LyrArc Article Gist
Obama deal simply pushed back till 2030 Iran's development of nuclear weapons but even that was not achieved as Iran quickly moved to nuclear weapons capabilities by 2026. The basic problem and it does not go away with wishful thinking as the Obama administration had done or not taking responsibility as the EU, China have done. The basic problem is that Iran wants a nuclear weapon. When it seeks the elimination of the Jewish state, and a Shia state that competes with the Arab states this become a problem not just for Israel but for the entire Middle East and for western civilization that the Obama administration never was able to recognize and accept. After the experience of the 1930-1945 period in Germany a traumatic period for western civilization itself-  the German nation and Europe, the US, western civilization itself is committed to a safe society and nation for the Jewish people. This includes India's 1.4 billion people and in many ways China and Russia. Which also recognizes the need for the Arab nations to live in peaceful coexistence with Israel, Christian minorities in Arab countries and with Iran, Palestinian people to be protected, and respected, as well as peaceful co-existence between the urban areas of Iran with the influence since 1800 of Russia, France and Britain and the rural religious areas of Iran that form the core of the IRGC. This is the basic problem- EU, US see a civilization issue and would never allow a nuclear weapon. Arab states are also against a rival religious Shia sectarian IRGC run Middle East, and the Iranian state is itself divided between its modern one in the major cities that do not see a nuclear weapon as essential and the rural one of the IRGC in the rural areas and the countryside that seeks a nuclear weapon. It is this situation the US, not just DJT or Republicans face today, it is one that all Americans, Europe, India, China, Japan and Russia, which have modernized and adopted western civilization's ideas of the Renaissance and Enlightenment as their own have to face up to. One that does not overlook the vital fact that the nuclear proliferation in dangerous parts of the world like the Middle East with more recent conflicts for 50 years than any other part of the world including the Balkans and Ukraine, is simply unacceptable for the people of the world. A world in Asia, Latin America, Africa, Europe, NorthAmerica which seek better standards of living and modernization in infrastructure, industry, and a better life using the ideas of the Modern World. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
 Franco German differences are growing as Macron of France and Merkel have serious differences on NATO, Russia, EU expansion with Balkan countries, and a eurozone budget. Macron has called NATO brain dead. Merkel disagrees. The personal relations between the two leaders never close have worsened. 

On climate change Macron's push to cut in half greenhouse gas emissions in Europe was supported by Merkel but only after much wrangling within Merkel's own coalition government. German conservatives in the CDU fear it disproportionately hurts a heavily industrialized country like Germany. And most Germans are wary of the Macron idea of more EU integration after the experience with Greece and Italy, suspecting that Germans will have to pay the bill. EU officials say personal relations between Macron and Merkel now border on animosity.

LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ's Fidler describes the views of Victor Ruhe, a former German defense minister, on the Ukraine crisis and the EU's response. The EU's position for relations with Ukraine comes under criticism for being technocratic as in earler trade and aid negotiations, and not addressing the problems which Ukraine faces. This requires closer cooperation from the EU, and some costs the EU has been unwilling to assume. Ruhe says the best response for the EU is to turn Ukraine into a European success story. This means taking on the effort to gradually transform the corrupt and inefficient political and economic system, something the EU did over many years in the Balkans. EU leaders have signed an agreement with Ukraine's new government on political dialogue and security cooperation. Critical parts of the agreement for trade, law enforcement, anticorruption actions, and macroeconomics changes, will be signed after a new government is elected in May 2014 elections. The EU is in this for the long haul as political support will be needed for a new generation of politicians....

