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 Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A lead researcher at Stanford and UC Berkeley says he hasn't seen anything like it, the opposition intensify so quickly. 70% of Democrats and 50% of Republicans oppose overinvestment in AI  and increasing in sentiment- not about stopping progress but  about stopping hyperlevel investment of trillions of dollars and diverting from reindustrialization/infrastructure for US that creates jobs and a better qualityof life. In today's world neither China or the US can afford hyper investment, most Asian countries would prefer to let the US do it and later get that technology for free one way or the other. Therefore this means the American people are being hoodwinked- they pay the price when their bridges and roads, airports are in disrepair, when even a national network of data charging stations could not get funded under Biden which would have addressed the biggest problem for transition from fossil through EV's to fight climate change.  The investment community is being hoodwinked. Investors are being hoodwinked as the returns are uncertain and cannot be justified on financial grounds- only by hype.  Polls only ask about AI not the hyperinvestment in AI. If the truth is known that these trillions of dollars diverted by using flaws in capital markets in the US, avoiding financial scrutiny and hyping up AI when returns are by a long shot uncertain compared to rebuilding America's infrastructure and industries to compete with China and the EU- that is desperately needed- then these numbers would show the vast majority of Americans oppose this diversion of funds from the infrastructure and reindustrialization that create jobs that support working families. Take for example Texas, a Republican state, where the Agriculture Commissioner is calling for a moratorium on new hyperscale data center development in the state, citing higher costs for farmers, and strains on the power grid. It is not about stopping progress. Fon transition to renewable energy or example the adjustments made by Biden and Democrats allowed some fossil fuels use to make the transition, the same policy being pursued under different political slogans and labels under DJT. It is not about stopping progress as progress continues even under DJT Republican administration - natural gas prices and coal use prices are making natural gas a choice for power plants, the cost of oil at $100 making EV's hybrids cost less than gasoline cars. AI technologies will advance, and the wherewithal, the framework in which AI should operate can be built alongside without throwing everything out of balance. Throwing the whole economy out of balance, destroying the chance to create jobs and bring about the 1st priority of America and EU- reindustrialization and infrastructure renewal alongside India's modernization. That requires these trillions of dollars being pushed into AI by a few self-interested individuals without returns, and trillions of dollars more. If that is accomplished any challenges from China will fade in comparison with the scale of the effort in the EU, the US, and India with the largest industrial bloc in the world far bigger than China. This is not mere words. It is a plan of action that is being put into place right now at Oslo, Norway at the Nordic+EU Summit with India on the next phase of this effort, put into place piece by piece through hard work and a clear vision for the future. ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Tariffs are for adaptive reindustrialization, for building capacity step by step over a decade starting with components in the supply chain and semiassembly, then final assembly, all within the USA. Do not grade them by the news cycle or one year, says Peter Navarro, adviser to US president DJT, as it took many years to deindustrialize and lose American manufacturing, it took many years for China starting in 2000 to industrialize. It will take years step by step with policy actions to achieve the goal of jobs and growth through factories making in America, starting earlier in the Biden administration and now in the Trump administration with industrial and trade policy that directly supports American factories. Tariffs do not create inflation when foreign producers who keep overcapacity and subsidize to put American factories out of business and people out of jobs have to reduce their prices to maintain sales, not pass through the tariffs to buyers. This is why inflation in the US is subdued. And the process of actively building new factories in the US is only now beginning to take place in its first year for DJT, following Biden/DJT early efforts It will require patient attitude, har.d work, and strong action, policies set in place that will bring results by 2030. ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Guardian in its Editorial on Keir Starmer on February 10, 2026, says Labour was in the political wilderness for 18 years, and yet it has taken only 14 months for the project which put it into power to implode. It is referring to the project of McSweeney from County Cork, Ireland, and others to put a centrist to replace Corbyn, and selecting Keir Starmer. This was a weakness from the start as a candidate has to emerge on his own merits not be put in place by handlers like McSweeney, as he would not be able to govern on his own thinking and make his own decisions.  McSweeney was a campaign organizer and not successful at that as portrayed as Labour could have taken more than the 34% of the vote it received after 18 years of Tory rule without the likes of McSweeney. The Guardian says "excessive power and influence" was given by Starmer to McSweeney, and that the outsourcing of Britain's direction served neither the prime minister or the country well.  