LyrArc Article Gist
PM of Sweden Ulf Kristersson on the Joint Statement of the Nordic nations with India. Joint Statement: 3rd India-Nordic Summit, Oslo, 19 May 2026 Published 19 May 2026 1.  Today in Oslo, the Prime Minister of India, Shri Narendra Modi, the Acting Prime Minister of Denmark, Ms. Mette Frederiksen, the Prime Minister of Norway, Mr. Jonas Gahr Støre, the Prime Minister of Finland, Mr. Petteri Orpo, the Prime Minister of Iceland Ms. Kristrún Mjöll Frostadóttir, and the Prime Minister of Sweden, Mr. Ulf Kristersson, held the 3rd India-Nordic Summit hosted by the Norwegian Prime Minister. This Summit builds upon the previous two Summits held in Copenhagen in 2022 and Stockholm in 2018. 2. The Prime Ministers noted that they are meeting at a time of global geopolitical flux and rapid economic and technological transformation and agreed on the need to deepen the partnership between India and the Nordics for mutual benefit based upon shared interests and values and to cooperate in addressing global challenges. In this context, they decided to elevate the India-Nordic relationship to a trusted Green Technology and Innovation Strategic Partnership. 3.  As leaders of vibrant democracies and large open market economies, they underscored their shared interest in fostering a robust and resilient global order based on international law that promotes peace, stability, inclusive economic growth and sustainable development.  4. They reaffirmed their commitment to upholding international law, shared values and obligations including democracy, freedom, human rights, gender equality, rule of law, respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity and international peace and security in accordance with international law, including the United Nations Charter. 5.  The Leaders discussed international peace and security including the conflicts in Europe and the West Asia/Middle East. 6. They discussed opportunities for collaboration in trade and investment, blue economy, circular economy, digital infrastructure, digitalisation and artificial intelligence, climate action and energy security, fighting pollution, water, research and education, talent mobility, healthcare, space & geospatial sectors and defence. UN, multilateralism and international cooperation 7.   The leaders reiterated the importance of an effective multilateral system, with the United Nations at its core. They confirmed their commitment to work towards reforming the UN, including the UN Security Council, to make it more representative, inclusive, transparent, efficient, accountable, effective and reflective of the contemporary geopolitical realities. The Nordic Prime Ministers reiterated the support of the Nordic countries for permanent membership for India in a reformed and expanded UN Security Council. The Nordic leaders welcomed India’s application to the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group (NSG), and emphasized the importance of the international multilateral export control regimes in upholding non-proliferation and international peace and security. Trade, investment and economic cooperation 8.  The leaders emphasised the importance of a continued central role for the World Trade Organization in the multilateral trading system and global trade governance. They underscored the importance of a fair, open, transparent, equitable, non-discriminatory, inclusive and rules-based multilateral trading system, with WTO at its core. 9.   They acknowledged the significant economic exchanges in the form of trade and investments between India and the Nordic countries in promoting sustainable economic growth, prosperity, circular economy, bioeconomy, sustainable development and supply chain resilience. 10. To facilitate trade and investments and contribute to the objective of sustainable development, they particularly welcomed the entry into force of the India-EFTA Trade and Economic Partnership agreement and the conclusion of the India-EU Free Trade Agreement. The leaders also welcomed the active business exchanges in the margins of the Summit and highlighted the need of continued business exchanges to identify opportunities. The leaders stressed that in addition to the economic benefits by enhancing market access and removing trade barriers, the India-EU FTA and India-EFTA TEPA could support economic security and resilience through diversifying critical value chains and opening new markets. They welcomed the shared objectives under TEPA that EFTA states shall aim for investment of USD 100 billion leading to creation of one million direct jobs in India. 11.   The leaders further emphasized the need of undertaking initiatives to improve connectivity between the Nordic and the Indo-Pacific regions, including in line with the continued development of the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US Defense Security Cooperation Agency in State Department approves sales of Javelin and Excalibur missile systems to India November 19 2025, at a price tag of about $95 million. This increases US military sales to India to over $20 billion. FOr India to get a good trade agreement with the US, the US government set two conditions - increase purchases of US products and stop funding Russian attacks on Ukraine by reverting to the situation in 2019 when India purchased about 4% of its oil from Russia. India's purchases of discounted oil from Russia are a recent development. Indian and Chinese refiners have cut purchases of Russian oil, according to recent reports in WSJ. The increasing arms purchases from the US is a development that has taken place throughout the Modi administration since 2014 cutting dependence on Russian supplies including India's building its own capacity for defense products.

