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
Iran Ceasefire shaky May 11 2026 with no willingness on the part of IRGC Iran (Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps) to send all nuclear materials out of the country. Past experience has shaken American confidence in IRGC Iran's willingness to give up nuclear weapons development. Under president Obama some nuclear materials were sent to Russia, some left inside Iran which were after an agreement used by IRGC Iran to develop weapons grade enriched uranium, putting the situation back to where America started before the agreement. This is behind the DJT Republican administration's effort to get all nuclear materials out of Iran. This has wasted another decade for Iran, diverting resources needed for improving standards of living and cost of living to the weapons programs. The result is internal protests that were widespread in Iran including the middle class, not just students. So that today Iranian people are divided on the issue whether Iran should against all prevailing Middle Eastern and World opinion go for a nuclear weapon. The situation of clandestine development in North Korea and Pakistan of nuclear weapons is not existent today as the US is monitoring it constantly. Israel sees these weapons programs in Iran as a threat to its existence close to its borders in Lebanon and Iraq, which makes it unlikely that clandestine development is possible for nuclear weapons development anywhere in the Middle East. The UAE has also shifted its stance in favor of the US, Saudis want assurances, and India, Pakistan Egypt are in different ways seeking a denuclearized Middle East. This means the American DJT administration is NOT ALONE on this issue as the media in the US and Europe are presenting. Germany's Wadephul and Merz are closer to US thinking on this issue than the media says. Macron and Starmer are at popularity of less than 20% in France and the UK and do not reflect the opinion in France and Britain, and in Europe on this issue. In this sense the US is doing this for a safer world, for China, India, Brazil and EU, all the nations in the poorest parts of the world in Africa, Asia. These poorest nations which are bearing the brunt of this obsession with nuclear weapons development by IRGC Iran in a Middle East torn by 5 decades of wars from Kabul to Damascus, Baghdad to Tehran, by IRGC Iran (Revolutionary Guard Corps), as these poor nations confront lack of oil and fertilizer supplies. It does not come at a good time for even the largest nations about 3 billion people in China, India and Indonesia, Egypt which are suffering from the effects of oil shortages and fertilizer shortages when possibly at most about 40 of 90 million people in Iran support weapons programs, all others in Iran seeking a way out for better standards of living and living at peace with neighbors and the world. In that peacetime Middle East the Palestinian people could find solutions like the Irish people with the goodwill of all neighbors. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Media headlines focused on Xi's statements on Taiwan. China is concerned that US not recognize Taiwan independence, but not much beyond that. China puts Iran much lower on the list of issues it considers important. It appears that China first priority is to be accepted as an equal partner with the US as a superpower. That is Xi's goal in this trip. Issues of Hormuz and Iran not something China considers important. China has an interest in a non-nuclear Iran, in no nuclear weapons proliferation. As the US has made this a priority China prefers to be not vocal on this issue, as it relies on the US to see this is done. A secondary priority for China is to have the US agree that China could continue to import from the Hormuz Straits to met its oil needs. As China has relations with Arab states it is carefully balancing this with relations with Iran. What does this mean? It means China and US are in considerable agreement on the current situation in the Gulf region and in the Middle East. China sees beyond Iran, so does the US. Both countries are focused on the future - on reindustrialization in the US and China on the next phase in its industrialization. New countries and blocs are also emerging that will rival China and the US- India/Japan and the European Union under leadership of Germany and France. These four countries or blocs are all thinking of the world beyond a failed Middle East- the economic issues they face and how best to tackle them, and the issues relating to borders and security, how best to tackle them. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China's president expresses the need for greater cooperation between China and Germany during Scholz's Beijing visit and says "we jointly oppose the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons." Scholz for his part said "it is right and good that I am in Beijing today," that in times of change bilateral meetings were all the more important. China's president Xi said that "in times of change and turmoil" nations of influence should work together for world peace. This is the first time after the covid lockdowns that Chinese leaders are meeting a leader from a large western nation, and this is generally welcomed in China.

LyrArc Article Gist
French nuclear weapons numbers and new strategy integrated with Germany- Macron explains this from a Navy base in Crozon, France, March 2, 2026. With wars in Ukraine and in Iran Macron says he will expand the French nuclear weapons from 290 warheads, and starts a consultative strategy approach to work with Germany to extend France's nuclear weapons to cover other states like Germany and coordinate with Germany on military exercises for European defense. This also includes Britain.