This is aserious flaw. McSweeney did not have the long experience of advisers that backed up Biden in the White House. And even the long experience of Biden group of advisers failed Biden when it came to immigration policy and the Border. And yet the question remains why was there such a lack in the talent pool for good governance for Labour, as it was for the Conservatives, for 3 decades since the 1990's? Similar to the situation with Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama governance in the US, why is there not a good talent pool for effective governance in the UK and the US? The Guardian goes on to question the judgement of Starmer and the clique around him including McSweeney for their attitude towards helping the working class in support payments during a cost of living crisis- what it calls a contempt filled approach of the cliques to the normal priorities of a Labour party. The Editorial concludes that Labour has lost control of the trajectory of events- as more Mandelson emails are expected- and that it is hard to see how this trust can be won back. For Britain having 5 prime ministers over 4 years is a shocking lack of the talent, of confidence, that once prevailed in the nation that once led the world with the Industrial Revolution, and in science and technology. ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Harris attended the Munich Security Conference 3 years in a row and met with world leaders in the last 2 years. She has also learned from working with Biden who was over a period of 30 years chairman or senior most member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. No other president comes close. Harris has as foreign policy adviser Phillip Brown who did his PhD. on French Gaullist security policy. Her close links and great understanding of India are also an asset as India is a key part of US policy in Asia with Japan and Australia, and is expected to be the third largest economy in the world over the next decade. This will help in setting economic policy along with foreign policy. Under Biden domestic policy worked hand in hand with foreign policy to achieve domestic policy goals of industrial strength and manufacturing in the US. Harris is likely to continue this policy approach. Harris is a close observer and learner of the conduct of economic policy under Biden, and can add in some ways to bring fresh look at foreign policy. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Biden administration has announced a 100 day review of strategic vulnerabilities in America's supply chain. President Biden has said he supports funding of incentives for production in the US, to become independent of China and Taiwan. From 1990 onwards chip production in the US went from 37% to about 12% today. It will now go back up. Biden's National Security Adviser noted in an article in Foreign Policy that advancing industrial policy like Japan and France once considered out of tune is now essential, "something close to obvious."  At one point in the post war period America's most advanced jet engines were made in West Berlin, surrounded by the army of Russia and its ally the GDR. There is new realization that dependence on Taiwan which makes 22% of semiconductors worldwide and 50% of advanced designs cannot go on the way it is exposing a critical vulnerability for American industry. A 40% tax credit for the cost of new semiconductor fabrication plants and other incentives are now supported in the Biden administration. The whole idea is to turn this around quickly where US no longer depends on uncertain supplies from overseas. Four critical areas of strategic vulnerability will be reviewed- pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, batteries, and strategic materials. ...
The White House Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Speaking at the Brookings Institution Biden senior adviser Jake Sullivan laid out the "foreign policy of America's middle class." What he means by this is "President Biden's core commitment- indeed his daily direction to us- to more deeply integrate domestic policy with foreign policy." "After the Second War the United States led a fragmented world to create a new international economic order. It lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty. It sustained thrilling technological revolutions. And it helped the United States and many other nations around the world achieve new levels of prosperity. But the last few decades revealed cracks in these foundations. A shifting global economy left many Americans and their communities behind. A financial crisis shook the middle class. A pandemic exposed the fragility of our supply chains. A changing climate threatened lives and livelihoods. Russia's invasion of Ukraine underscored the risks of overdependence. So this moment demands we forge a new consensus." "When president Biden took office the coutnry from our perspective faced four fundamental challenges. First America's industrial base had been hollowed out. Second economic integration with a large non-market economy did not work out. Third, an accelerating climate crisis, and the urgent need for a just and efficient energy transition. Finally we met the challenge of inequality and its damage to democracy."   ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A professor of economics of innovation and public value at University College, London, says one-off deals such as the one with Land Rover to produce electric car batteries is not an adequate response to the big industrial strategies of the US and the European Union. Mariana Mazzucato says in this Guardian article the UK's decision to leave the EU is costing 100 billion pounds in output. Of 100 leading Uk manufacturers about half say their suppliers in the EU are more cautious about doing business in the UK. She compares the US industrial strategy that combines public and private investment of $3.5 trillion over the next decade, and the EU's for $2 trillion with Britain's effort. She says of the UK that it has nothing like this and worse with austerity it is moving in the opposite direction. Another problem is the change in governments of the Tories and new industrial policy every time there is a new minister. Business investment in UK is 19% less than the G7 average. The civil service needs investment, as she says Britain has become addicted to outsourcing the core functions of the public sector. Mazzucato says the government for aid to the private sector should do what Germany and France have done to expect reduction in carbon emissions, or as the US has done with Biden's Chips Act of giving aid given that there are no share buybacks by companies.