LyrArc Article Gist
Making some territorial concessions appears to be the only way for peace talks to succeed. For a long time there was insistence on territorial sovereignty of Ukraine by EU and NATO leaders. This appears to have prolonged the war- with needless loss of life on both sides, and costly damage to Ukraine infrastructure, a population that had to face additional winters and hardship in war ravaged areas. NATO's Stoltenberg from Norway, leaders of northern Nordic and Baltic countries, the UK, could take that position without having to face the hardship of the war. NATO had to be re-formed under a new name and new structure  following the collapse of the Soviet Union, with wariness about the possibility of centuries old since 1700 UK and Nordic historical adversarial relationship with Russia casting a shadow over that organization, and embroiling the US in conflicts not of its own choice or of wise leadership. This is the root cause of the Ukraine war. It would have been best to completely restructure NATO and give it a new name without Northern European nations leading it. Principles matter once soviet communism was no longer there NATO formed for its expansionism in 1950's had served it's purpose. Rasmussen from Denmark and Stoltenberg from Norway led the organization for the last decade and half from 2009-2014 and 2014 to 2025, with backing from Obama/Merkel for most of the period of the war in Ukraine. Also most of the period NATO expanded to Russian borders happened under Northern European leaders from Spain, Britain and Nordics (Solana, Robertson, Scheffer, Rasmussen and Stoltenberg) and the organization NATO getting the northern European slant based on historical adversarial relationship of Britain and Russia since 1700- for no other reason than the British wanting to protect its large Empire and commerce in India which in the 18th and 19th century included most of Asia. Under Robertson the UK Defense Secretary much of this transformation into turning NATO into something anti-Russian happened which was primarily because of British and Nordic perceptions of Russia as an adversary. Robertson added the following countries at the Prague Summit in 2002 to NATO- the Baltics, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. Russia faced internal upheaval in those years and Yeltsin in resigned in 1999, Putin was elected in 2000. It is clear that Russia had suffered severe economic hardship in that period and Putin's first goal in 2002 was to stabilize the economy.  It could be said that this turning NATO over to UK and Nordics was a huge mistake considering that Russia was still the largest nuclear power after the US, and British policy was now determining US policy. And Britain's Robertson/NATO should not have involved itself in the Afghanistan war using Article 5, as the US could have handled this alone and limited that engagement. It got US involved in another conflict, conflict with Russia that was to come in Ukraine on the side of the Baltics and Ukraine, without US clearly understanding what the roots of that war was about and implied confrontation with Russia 20 years after the Prague Summit in 2002 under George Bush junior. The incompetence of Bush and Obama/Merkel laid the seeds of the Ukraine war in 2022 following Robertson, Rasmussen, Stoltenberg, small Nordic nations and Britain creating a conflict that did not need to happen, with loss of hundreds of thousands of lives of Russian speaking fraternal peoples of both Russia and Ukraine. The Republican sentiment under DJT of the tragedy of such huge losses of young people, and desire to end this loss of life, can nowhere be seen in bellicose talk in northern European nations, that take the US for granted to fight their wars.  The wisdom of Washington, Lincoln and TR/FDR clearly caution in getting involved in European centuries old animosities. For the US it meant in practical terms that it could no longer carry out the Monroe Doctrine essential for peace and good governance in the western hemisphere as only a Russia desperate to make its views known about NATO would interfere in the western hemisphere against US assertion of the Monroe Doctrine with the US Navy. Instead drug trafficking gangs took over Latin American countries and created a flow of fentanyl and millions of people through migrant traffickers across the US southern border. As America has expressed its concern for loss of Russian and Ukrainian men in the war for the first time under DJT Russia has distanced itself from Venezuela, Mexico and Latin America. The loss of hundreds of thousands of young Americans to fentanyl is a shared tragedy with the loss of hundreds of thousands of young Russians and Ukrainians in the last decade. How reliable are Northern European countries when it comes to protecting the eastern seaboard of the US with the acquisition of Greenland? It is a policy pursued by presidents since the Alaska Acquisition from Russia. By Seward, Teddy Roosevelt, Harry Truman and DJT. Denmark the land where NATO secretary general Rasmussen was from followed by Stoltenberg from Norway  (for 15 of the years of the war in Ukraine 2010-2025) the US efforts to protect its eastern seaboard are rebuffed by both Denmark and Norway, and the US presented in a negative light as an imperialist power in the face of Danish East India Company's  colonial attitude since 1700 clearly imitating the colonial British East India company.  It shows Northern European nations looking out for themselves not for the US, and embroiling the US in their wars at the cost of the entire western hemisphere being destabilized. The population of UK, Denmark and Norway, Baltics is far less than the Mumbai, Shanghai, Sao Paulo , Berlin and Tokyo regions. Should the views of a small population in northern Europe of 2% of the total determine the future of US, Europe, China, India, Brazil, and other parts of the world with 5 billion people the 98%, when issues of war and nuclear conflict, nuclear buildup, the western hemisphere destabilized with drug trafficking gangs running rampant in countries, divide the world in opposing blocs, when the wellbeing of most of the world's people in Asia and Latin America, Africa is at stake by establishing a essential degree of cooperation by all sides. The US under DJT has chosen a wise policy of cooperation over conflict -with China, with Russia, with all the major powers, and with smaller powers. Reading the wisdom contained in the writings of Washington, Lincoln, TR/FDR confirms it is clearly the wise choice. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Li Shanfu, China's defense minister meets Rajnath Singh in New Delhi for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting India is chairing in 2023. Rajnath Singh tells Li that border issues have to be resolved for normal bilateral ties to be restored.