LyrArc Article Gist
The world today is in a much better position to complete the transition to zero dependence on the volatile Middle East for oil. Today in 2026 the world's largest nations 1. US   2. China  3. India  4. Germany are all free of Middle East oil (India through waivers for Russian sources). European Union and UK is at about 12% which can be quickly substituted from the US+ Venezuela and other sources. US is self sufficient in oil and gas and exports oil to the UK, India, Germany and the European Union. Canada is self sufficient. Germany gets only 6% of its oil from the Middle East, the UK 12%, Spain 13% and Italy 14%. The Iran war is likely to shift more of the needs of UK, Spain and Italy to other more stable sources including oil from the US and Venezuela managed by the US, and other sources. This means that US policymakers can act in the best interests of all the nations of the world for preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and long range ballistic missiles. Germany is moving rapidly to renewable energy and this could bring its dependence on the Middle East to zero. India will meet its needs from Russia for the time being till it also shifts to oil from US+ Venezuela. India get 55% of its oil from the Middle East or about 2.7 million b/d. Russia was an important source of oil for India till the US trade agreement called for it to shift- a 30 day waiver and extension means India can get this oil from Russia without sanctions for the duration of the war. Reducing European demand and Indian demand frees up oil for Japan and South Korea on the world market the other 2 countries dependent on Middle East oil- Japan importing 95% of its oil consumption with imports of 2.5 million b/d and South Korea importing about 2 million b/d or 70% of its consumption. This means Japan and South Korea need a new strategy as they are overexposed to one source just as Germany was and learned a difficult lesson to diversify its sources. Japan has learned to reduce consumption for the same level of GDP and some of this can be through conservation, also tried in Germany in the last 4 years. During the 4 years. of Ukraine war Germany had to find ways to diversify sources Japan and South Korea will need rapidly to do the same in the Iran War. This means that only Japan and South Korea because of their lack of policy direction and vigilance have allowed this overdependence on the Gulf region,  (even as Germany diversified its sources, DJT and Israel were firm on nuclear weapons policy) they failed to see signs that they should diversify. Today in 2026 the world's largest nations 1. US 2. China 3. India 4. Germany are all free of Middle East oil (Indi through waivers for Russian sources), European Union and UK is at about 12% which can be quickly substituted from the US+ Venezuela and other sources.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Iran's (IRGC's not the people of Iran who are protesting) strategy in talks is to stall peace talks, to use the help of global media which is creating perception for Iran, and see if the strategy of no nuclear materials turned over to Russia or some other country, see if that strategy works. This is  what German Foreign Minister Wadephul is saying on Day 16 of the Naval Blockade. Earlier this week German chancellor Merz called it unfortunate that the Iran War is continuing in explaining to ordinary Germans why the German economy is slowing down, yet he understands the danger posed by nuclear weapons in Iran or for that matter anywhere inthe volatile and explosive Middle East. Almost like the volatile and explosive Balkans that ignited World War I in 1914. This strategy of IRGC Iran does much irreparable damage to the Iranian economy in weeks to come. Iranian protests were intended to put the economy on a new path in which not just students, the middle class in the bazaars, the younger generation of Iranians who had the most to lose participated. Why is this happening? It is happening because of the complicated politics of the Middle East and centuries old differences within the Islamic world between different sectarian beliefs and cultures. It is not happening because of the US. The US cannot be responsible for what colonial empires of the British and French did in this region in the 1920's by creating artificial states of Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, out of the Arab portion of the collapsed Ottoman Empire defeated in World War I with Shia, Sunni populations in these states mixed up into unmanageable states. Five decades of wars in the Middle East are the result of these unmanageable artificial states of French and British Empires by 1921. The British Empire also controlled Iran in the 1900's and its oil resources. There was no involvement of America as the British and French did what they wanted to do even in the Treaty of Versailles that ended WWI.  