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A lot that is wrong at Apple and Tim Cook's responsibility for putting profits over national interest in not preserving but destroying American manufacturing. All the talk about design is a smokescreen for dismally letting down American communities that relied on American industrial ingenuity. Tim Cook started the process of sending America's industrial manufacturing base to China in 1998 with an elaborate plan that has been put into effect over 2 decades. Some of this I saw with my own eyes in the period just before Jobs returned in 1997, on a trip as Japanese manufacturing methods consultant at Apple's Colorado Springs Plant. Apple's failure since 2016 to correct this overconcentration of manufacturing in one place is one of the major failures for America in the first decades of the 21st century. Apple's success in profit margins was bought at a price that is too high for the communities and towns that depended on manufacturing across America during the 20th century- it has a spiralling effect as other companies followed Apple leading to the shipping out of America's entire industrial base. Creating risks of international conflict as this entire process was allowed to happen by administrations of Bush and Obama that have failed America in unimaginable ways with foreign wars, and neglect of American workers. DJT, Biden who retained DJT policy, and DJT second term are only now correcting these serious mistakes and American business shortsightedness. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Bradsher, Tankersley and Cohen say in this NYT report- US industrial policy under president Biden corrects the failures of the past. Chinese experts in Hong Kong say the US and Europe deindustrialized their economies with pursuing of policies called "neo-liberal" but basically Reagan era policies that Democratic presidents Clinton-Obama imitated. As they deindustrialized it created disaffection among the struggling lower and middle income classes making $35,000-$106,000 that were big losers in the process, creating threats to democracy as financial and tech, plus pharmaceutical sectors took control of the economy. China's success comes from three decades of mastering the ways of practicing industrial policy that it can support private companies with low cost land, additional subsidies that reduce the cost of production and provide a buffer to absorb losses so that it could dominate key industries. Policies where textbooks and economists trained in the US failed utterly and completely leading to dangers to US democracy that we see as opportunities for good paying jobs in manufacturing disappeared for middle and lower income households from 1980 to 2020. These economists trained in the US always said see lower cost Chinese made goods means lower and middle income people pay less, never saying that this means all opportunities for better paying jobs in manufacturing will be lost for these classes in society. The tech and financial sectors had close ties to the new arrangement that turned manufacturing over to China from the Reagan era to the Obama and Trump era. Apple and Tesla and many industries benefitted from manufacturing mostly outsourced to China. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A Trump-Vance nomination with its huge tariffs inside a Republican shell with its preference for tax cuts is with a large degree of certainty likely to put America further behind China, slipping even further by a decade. And slipping in renewable energy and in meeting the aspirations of ordinary Americans. Most of the public does not realize that Trump-Vance 60% tariffs and Republican preference for tax cuts over infrastructure spending would create inflation and lack of growth in a Trump-Vance second term. Things would get worse because of the contradictions existing in the choice of tariff preferring Trump in a Republican party that sees tax cuts not infrastructure spending -even when desperately needed- as the answer to every economic problem. Without a clear policy of making the trillion dollar investments in the US economy, in manufacturing, in renewable energy, in chips and science, as it has under Biden the US under Trump-Vance policies would have two serious problems- first it would revive inflation. 60% tariffs on Chinese imports and 10% tariffs on other nations proposed by Trump-Vance would increase inflation. In the absence of the infrastructure investment that Biden has put in place it would create both a lack of growth for the jobs missing that come from infrastructure that is badly needed in a aging dilapidated infrastructure economy, and the inflation that the high tariffs would engineer. The benefits would not be great if China chooses to find other ways to conduct business and continues to keep its currency at levels that promote its exports. Even today Chinese products enter the US through other countries or when China builds factories in the US as Japan has done. The Republican aversion to tackling Chinese industrial challenges in the same way that China does by actively supporting American manufacturers would give China another decade of advantage as America slips even further behind in chips, science and manufacturing. This is the real problem in mixing Trump-Vance to the Republican philosophies on the economy which are not right for this point in time whatever their merits may have been in the 1980's when America was the industrial leader in the world.   ...