LyrArc Article Gist
iCET Initiative for Critical and Emerging Technologies is a new program that was agreed to between president Biden and prime minister Modi at the Quad Summit in May 2022. It has the focus of building the US relationship with India for advanced and emerging technologies in the competition with China, and also as a way to expand India's role in the US and EU supply chain arrangement. Its first inaugural dialogue happened this week between Jake Sullivan NSA for the US and Ajit Doval NSA for India. The goals of iCET are To seek to build supply chains which increase co-production and co-development between the countries  To increase linkages between the countries startup ecosystems To broaden defense innovation and technology cooperation To build resilient semiconductor supply chains  Space cooperation STEM talent Next generation 5G and 6G telecommunications cooperation The US will speed up approval of GE Engines making of engines in India for light combat aircraft manufactured in India. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Increased maritime and defense cooperation as Dominic Raab, UK Foreign Secretary visits India and has talks with Jaishankar, India's External Affairs minister. For the UK there is no stronger partner than India looking east, says Raab. India, UK and Australia form a core of the British Commonwealth of nations, an idea that brings together the English speaking world in Asia and Africa. After Brexit Britain is free to form its own relationships based on its history, and links of culture and language. Boris Johnson will visit India in January 2021.

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

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial calls the ISI and Pakistan army's playing both sides of the game- acting as an ally of the U.S. and supporting the Taliban- unacceptable. The editorial points to the Taliban and its leader Mullah Omar running the operations out of Quetta, in Baluchistan. And the Taliban faction loyal to Jalaluddin Haqqani having sanctuaries in North Waziristan and the tribal regions of Pakistan. Al Quaeda's No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahiri, it says, could very well be in Pakistan in some compound in the manner of bin Laden.

LyrArc Article Gist
Prime minister Abe of Japan and President Jinping of China meet for 25 minutes on the sidelines of the Asia Africa Summit in Indonesia, on April 21, 2015. In a sign of thawing in relations both sides take an active interest in improving relations. This is the 60th anniversary of the Bandung conference in Indonesia, and Japan restated its pledge during the 1955 meeting of Asian and African leaders to not use force in territorial disputes. Abe said he had "deep remorse" for Japan's role in World War II. Xi Jinping's speech covered China's effort to build the "Silk Road" infrastructure projects in Asia and Africa, and said the AIIB bank was seen positively by the international community. Jinping emphasized the joint responsibility of both countries for peaceful development and regional stability. Abe suggested that a communications system for emergencies be established between the two countries and a defense dialogue be setup.

LyrArc Article Gist
Maleeha Lodhi, a former Pakistani ambassador to the U.S. and Britain, has edited a collection of essays in a new book titled- Pakistan: Beyond the "Crisis State." It tries to form a new construct to move the debate on Pakistan into a future in which Pakistan can exist as a "normal country" free of a paranoia about India that affects its outlook, and free from the military connections that have shifted the focus from development that a friendly neighborly coexistence with India would provide. Intriguing essays include one by Saadat Hasa Manto who goes back to 1951, when the Cold War was at its peak and the U.S. formed a relationship with Pakistan based on military assistance, with only small fraction of aid going into development programs. Syed Rifaat Hussain, professor of strategic studies at Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad puts it directly: Pakistan needs to become a normal state and the only way to to do this is for the rivalry and obsession with India to be resolved and put behind it. As it now stands the U.S., India and Pakistan all stand to gain tremendously in such an outcome- the U.S. disengagement from Afghanistan and the Taliban because at its core the Taliban issue goes back to the Pakistan rivalry with India, Pakistan and India because it puts the focus on development, infrastructure building, and economic gains....

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. and Japan sign a new security agreement in 2015 which removes a geographical constraint on Japan participating in joint action with the U.S. in protecting vital global interests. The agreement is called the Joint Defense Guidelines. The agreement will enable Japan's Defense Forces with the permission of its parliament to participate in such action. Earlier agreements limited action to the defense of Japanese territories. A new alliance coordination mechanism will be established with officials from diplomatic, defense and military departments of the two countries. Consultations between the U.S. and Japan will take place through this mechanism in peacetime and in emergency situations. The new guidelines also include joint development of weapons systems and sharing of military technology, and cooperation on cybersecurity, missile defense, reconaissance activity. Japan's reinterpretation of its Constitution will now be discussed in parliament in the context of this agreement, to clarify what other activities Japan can take on....