The fall of the pro-Soviet Mossadegh regime in 1956 was the only fragmentary situation which is an anti Soviet Cold War move by the US in 1952, and was done by a group that had British connections deep inside the Eisenhower administration led by Secretary of State John Foster Dulles that took this unfortunate step for America (looking back over  5 decades of wars). A British oriented group was active inside the Republican party that continued to operate in the Reagan administration's involvement in support for Iraq in its war with Iran. And which no longer exists in the Republican party led by DJT which puts America First, grasps the fact of unmanageable states of British and French Empires and seeks to distance the US from the Middle East. Gandhi and Patel (and Jinnah) avoided the creation of such a state in British India's partition into India and Pakistan. Afghanistan is simply an extension of this Middle Eastern complicated setup, including 9/11. Why is all this important? Arab Middle East is a dangerous place for nuclear weapons- this is all the US is trying to accomplish, thankfully without the cooperation of the British and French whose Empires are responsible for the creation of a hodge podge mix of peoples in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq which (check this out) never existed before British and French Mandates of 1921. The global and American media that sees DJT Republicans as too conservative on cultural issues and the political establishment intending to return to power have completely obscured or not presented this side of the Middle East, yet is key to devising a policy that keeps America out of Middle East wars but keeps the goal of no nuclear weapons in this powderkeg of a region. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US president DJT meets with Rutte of the Netherlands Jan 21, 2026. He says he has come up with a framework for US acquisition of Greenland, rights title, and ownership of the island for US security and world security. He called for immediate negotiations with the goal of US acquisition of the island of Greenland.  The political situation is evolving in this way. Germany is key in the developments for the US to acquire Greenland. Britain is standing it out with the Nordic countries as Starmer has shifted to the side of Sweden and Denmark with little to gain for the Labor government which is facing local elections and popularity of Reform UK Party. In this situation Italy and Germany have taken a posture of not making any statements. Germany facing Russian intervention in Ukrain on the east needs the US for joint security at a critical juncture when Russia and the US have agreed to respect each others area of influence. Italy is run by a northern Italy party leaning to the anti-immigration stance taken by DJT in the US. It makes little difference to Netherlands, Germany/Austria/Switzerland and Italy who controls Greenland and in the context of Russian advances and nuclear weapons technology would prefer US move to acquire Greenland and rapidly build up defenses in Greenland with large investments. To not disturb the alliance's northern countries (Britain and Nordics) Germany has taken a back seat to the rhetoric yet will be in the deciding role because of its stable government, support from all parts of the political spectrum for US control of Greenland except for the coalition junior partner the SPD. The SPD Defense Minister Pistorius may form parts of the SPD that see US owning the island as positive in the bolstering of its defense capabilities with th $1 trillion outlay in the budgeted investments. Starmer may have misread DJT and US support as the US president can make a very good case for US owning Greenland and getting Denmark to accept the offer of Harry Truman of $100 million made in 1947, updated for what that sum is today which is $1.5 billion. As DJT pointed out Macron has no longevity for his government in France, and cannot speak for that country. As Treasury Secretary Bessent who along with Rubio is part of the team that will work with the president says, Denmark is irrelevant to the issues US faces for US and world security. It is a small country, Denmark, with a population of 6 million most of it in the area near Copenhagen. Houston or Dallas has a much larger population. For Denmark to decide on momentous issues of US security for the entire eastern seaboard or world security, with ownership essential for the US,  when climate has made the Arctic important, is something the US does not accept.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
It might not all make sense that the Pakistan/China mediated ceasefire conditions (including US and Israeli condition of no nuclear weapons development and ballistic missile development) are really not known even in the media today, only known to the Iranian government and the US government. In these conditions Iran's government gets to show that it had achieved its goals, even with enormous reconstruction costs of the damage done during the war. DJT had pointed to a sort of regime change in Iran after most of the earlier leadership has been removed, and new leaders in place who are keen on setting up conditions for their own administration replacing the old one.  Over the period 2027-2030 the prospect is real that China, India and Japan may shift their oil supplies sources to other regions, increase conservation per unit of GDP, and increase supplies of renewable energy, steps already taken by Germany over the last decade. Most media looks only what happens today and in 2026. This may be the last of the Middle East Wars before Europe and the US, and India, China, Japan shift away from the Middle East to get supplies of fossil fuels, and it may bring new renewables technologies that reduce the dependence on fossil fuels to the point of making a true transition to renewable energy. It may also be the last of the Middle East Wars in the sense that people of European nations and the US insist on no involvement in MIddle East as a sort of quagmire for squandering American, European and Asian vital resources of people and capital, ample example being given over the last 40 years. Considering the costs of the war and the moral cost of destroying infrastructure such as power plants that hurt the local population more than the regime in power, China, Japan, the US, and EU, India may find it is easier to race each other in coming up with alternative supplies and shifting to renewable energy faster than planned, making Middle Eastern oil supplies  and volatility in prices redundant, which would be a good thing after the hugely negative and costly experience of the last 50 years of dependence.