Le Monde.fr Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The French view of the DJT administration is that it is a rupture, an "historic rupture with immigration repression, aggressive trade policy, and undermining of federal and state institutions." This is far from the reality. In fact it is not a rupture, and far from that policy that DJT brought in the waning days of a tired cautious Obama administration that extended the war in Afghanistan long after it was clearly a failure from the Bush years. DJT called it common sense during his Inauguration speech waving his hands- so obvious, stay out of wars we have no purpose pursuing. Regain America's manufacturing base shipped out to China in the Clinton-Bush-Obama years 2000-2016 that helped the rise of China in phases of supply chain partner, competitor, adversary. French view Le Monde is that this is "aggressive trade policy," when in fact small towns across the US and France, and other industrialized EU nations, by losing their factory and industrial base to China have gone downhill losing jobs and standard of living. Tariffs and DJT policy was continued by Biden- there is no rupture. What French in Le Monde call "Immigration repression," is a policy of protecting border security including illegal drug and fentanyl flows and gang activity that was accepted by Biden and Biden-Republican Lankford legislation was agreed in 2024 to close the Border. There is no rupture from Biden on closing the Border.  With millions having crossed the Border illegally Republicans now have the support of Democratic Senators Gallego of Arizona and Fetterman of Pennsylvania in passing the Laken Riley Act in Congress to protect Americans and safeguard life in America.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
No country benefited more than first Japan and then South Korea till 2000, and now China till 2022 from the trade and sharing of industrial technology enabled by the American backed system of trade and industry. Walter Russell Mead says in WSJ that China has chosen to challenge the system through which it developed into an industrialized nation with the US running huge trade deficits, sharing its technology and letting Chinese manufacturing displace American local manufacturing. China is seen as challenging the system. Yet what has happened is that this process of displacing American manufacturing and industry was not sustainable anyway and continued for a decade longer than it would otherwise have lasted because American industry could not easily reverse a course it had set of setting up manufacturing in China, once that manufacturing base had already been transferred from the US to China and American companies had grown accustomed to a new state of affairs of making overseas in China. Not much thought was given to how American workers would react to that situation as companies and industries making that transfer made independent decisions. This led to the election of Trump with wins in midwestern states that had suffered from loss of manufacturing communities.  The Trump tariffs on Chinese goods and the Biden administration lining up completely behind American workers and families for the first time for Democrats has sent the signal to China that it finds the situation of China's dominance in the trade system unacceptable. The document of "China 2030" of the Chinese Government with planned dominance in key sectors and industries was met with alarm across America in all parties. The paradox of Apple as a key sector in Chinese manufacturing and the largest American company is the result of policies pursued by America without realizing the true cost of shipping manufacturing out of the country. That process is now being reversed with change of management starting at Intel Corp. and other companies to bring the manufacturing base back to the US. This policy is being resolutely pursued by the US and will speed up following the pandemic which has further demonstrated how much of a mistake the policy of sending out manufacturing in critical areas such as health could be. This is the reality behind the rhetoric and verbal exchange between China and the US. With the rapid growth of Chinese manufacturing countries such as India were put in a difficult situation  as this was preventing the local industrial base developing in India with Chinese imports in the same way as it had damaged that of the US and the EU. Worse it led to the use of US and European technology in China's defense industrial base including aviation and other sectors that threatened India's borders with repeated Chinese incursions in the Himalayas, from the Pakistan western Himalayas to Ladakh and the eastern Himalayan mountains. That situation existed long before the Trump and Biden administration and the Modi administration called for a return to America of its industrial manufacturing base and its technological leadership. Both the Bush and Obama administrations and the Indian Congress administrations failed to realize the dangers of letting the US, European and Indian industrial base wither. India is not just a country but a culture that extends from the Himalayas all the way across Bangladesh to the Indonesian islands which shares a common cultural history of Buddhism and the Vedanta. This is a region that has a population of about 2 billion people. In a larger sense the cultural history extends to  Vietnam and Japan with its Buddhist culture whose origins go back to India, and also of China itself. In the larger sense this is a population of close to 3 billion people. The economic development of this region and learning from the parliamentary traditions and scientific discoveries of the modern period since 1700 is a task for both the US, Europe and the people of the region.   ...