LyrArc Article Gist
Saudis are now prepared to increase oil production after weeks of US diplomacy in exchange for security guarantees against attacks by Yemeni rebels and Iran. Russian oil output has declined by about 1 million barrels a day since the start of the war says WSJ. Drops in production lead to a rise in oil prices more than making up for the decline in revenues for Russia. This makes oil sanctions a weak deterrent for Russia in its invasion of Ukraine unless Saudis and UAE step in with increased oil production to make the EU embargo on Russian oil work effectively to cut Russian oil revenues financing the Ukraine invasion. Europe has stepped up with its embargo on about 90% of Russian oil- all except pipeline supplies to Hungary and Czech Republic, Slovakia as an exception. This will reduce oil production in Russia as EU is the biggest importer of Russian oil, bigger after previous German chancellor Merkel's failure to see the risks in such dependence and increased imports. For the oil embargo to lead to sharp reduction in Russian oil revenues that reduces financing of the Ukraine invasion, and for the EU oil embargo to bring results the missing piece is Saudi action to increase production. This may now be in place as Mr. Biden visits Riyadh next month. Crown Prince Salman of Saudi Arabia has pushed Saudi Arabia to make changes to modernize the country's culture providing the US with a partner that is now different than the Saudi Arabia steeped in tradition and inward looking under previous rulers. Under president Obama Democrats favored Iran and reduced security guarantees that were set up since president Franklin Delano Roosevelt met the Saudi King in 1944 aboard an American ship during the war. The turn of events with Russian invasion of Ukraine with Chinese support have created risks of a China invasion of Taiwan with aggressive action of China. President Biden has made this clear and stated straightforwardly the American position on Ukraine- Russia winning by invading a neighboring country sets the precedent for a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. This is why the US remains resolute with its European partners in seeing to it that Ukraine remains as Biden said in the NYT  "independent, sovereign and able to deter invasion and defend itself." For Europe it is about defending its neighborhood from the Baltic Sea to Bulgaria in the Balkans with American support. For the US it is about keeping its leadership presence in Asia in an alliance with Japan, India, Australia and most of South East Asia including Indonesia, Bangladesh with a population of close to 3 billion people. China which was supported by the US throughout the period of colonial dominance since the 18th century preventing its breakup and foreign rule as happened in India, and a major recipient of American aid and investment in the 20th century is now where Japan stood in the two decade period 1925 -1945 with its aggressive expansion under Japanese imperialist rule. In this sense the world is moving back to the days of the Free World's struggle in the days after the Iron Curtain fell over Europe with Soviet expansion in Eastern Europe. Saudis, UAE, and Turkey as part of NATO, are also moving back to the positions they had over a long period for centuries from 1800. Saudi Arabia and UAE came into prominence after discovery of oil and were backwaters to Egypt and Turkey which were supported by Britain to keep Russia from advancing in Asia and Europe during that period. India under the British Empire is now in the Indo-Pacific Framework with Japan which was inward looking and under European influence for most of the last 200 years.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Collapse of the easten european economies says the Economist would raise questions about the idea of a united Europe, the idea of the EU itself, and destabilize the euro - as countries in the EU like Ireland and Greece are in just as bad a shape. And in talk of enlargement of the EU will be doomed, and this is true of the western Balkans, TUrkey, and some countries int he former Soviet Union. Politically letting these countries derift could mean they fall for populists and nationalists of the bad type. And there is the serious economic consideration for banks in Austria, Italy and Sweden, which are heavily involved in lending to Eastern Europe. They could see catastrophic losses and put the banking systems of these countries at risk. Sweden has already chosen to help the Baltic Countries, and sees it has its political responsibility, and the whole Baltic region as its home, see link. The Economist suggests a differentiated approach depending on which group of countries in Eastern and Central Europe something that Angela Merkel of Germany also supports. For Ukraine the Economist says its best to let the IMF provide assistance. For the Baltic countries, plus Bulgaria, the Economist advocates an accelerated path to the euro, on the grounds that they are tiny and shouln't affect confidence in the euro. The Baltic countries have a population of 7 million. This approach is not supported by the European Commission or the European Central Bank. For the 4 larger countries, Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, and Romania, the Economist says the priority should be to prevent further currency collapse, and to rescue the banks responsible for the foreign currency loans that are going bad, with the pain being shared between debtors and the banks, governments of lending and borrowing countries. Financial institutions like the ECB, the IMF, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Developemnt, and the European Investment Bank should help support the rescue effort. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Recent polls in Serbia show support for joining the European Union at 50% and those opposed 34%. President Boris Tadic says EU is no paradise, but joining the EU and adopting its standards will move Serbia forward. He is campaigning for presidential elections in Serbia on a outspokenly pro-EU platform.

LyrArc Article Gist
Ivica Dacic, head of the Socialist party, is the Interior Minister in the government of president, Boris Tadic. He is a former member of the Milosevic government, running in the presidential and parliamentary election against pro-EU Boris Tadic of the Democratic Party, and Tomislav Nikolic of the Progressive Party. Dacic opposes recognition of Kosovo as a condition for joining the EU, and has offered the solution of partitioning Kosovo. His popularity has increased with the 24% unemployment rate in Serbia, and dissatisfaction with the current government.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Progressive Party of Tomislav Nikolic wins 23.5% of the parliamentary vote, the Democratic party of president Boris Tadic 22.1% and the Socialist party of Ivica Dacic 16%. Serbians cast a protest vote against high unemployment of 24% and corruption in government. There is still a sense that the joining the EU is the best option for Serbia. Even though nationalist parties, some allied to former president Milosevic, won a significant portion of the vote, the nationalist sentiment is balanced now with a sense that Serbia must now look to the future for what is best for the next generation and economic progress.

LyrArc Article Gist
Results in the Saarland election show the AfD party with only 6.2% of the vote. The CDU is well ahead of the Social Democrats. This result shows that the support for the AfD is strongest in the east. With the refugee crisis not as big an issue as it was in 2016, and the larger effort put forward in push back by CDU/CSU and SPD in the western part of Germany, the AfD sees its support declining from the levels it had in 2016.

LyrArc Article Gist
Chancellor Merkel tells the newspaper "Sachsische Zeitung," that she sees a follow through on policies on refugees after reestablishing control over EU borders as one of the lessons learned from last years refugee crisis. This has reduced the flow of refugees and Merkel says the process of deportation of non-German nationals who had no residency permit had to be done rigorously and speeded up.  Having said this Merkel defended her policy on refugees as "coherent," and was clear about it- "I do not see a change of course, but coherent work over many, many months." Responding to Pegida and anti-immigrant sentiment in Dresden, Merkel said it is important to remember the lessons of history, that "we are the people" slogan used by the far-right is misplaced, that in a free society "we all are the people."

LyrArc Article Gist
Infratest Dimap polling institute is commissioned by DW.com to find out what Germans think of the refugee policy of chancellor Merkel one year later. In summer 2015 Merkel said on Aug 31, "We can do it." Costs related to the refugees are about $17 billion, do Germans think services are overstretched for education, healthcare housing and other services. On the other side German society is aging and for every 100 unemployed people there are 200 open positions for skilled personnel. But the refugees who are accepted do not have the skills required and have to acquire the skills or given training and education. On this issue DW.com asked the question whether it will strengthen the German economy. About 51% agree and 45% disagree on this question, and about the same number agree and disagree on the question that Germany will be overstretched providing the services for housing, education, healthcare and other services. The higher educated and young are more favorable to accepting refugees, with those over 50 and basic schooling unfavorable. On the AfD side most people are unfavorable, and in the Greens party most are favorable. On terrorist incidents probability, over 58% think this is more likely, 38% disagree. On the question of whether this will make Germany more diverse 56% agree, 40% disagree. Overall the situation appears to be balanced, with a range of views expressed, and the positive and negative sentiment "evenly balanced", says DW.com.  ...