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Germany's Merz is bringing historic change to Germany that it has not seen since reunification in 1990. Understated and underestimated Merz is different from the career politician chancellors of the past. Merz is a businessperson who headed the German branch of the investment fund Black Rock and from this experience has a keen understanding of the economy, of American and European business, and a direct commonsense approach to issues from defense to modernization. In short he is direct, speaks clearly, and action oriented. Within 5 months DJT has acted on tariffs and a level playing field in world trade and on a new budget with priorities for defense and tax cuts. Merz has in 2 months removed the constitutional debt brake of Merkel, corrected policy errors on illegal migration, passed 5% of GDP on defense and gained approval of added borrowing for 129 billion dollars in 2030, 4 times the 33 billion in 2024 to invest in modernization of Germany's failing infrastructure. Together Merz and DJT have stood up for the principle of no nuclear weapons in Iran, and the refocus of South and Southwest Asia on economic development from tragic and senseless wars. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US naval blockade of Iran in Arabian Sea starts April 13 2026. US destroyed Iran's larger ships 158 of them, yet Iran also has a fleet of smaller attack boats which it plans to use in Hormuz. These are harder to detect and can be hidden in coves along the Iranian coast and used against ships. The US with its naval blockade is now prepared to do what it has done also in Venezuela, stop and interdict fast drug boats on the Venezuelan side in the Atlantic ocean. By blockading Venezuela in the ocean US is using its strengths, and stopping drug boats its ability to pinpoint traffic on the ocean. Similar capabilities are well suited to Arabian Sea and Red Sea on the open oceans and away from narrow Hormuz playing to US strengths and capabilities. Aircraft carriers and destroyers and the US Air Force is in a position to do what it does best control open seas like the British did in their heyday of the Royal Navy for most of 1750-1920. This avoids options of Hormuz itself with its narrow 15 mile gap of water between Oman and Iran too close to mountainous terrain on either side, and of the Kharg Island option which would require special forces to be backed up with more ground forces. This is the most viable option and the interlude of couple of weeks has given the president an opportunity to make a better choice for positioning the US forces where the US has its strongest points. What is lacking is the individual powers of Britain and France whose leaders Starmer and Macron have popularity below 20%. Yet the US is better off making good choices and not having these nations alongside. The posturing by European nations is limited to France and UK, as Germany and Italy are in sync with the US position. Much of the media operates as if the goal of preventing the spread of nuclear weapons to the Middle East is not important for long term peace for nations such as China and India with about 3 billion people and the billions of people of Asia, Latin America and Africa. For the first time in 400 years since 1600 as Asian civilizations began a long decline China and India have emerged in 2000-2030 into the kind of modern economies and societies that exist in Europe and the US. The last thing they need is the risk of destroying the Modern World with nuclear proliferation when it took centuries to get to the right opportunity after 1950 to modernize China and India. Xi's and Modi's generation are the first to experience modernization in Asia after Japan's experience. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Violation of international law or tacit approval of drug states and suppression of the election results in Venezuela- position taken by Oxford's Dill and Germany's Steinmeier is itself controversial. Merz's is realistic. For those concerned about international law is it restricted to any particular period? Then the British policy in China supported by the other powers Japan, Russia, Germany and France to suppress the Boxer rebellion in 1901 and expand Treaty ports that forced opium on China in the period 1850 to the 1930's was not just a egregious violation, horrendous violation of basic human rights on a scale unimaginable in modern times. Much of the prosperity of the Netherlands and Britain, France was achieved through such policy in Asia. Yet Oxford's Dill and Steinmeier have chosen not to look at European history and the Empires of Europe in Asia and Africa for 300 years since 1700. By comparison Venezuelan action comes after the great patience of well meaning people, and the silence of elites in the US and Europe about massive migration encouraged by the regime in Venezuela of one third of its population about 9 million people to neighboring countries including the US, and suppression of free elections, complete mismanagement leading to 150% inflation destroying its economy.  