Georgetown Law Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US Trade Representative Lighthizer in the Report on China's Entry into WTO sees this as a mistake in the policy of president Clinton. Clinton has said that was a mistake. David Sacks raised this issue in a podcast with Larry Summers, an economist who was deputy to Robert Rubin and Deputy Treasury Secretary, then Treasury Secretary succeeding Rubin in 1999. Clinton on the advice of Rubin and Summers set up the framework for China to join the World Trade Organization without the safeguards and the setup that would prevent it using state capitalism and subisidies to build its own economy with exports, to ally with American corporations to support the outshoring of almost the entire industrial base of the US. Shocking as it sounds this has happened, had happened by 2016, when Donald Trump with the advice of USTR Lighthizer took the first steps to reverse this with Tariff policy, which was supported by president Biden, and continues in its new phase under DJT in 2025. Rubin and Summers had supported deregulation of financial markets and removal of the Glass Steagall Act by 1999. This was to led to the financial crisis of 2009 that was to be one of three body blows to the American working and middle class. The others China entering WTO without safeguards that led to deindustrializing US and loss of its manufacturing base, loss of 5 million jobs, tens of thousands of factories. And the third was the pandemic. “ . . .it seems clear that the United States erred in supporting China’s entry into the WTO on terms that have proven to be ineffective in securing China’s embrace of an open, market-oriented trade regime” 2017 USTR Report to Congress on China’s WTO ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US needs good manufacturing jobs for the jobs and income that it brings into communities, and also because of the tax revenues from the companies making products in America that provide the basis for local governments to provide good public services in healthcare, education, and transportation. To say comparitive advantage that helped first Japanese and now Chinese manufacturers is real and how society gains is to deny some basic facts that are self evident from observation that contradict textbook ideas in economics. Comparitive Advantage is a textbook economics concept that says countries are proficient in what they make best and should specialize in that product. But it is a static concept that exists only in textbooks. If Japan in 1960, China in 1980 and India in 2000 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making steel and remained makers of lower end products such as footwear and textiles. If Japan in 1980, China in 2000, and India in 2020 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making semiconductors and remained makers of lower end products such as steel. A senior vice president of US Steel in the late 1960's even told this writer a graduate student at Northwestern in Chicago- as the US can make steel better than India or China let us keep making it for you. He and much of the business faculty at Northwestern also could not understand in 1970 why Airbus was being setup to compete with Boeing who by the concept of comparitive advantage should have had the whole market to itself for commercial aircraft . By this kind of thinking Airbus would not exist today because it did not have the lowest cost or the manufacturing technologies Boeing had through its vast manufacturing operation. America would be still the only one making aircraft in 2023 if textbook concepts ruled the day. By indirect methods such as hidden preferential arrangements, provision of inputs such as land, capital and labor, tax relief, the costs can be represented in a way that shows it is cheaper to manufacture overseas. The lack of a level playing field is what president Biden is correcting by doing what first Japan, then South Korea, then China and now India are doing since the 1960's. By 1974 in four years after its founding in 1970 Airbus came up with its first model the A-300 using advanced technologies. America will regain its leadership in the cost and manufacturing of many products through Biden policy and the efforts of American companies by 2030, and do this in a transformative way that will benefit the world as a whole.  It is an enormous error to say the US does not need good manufacturing jobs, that local governments do not need the tax revenues from manufacturing plants to build services for communities where manufacturing workers live, and the US does not need the manufacturing experience curve that leads to reduced costs. It is this loss of the manufacturing experience curve that is the most vital aspect for understanding the need for the US government to compete effectively with the governments of Asian countries to keep manufacturing healthy and strong at home. Economics experts ignorant of how important this science and engineering principle is fail to grasp this. Related to this is the idea of a virtuous cycle in manufacturing- whoever braves the hard years of moving up the learning and experience curve gets rewarded because once that country has mastered that skill it gets better an better as the technology advances- making it harder and harder to prevent a new monopoly in manufacturing by the country (Japan, China or Taiwan) that had the highest costs and the least advantage ten or 20 years earlier but just persevered through it all with the government's help to gain cost