LyrArc Article Gist
Bruce Reidel, Obama administration advisor on the war in Afghanistan, conducted a policy review in 2009. He says a policy of engagement he advised in 2009 now needs reshaping. He points to recent events that show the Pakistani ISI and the military who run Pakistan are in direct conflict with U.S. policy in the region. Especially after the attacks on the U.S. embassy in Kabul and the killing of a former Afghan president who was expected to lead peace talks. Reidel says this requires a reshaping of U.S. policy and a policy of containment which would reduce military assistance to Pakistan, and at the same time shape policies that would help the people of Pakistan, such as reducing tariffs on textiles.

LyrArc Article Gist
Chandrasekeran looks back on the troop surge ordered by President Obama on the advice of General Petraeus and General McChrystal in Afghanistan, and the results in Afghanistan as the U.S. withdraws troops in 2012-2013.

LyrArc Article Gist
Defense Secretary Gates does not see Russia as the threat it was in the Cold War, first because Russia's conventional forces are a "shadow" of what they were during the Cold War, and Russia has adverse demographic trends that will diminish Russia's ability in conventional forces. He sees the Georgian war in the context of Russia's seeking to exorcize, as he puts it, past humiliations. And Gates sees opportunities in the relationship with Russia. Such things as Russia's willingness to work with the US on Afghanistan. Evidence of this is Russia supporting the renwal of the UN resolution on Afghanistan. Another indication is that Russia he says is very worried about the drugs coming out of Afghanistan, and has been supportive to provide alternative routes for Europeans to get equipment and supplies into Afghanistan. These views come across in an interview on December 17, with Charlie Rose, a five time elected Congressman, for the PBS Charlie Rose show. They are also reflected in an article in Foreign Affairs journal's current issue. Gates was a CIA analyst and has some insightful observations. Gates told Charlie Rose that he does not see the Islamic radicals and violent Islamic extremists as a threat in the same way as the threat in the Cold War years. This threat is not as big as the threat to freedom during the Cold War. He says the failure in strategic communications was huge as agencies of the US government engaged in activities in other countries, like the Agency for International Development and the US Information Agency, were neglected starting in the in the 1990's. Communications in other countries of what the US represented and stands for was left to the Pentagon, a role the Pentagon was ill-suited for. He sees the Islamic terrorism as more of an ideological conflict. Speaking at a town hall meeting at the Balad Air Force base in Iraq, in December, Gates pointed to these communications failures as a real challenge for the new administration. But he now sees a huge opportunity in this past failure, and ways of addressing it creatively, in addition to commiting resources and people to this effort. Walter Pincus wrote this article, and its part of the fineprint analysis effort at the Washington Post in which speeches, reports, and other documents are examined by people like Pincus, to catch the really important things, uncovering the fine print that really makes the headlines. Another aspect of this fineprint effort is that there are a huge number of reports, and speeches and documents that had a tone reminiscent of the Cold War during the Georgia war and yet they do not correctly reflect the real situation about Russia, as Gates sees it from his analysis of what is actually happening. Gates has used Foreign Affairs, the Dec 17 Charlie Rose Show on PBS in which he was interviewed, and the speech at the Balad Air Force base in Iraq, to communicate his views and analysis. They are important to underline and emphasize precisely because they show that all that cold war hysteria reporting and speeches may be misleading and lead to improper conclusions and mistakes in policy, wasted effort, wasted resources, and lost lives. And just as the US strategic communications was starved of resources and effort, so also this necessary work to retrieve and give emphasis to the important things is neglected. One additional link to this is the speech, discussion, and QA session in Washington DC at the time of the G20 summit in which President Medvedev and the new administration's elder statesman and diplomat Marilyn Albright, former secretary of state, expressed their hopes and plans for a new era in Russian-American relations. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Michael Getler describes the missed opportunity under President Obama for using one of America's most talented diplomats to engineer a peace agreement between the warring factions in Afghanistan- the U.S., the Pakistan army, the ISI and its support in the army, the Taliban, and the other parties such as the Haqqani faction and the Afghan government of Karzai. Holbrooke had used his experience for another President, with the same force of his larger than life personality, when he helped bring about the Dayton Accords in a similiar area of stubborn ethnic strife. Could Obama have tapped Holbrooke's skills and set aside the distractions of his personality as coming from an American with unique gifts, talent and achievement, is the question Getler asks. And is this a comment on the nature of the Obama Presidency and America's poorly invested hopes.