It was not only these elites in the US and Europe that were responsible through their silence, but also the Bush and Obama wars in the Middle East which sapped the resources of the United States. Why is this happening when the Venezuelan people are the main benificiaries of the action taken by the US president to send in its military. All oil sales revenue will no longer go to a corrupt "drugs" state but be used to directly help the Venezuelan people achieve a better standard of living, bring down inflation  and invest in modernization, in these unusual circumstance a program run by Bessent at US Treasury. Those who dislike the unconventional but well meaning style of the US president and his occasional poor choice of words, find every opportunity for criticism even ignoring facts and common sense. Under Chavez and Maduro the Venezuelan economy was simply mismanaged to the point of being destroyed and an affluent country reduced to poverty and inflation so bad that one third or 9 milllion people left for neighboring countries. On this Dill at Oxford and Steinmeier have only this to say- it is somebody's else's problem. we will remain silent. Similarly on introducing nuclear weapons in the Middle East -where most nation states have intermittent wars and economic mismanagement for the last 50 years the artificial states from the Ottoman Empire of Syria and Iraq, Libya, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Sudan every state impoverished by war and economic mismanagement - Dill at Oxford and Steinmeier in Germany also have only this to say- it is somebody else's problem not ours, we will remain silent. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The US president tells the King it was special that all members of Congress stood up for a standing ovation many times- something that in recent years rarely happens. The King "has shown his class" in the last 24 hours says BBC, it is now up to Starmer and the British government, DJT and the Americans to make it count. Notable DJT sharing that the King agreed with him that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon. The King also talked about the NATO alliance and its role in keeping the peace for 80 years in the world. In the King's words-  "the international rules that have allowed us to trade and have kept power in balance for 80 years." Adding that the US should not go it alone- "The challenges we face are too great for any one nation to bear alone." However the King is only doing what his is role as monarch to present British interests, and it is important to recall that Britain's interests were once colonial interests around the world, that opposition to these colonial interests led to the Declaration of Independence by Jefferson and Washington in 1776. And caution in Washington's advice to America in Annual messages when it comes to these Empires. Right after 1945 when NATO was created- as it was throughout its Empire in Asia  in 1750-1950- Britain opposed Russia and was the most vocal opponent of Soviet Russia in 1950's and saw NATO in this mission. Times have changed with the emergence of Russia after 1990, China in 1950 and again in 1990's, and America as a world power is best following Washington's advice not to get involved in or inherit the British anti-Russian attitude as it has interests in the Western hemisphere and around the world that require cooperation with other world powers such as Russia, China, India, and Germany to create a peaceful world  and not the kind we have today that puts Russia and China on the wrong side just for opposition, as no powers have any interest in drug and people trafficking in the western hemisphere form places like Mexico and Venezuela, or creating small wars in other parts of the world. A situation NATO as seen by Britain in 1950 as Anti-Russian creates for the US- Lord Hastings Ismay first Secretary General of NATO set British goal for NATO (not the US interests or consistent with George Washington's advice to distance from) in 1949 as "Keep the Russian Out, the US Involved, and the Germans Down." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The purchase of F/A-18 aircraft by Germany capable of delivering nuclear weapons stationed in Germany is critical to keeping the nuclear deterrance and the "nuclear sharing" agreement with the U.S. Older aircraft, the Tornadoes are now 40 years old. Chancellor Merkel has supported the purchase but this is now being called into question by its junior partner in the coalition government the SPD.  Leaders of the SPD party say they would block the purchase of 45 Boeing Company made F/A-18 jets proposed by Merkel's defense minister. Under NATO's nuclear sharing agreement going back to the 1950's it is believed there are about 180 B61 tactical nuclear bombs in rope, some 20 in Germany and spread out over Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey. President Trump has said the U.S. will withdraw from a treaty with Russia that limits the presence of nuclear missiles in Europe because Russia is not living up to the agreement. This could lead to an arms race. The issue is leading to the beginning of a fundamental debate about nuclear armanent and military spending of a type that has not happened in Europe since 1982 when a rebellion in the SPD over the stationing of nuclear weapons in Europe led to the ouster of Chancellor Helmut Schmidt.  The Christian Democrats view the purchase of the F/A-18 at a time when Russia is updating its nuclear deterrance as fundamental to NATO and nuclear sharing. The SPD's leaders say nuclear sharing does not mean the need to host nuclear weapons, and give the example of Canada, a NATO ally that does not have U.S. weapons on its soil. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Is a Win-Win possible for the US/Israel and Iran possible with the US/Israel strikes and operations started March 1, 2026. Not just for the American and Israeli people, but for the people of the Arab countries and for the people of Iran, and for the people of Russia. Greg Ip in the WSJ, Marc Thiessen in the NYT, and Bret Stephens of the NYT have looked at this in this way and offer an alternative view of what might happen, even though the tendency of the WSJ and the Washington Post is to be skeptical and the NYT with an opposition to all things DJT offering pessimistic version. First, all the anticolonial writings that were read by Khamanei in Moshaad are no longer the case as the US is no longer acting to secure some benefit to itself as the British and French colonial powers did for themselves or their oil companies in pre1960's Iran. Second the US truly wants to learn the lessons of 30 years of troubles in the region at every level of the DJT administration which is to extend a true olive branch to the subdued foe as it did to Germany and Japan under generals Eisenhower and McArthur. Third moderates in Iran could emerge as in Germany ( Adenauer) and in Japan Shigeru Yoshida who worked to adopt the 1947 Japanese Constitution under Gen. Douglas MacArthur. Behind the student protests and now national protests there is a realization in Iran that living perpetually under sanctions is not the way to live, that it can increase oil production, get investment in its industry, and raise standards of living, by doing something different. That nuclear weapons development, supporting movements overseas, perpetual conflicts with Arab states, these things have been tried and are not working. That this is the last chance to build a prosperous Iran before fossil fuels are replaced by renewable energy over 10-15 years and which will make it that much harder to modernize and develop Iran for the benefit of Iran's future 110 million people. The gap with India will only widen as India catches up with China, the way China caught up with Japan. It is better to accept that these anticolonial writings that emerged from decolonizing Arab North Africa applied to the British and the French, and that the world is a different place today as the Indians and the Chinese have realized modernizing ancient societies with ancient religions is possible with the help of the Americans and the Europeans, working with the Americans and the Europeans. Theodore Roosevelt says in his Autobiography that one should be careful to judge people as the best have some negative aspects and the worst have some positive aspects, an experience he described in his dealings with progressives and those who opposed changes. Adenauer and Yoshida had contacts and dealings with earlier governments defeated in the war, but wanted to search for an entirely different path for rebuilding their countries having learned from experience. A thoughtful moderate Iranian outcome is possible as happened in Germany and Japan and which is beginning to develop in Venezuela.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
There is only one way to interpret this. Putin and Russian influence have calmed down the Israel Iran war. DJT opening up discussions and talking to both Russia and China has created a sense in both countries that their vital interests are with the US, China on a trade agreement with the US, and Russia for a settlement of the Ukraine war on terms that it sees as fair. There is the issue of nuclear non-proliferation on which US, Russia, China, India, Germany and the EU, and the rest of the world are in agreement which meant action to end Iran's nuclear program. Putin met with Iranian Foreign Minister and looked for a way to end the war. Putin said: “This gives us a chance to…think together about how it would be possible to get out of this situation,” said Putin. From the point of view of a safer planet Biden's period of not talking to China during the balloon incident, and not talking to Russia with a single minded focus on Ukraine conflict, can be seen as not the way a responsible world power should act. DJT's emphasis to end the wars in the Middle East yet standing firm on Israel's right to exist and the non proliferation of nuclear weapons, and working to end the war on Ukraine by puting pressure on all countries, is proving to be an approach that gives all world powers a chance to reflect truly on their obligations to their peoples and the people of the world. To keep their and the world's sanity and composure while pursuing national aspirations. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Iraq is an artifical entity, an artificial state created by the British out of the defeated and disintegrated Ottoman Empire. Created from 3 Ottoman Arab provinces- provinces or vilayets of Mosul province which was mostly Sunni, Baghdad province, the city of Baghdad  mostly Sunni and rural areas Shia, and Basra in the south mostly Shia from tribes who converted to Shia Islam extending the reach of Shia religious sites such as Karbala. Note that the Sunni Arabs were closer to the power structures of the Ottoman Empire than Shia in the 18th and 19th century. As a result post war Iraq in 1950's was dominated by Sunni elites and the British imposed Faisal 1 monarchy of 1921 was thrown out by Sunni elites in the army in 1958 by Karim Kassem, followed by the emergence of Saddam Hussein from Pan Arab Baath socialist ideologies of that period.  