competitiveness. This part does not make it into the economics textbooks which are mostly theory and much of it outdated by the time they are written. Observation is the best teacher and guide as it is in science, to guide policy and action. Obsessive attachment to theory that ignores observation becomes the enemy of progress. Comparitive advantage is one concept that needs to be retired even from the textbooks. Overseas manufacturing then is a piece of the overall picture that fits into what is good for the US. Macroeconomic principles determine microeconomic outcomes as opposed to microeconomic principles with companies out on their own being forced to compete without a level playing field, or handing out technology for special status in a recipient country as some do putting the US at a macroeconomic disadvantage. This is also healthy for the recipient country overseas, as recrimination with loss of manufacturing jobs in the US inevitably leads to the kind of recrimination that does not serve either country well as in the case of China today, and worse still can lead to conflict, even war. After the egregious situation of loss of manufacturing communities across the US leading to destabilizing the social fabric, it is hard to see such thinking prevail about the US not needing manufacturing as a vital part of its social fabric and industrial strength. China, it can be said, would have developed, and developed well over the past two decades without overconcentration of US and EU manufacturing in China. Without aggravating the problems of climate change and contamination of air, land and water, and destabilizing the social fabric in the US hurting workers and communities across the US, if macroeconomic policy was made to manage this process in the US government without it being left entirely to individual companies to decide. Instead China faces today a difficult situation through events such as destabilizing the social fabric in the US (the Trump tariffs), advanced economies in G-7 resistance to sharing of technologies, the damage to its environment from microeconomic locally determined policy at individual companies, and the global effects of climate change from climate unsustainable levels of growth since 2000.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Two US carrier strike groups and 17 naval ships prepare for joint exercizes with Japan's Self-Defense Forces off Okinawa in the first week of October 2021. In late September a British aircraft carrier group goes through the Taiwan Straits. China has flown aircraft near Taiwan's airspace before. On October 1-5 over a period of 4 days China sends 150 fighter, bombers and other aircraft near Taiwanese airspace. This situation is reminiscent of the situation in 1950-53 during the period of the Korean War when US president Harry Truman sent the Seventh Fleet to the Straits of Taiwan. In 1954 Chinese artillery started the shelling of offshore islands Quemoy and Matsu. This happened again in 1958 under president Eisenhower. At that point the US sent a naval contingent to the Taiwan Straits. The crisis was resolved through talks with China. Eisenhower then setup a joint defense agreement with Taiwan.  Here the Taiwan Defense Minister says China is capable of an invasion of Taiwan in 2021 but "it has to calculate what it would cost and what kind of outcome it would achieve." He also says that after 2025 "it would have lowered the costs and losses to a minimum." As US companies seek expansion in China the situation is changing rapidly in 2021 in the other areas.The US under president Biden sees the wars under previous presidents and the economic policies of not investing in American industrial strength have created risks for America in its role in the world. Biden seeks to restore American industrial strength through massive investments. It has been reported that Taiwan even considers the concentration of world semiconductor industry in Taiwan a way to assure the US dependence on Taiwan for semiconductors would lead to allied economic commitment to Taiwan in addition to defense commitments already given. In a sign of awareness of the distorted situation in semiconductor manufacturing that American companies such as Intel have allowed to happen, including ceding essential technologies in manufacturing semiconductors to other nations, the Biden administration has pushed to reverse these policies giving $52 billion in state aid. President Biden talked to president Xi of China in early September in a 90 minute call. This was aimed at easing hostility between the two countries. During that call the two leaders had agreed to abide by the Taiwan Relations Act, that states Taiwan's status should be resolved through peaceful means. It was passed in the US Congress in 1979 during the period when the US restored diplomatic relations with China. The situation today resembles that in the period after the Korean War into the late 1950's when China under Mao continued shelling of islands under Taiwan from the mainland. This makes the existing supply chains that make the US, Europe and India overly dependent on China,Taiwan, Singapore, for manufactured goods look antiquated and out of place. American companies such as Apple, GM, Black Rock and American financial companies are caught in a bind as they operate as if nothing is happening, when a lot has changed during the coronavirus pandemic. The Biden administration is pursuing its own long term policy for restructuring the supply chain for American industry. ...
