery, doing everyday stuff, and doing things with pictures. Xerox's corporate executives failed to grasp the significance of the developments in their labs. Jobs grasped this rightaway and put all his efforts into developing the Apple Macintosh in 1984 incorporating these ideas. A decade later Gates copied the Mac's eay to use features and created economies of scale, creating the personal computer that we know today. The internet was a parallel development during that decade after the pioneering work of Tim Berners-Lee on the worldwide web. Jobs took the experience one step further and created new devices like the iPhone and the iPad that brought mobility, ease, and refinement to the internet experience....
Economist Original article ›
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....

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us