After the US wars in Iraq and Iraq- Iran war, Iran mobilized Shia into popular militias. In 2026 Iraq is essentially several ministates pulled together in Baghdad, with Shia, Sunni and Kurdish ministates formed into the governing structure, and everyone praying for no outside interference to pull it all apart and maintain a fragile peace. While the British got Iraq Mandate from League of Nations in 1921 French got Syria provinces of the Ottoman Empire. In fact Sykes and Picot are the British and French diplomats who created artificial states of Iraq and Syria to suit their interests in the region for oil and for controlling Suez and territories in India, Indochina, Hong Kong, parts of coastal China (Shanghai). Why is this important? It is important because at the time Britian dealt with weak Sunni populations that were controlled through monarchs they put in place, and the British and French industrial power had no rivals. Today the Sunnis are mobilized and the Shia have with Iranian support mobilized also, and sectarian wars have torn the place apart for 40 years. America's founding fathers and first president George Washington, would if here today consider this the one place US would have nothing to do with in terms of wars and bases. On oil George Washington would advise America to find alternative sources than get dragged into useless sectarian wars and lose the battle for reindustrialization, after America's elites and their economists have essentially deindustrialized America. It is appropriate for the US president to take action only on grounds of not letting the place fall into regimes with ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons that could reach US and Europe. And for that China and Russia, India and Brazil, Germany and France should also do their part and fulfill responsibilities. As for Britain and France it is appropriate for the US president to say to the posturing in Europe and ambivalent posiions, "Go, get you own oil in the Hormuz," as the US is self sufficient in oil and does not need Iranian or Iraqi oil. It is also appropriate knowing that this Iraq and Syria were created by Sykes and Picot and the British and French to build and sustain their Empires that no longer exist because Turkey and India, and China, through the effort of Gandhi and Ataturk, Sun-Yat Sen and Mao, Brazil also, are now strong independent nations. The message is- if Germany can do it to get only 6% of energy imports from Hormuz straits, so can China and Japan. China and Japan get 90% of their imports from the Hormuz straits and there is no reason why China and Japan, Britain, India need to be so dependent on a region where disruptions have happened again and again for 40 years. If they do not want to change they can assume the responsibilities of keeping Hormuz Straits on their own. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
World War I was the first major worldwide war since the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars, and World War II was fought after World War I's punitive reparations exacted from Germany led to the Nazis. US General Pershing did not want to see the French negotiate the settlement, preferring the war to continue till the destruction of the German Empire's war machine rebuilt by the Nazis. Mistakes were made in Europe for which millions of Americans gave their lives to liberate Europe. Russians and Americans see themselves as part of western civilization. On this point there is no difference, none, it is only who is the more important and whose view of the world is right. Asian civilization including China and India see the benefits of western civilization, of the Renaissance, the Enlightenment and the Scientific Revolution and embrace it wholeheartedly and wish it had come sooner on of their own volition and intent. Other than the Korean and Vietnam wars fought in their origins against the Japanese and the French colonialism and Empires, the wars of the Middle East since the end of colonialism stand out. In Iraq, Iran, Syria, Afghanistan, Yemen the only other major wars since the 1970's there are religious and ethnic wars that are of no interest to the people of three continents Europe, Americas, and East and South Asia, for whom the spread of nuclear weapons to the Gulf region brings nothing but dangerous developments for their peoples and for the peace of the world. ...

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....

LyrArc Article Gist
Mr Obama's vision of a nuclear weapons free world going back to his days at Columbia University. There as a senior he took Prof. Michael Baron's seminar on international politics and American policy. In a paper for that course Mr Obama analyzed how a President might go about negotiating nuclear arms reductions with Russia. Baron says Obama has been thinking about these issues for a long time. About this time Obama wrote an essay in the Columbia Sundial student newspaper. This was the time when the Greens movement for a nuclear weapons free world was strong in Germany, and Reagan was pushing for a nuclear arms development race with Russia. The article was titled "Breaking the War Mentality." As a senator Obama joined Senator Dick Lugar -who has worked hard for non-proliferation- on a trip to Russia to monitor efforts by Ruusia to scrap nuclear arms and secure atomic materials from theft or diversion. He allied himself with four Reagan period veterans Kissinger, Shultz, Perry and Sam Nunn, who in a 2007 WSJ op-ed article, argued that it was time- as the headline for the article said -to work for "A World Free of Nuclear Weapons." The steps in practice Obama plans to take are the following. A Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty, which would bar all nations signing it from making fuel for their atomic bombs. Rewriting crucial provisions of the 1968 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, strengthening inspection provisions and closing loopholes that let N. Korea drop out in 2003. Countries would have to give up the freedom to make fuel for reactors and instead buy it from an international fuel bank. Global consensus and prevention when it comes to deviant states hoping to enhance their own security, or regimes or terrorist groups, will be crucial in setting up a new system for a nuclear weapons free world....