Wilson Center Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Anton Harder in this Wilson Center publication of research uses correspondence between Jawaharlal Nehru and his sister Vijaylakshmi Pandit ambassador to the US in 1950, to show that the US made an offer for India to take a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. India had supported two resolutions on June 25, and June 27, first condemning the invasion by North Korea and second the organizing of a UN force of 29 countries to push back the North Korean invasion. Even though the US is not seen as actively engaging with India during that period and seeing through British eyes the colonial policies of encouraging  different powers in South Asia, that may not be true.  Who was India's foreign minister in 1950? Jawaharlal Nehru was both prime minister and foreign minister till 1964, which means there was less discussion of foreign policy than happens today during the Ukraine invasion with Jaishankar a career diplomat with 30 years experience, Rajnath Singh, and Mr. Modi, in talks with president Biden recently, and in further discussions Modi had with EU's Von der Leyen and UK's Boris Johnson, Kishida of Japan. Who was India's defense minister in 1950? Baldev Singh, a Sikh independence struggle leader was Minister of Defense for 1947-52 and tackled partition of Punjab and Kashmir issues. The rest of the years to 1957 when India faced the Chinese invasion of Tibet India's defense minister was also for most of the period Mr. Nehru, except Ayynagar in 1953, and Kailash Katju in 1955 and 1956. The controversial V.K. Krishna Menon was Defense Minister from 1957 to 1962, when Indian defenses were further neglected leading to the Chinese invasion of India in 1962, and his replacement by Yashwantrao Chavan. The purpose of this is to look back at what happened in earlier periods to understand where India stands today- and what choices it makes today. Clearly the US was looking for allies then and now. Nehru saw things from his own reading of history seeing China and India as both suffering from western invasion, not realizing that China's experience under Mao was different- that of Japanese invasion and bombing of China's major cities not just colonization of Hong Kong and other ports for trade under British trade based policies in 1850-1900. Thus a Communist Chinese version of China's defense involved taking over border regions such as Tibet putting China in direct and open opposition to India. Nehru never really grasped what was happening in Tibet and the war China fought against the Nationalists. American general Stilwell loved China deeply and had an understanding of its people as shown in Tuchman's account in her book Stilwell and the American Experience in China 1911-1945. Stilwell during that war had a better understanding of China, the strengths and weaknesses of Mao's China and of the Nationalists under Chiang, than Nehru. Some of these errors post 1950's and a concentration of foreign, defense and embassy positions in the person of Mr. Nehru and of Nehru family member such as Mrs. Pandit led to the Indian failure to act on Tibet and see it as see it for what it was -facing a Communist Mao led China that had fought the Japanese invasion as different from Bodhidharma's China of the history books. Bodhidharma's China will outlast Mao's China, yet it is Mao's China that India faces today. This also tells us that India has to think in new ways- as Lincoln said during a period when America was also making its own progress as an industrial nation in the 1860's. "The dogmas of the quiet past are not adequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise to the occasion. As our case is new, we must think anew, we must act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and we shall save our country." India's values are values of democracy heightened not just by Mohandas Gandhi's ideas with Hind Swaraj written in 1910 just as powerful in 2022, but also by the heights of Ladakh where elections are held in remote regions of the Himalayas. India's values are values that are also shared in the best that America has in its values and culture and in the defense of freedom.    ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This article by Gerald Seib in the WSJ says not enough was done to attract white working class voters- critical for Trump in industrial swing states- at the Democratic National Convention. He says only on the last night of the convention did a factory worker, a home care provider and a laid off restaurant worker, appear on the stage. These are the voters who have drifted away from the Democratic Party. The convention draws ironically on Republican themes, defense foreign policy as in the speeches by Leon Panetta and retired General Allen, and in efforts to portray Hillary as more human with frailties but a 40 year public service record that includes exceptional work for children. Actually the appeal to traditional Democratic white working class voters was there always in the background with most of the speakers, as it colored most speakers comments including Biden and Kane, who have the colloquial language and style to appeal to this group. The appeal to traditionally white working class voters is in the party platform with the $15 minimum wage for service industry workers, and in the promise to provide college free tution for people making less than $125,000. The Democrats simply painted this with a different brush. Contrasting the callous attitude to the poor and struggling of billionaires like Trump with those who have fought for pushing people up the ladder since FDR- with the lapses in recent years from the tech boom which left some workers short now being addressed. This was expressed by Hillary Clinton saying to Bernie Sanders voters- "your cause is our cause." For Democrats it was more effective to tackle the traditionally Democratic working class voters first, before shifting to working class voters who are border line Republican because of social issues or those who are so disaffected so as to be beyond reach. ...

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