LyrArc Article Gist
Parliamentary group of the ruling LDP party elected Fumio Kishida, member of parliament from Hiroshima, as the new LDP leader and prime minister. He has called the abolition of nuclear weapons his life's work. His grandfather and father were both members of parliament. Kishida was elected in 1993 to the Japanese parliament, and was foreign minister under Shinzo Abe. He supports the Hiroshima baseball team and is said to be good when it comes to washing up and cleaning the bathroom. As a child he grew up in New York and pictures of that time show him at a school in Queens, New York as a child. This has given him a sense of social injustice. He shares this in his plans for Japan with Biden in the US and Scholz in Germany, a sense that there should be a reduction in the income gap, and support for low paid temporary workers, families with young children. He also shares with Biden and Scholz plans to invest hundreds of billions of dollars for renewal of the country- for renewal of US, Germany and Japan in the manner of the postwar renewal in the nineteen fifties. ...

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. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Former Secretary of State James Baker III on the Obama administration's negotiations with Iran for a nuclear deal. He points out the importance of the U.S. making the removal of sanctions gradual manner as Iran fulfills its part of the agreement. Baker says Iran in the past has broken agreements to resume nuclear weapons research, making the verification process and snap back of sanctions critical. Baker does not address the issues related to how effective verification would take place, calling this the work of negotiators to work out the bureaucratic and cumbersome provisions. He also does not address the problems other critics have raised about any future snap back of sanctions because of the reluctance of European countries, saying only that the U.S. should maintain its credible position on the negtiations with its other partners- China, Russia, Germany, France and the UK.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Obama invited NYT's columnist Thomas Friedman to the White House for an interview on Saturday afternoon April 4, 2015. Here Friedman gives president Obama's response to his questions, and Obama's concerns about the heated rhetoric in the U.S. and Israel on the negotiations with Iran detracting and distracting from his key goals of protecting U.S. interests and Israel. On the Sunni states, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, Obama points out that there are some tough conversations needed about changes inside their societies which pose a greater threat to the governments than Iran. Obama says he understands perfectly that Israel and the Jewish people after their experience of the last hundred years are determined to not let Iran develop a nuclear weapon, and their right to be concerned that the agreement could let Iran clandestinely develop one. Obama says the verification is extensive and covers any facility in Iran, any suspicion about secret facilities, yet it leaves the subsequent decisions if Iran created difficulties, to a international body over which the U.S., UK, France, have no control. This is a principal issue for critics of the negotiated agreement. No mention is made of why Iran simply discarded the option of sending the atomic material to Russia to be processed into nuclear rods for the Bushehr nuclear plant built by Russia only a few days before the final outline was developed. And why the U.S., with allies Germany, France, UK and Japan, did not offer the Iranians an economic aid package if needed in return for the billions Iranians invested for that atomic material, to ensure that the atomic materials are shipped out of the country- to create a nuclear agreement that would be credible to all parties. The economic aid would benefit Iran modernize its oil industry, including refining operations, meet basic import needs, and provide tangible proof to the Iranian people of our best intentions for the future, that president Obama strongly espouses in the interview. The interview does show the quandary president Obama faces in Iran for strong action, that is a result of failed policies with Iran since the Eisenhower administration's intervention 1953 during the Cold War that displaced the elected government of Mosaddegh in Iran and setup the Shah's regime in 1956, the support of Saddam Hussein in Iraq in the war against Iran, which Obama mentions in this intervew. In the light of the repeated failures of the U.S. policies a Democratic party leader faces increasing reservations for taking strong action against Iran's development of nuclear weapons capabilities, preferring to exhaust every diplomatic channel, and take risks in the hope that time will give the Iranian people an opportunity to to reintegrate in the global community and pursue the peaceful development of nuclear energy. This strain in president Obama's thinking is evident throughout the interview with Friedman. Other aspects of president Obama's policy in the Middle East shared in the interview are about supporting the Sunni states in some areas, and Iran in some areas, at the same time as the nuclear issue is "put in a box" and separated from the regional conflicts. Friedman presents this as the Obama doctrine, yet it appears to be coming after a series of improvisations in foreign policy following a failure to act in 2011-2013, when the "once in a lifetime" opportunities presented by the Arab Spring were not taken up by the Obama administration, leading to the region's current disintegration....