LyrArc Article Gist
Vice President Vance's attempted thaw in relations with Iran (the Memorandum) and the Iranian response in missile strikes to interrupt open navigation in Hormuz on Omani side route breaking ceasefire happens on July 8, 2026. Early on in the US strikes the focus was on Iranian underground nuclear sites with preparations for nuclear weapons. When Iran shut down the Hormuz channel to navigation the US extended this to a naval blockade. As the US bombing of military targets in Iran continued in May and June the WSJ and other media were critical of the US. DJT turned to JD Vance to get the Iranians to negotiate a ceasfire with a Memorandum of points they agreed to included a plan to have talks on nuclear issue, open up the Hormuz channel, lift American naval blockade and American sanctions to Iranian oil exports. This WSJ Editorial Board commentary says Iran has not acted on as it said it would - no talks on nuclear issue are started, and Iran launched missiles against shipping in Hormuz.  This WSJ editorial says Iran does not intend to open Hormuz or discontinue its nuclear weapons efforts. In this situation the only options for the US are to find alternative sources for oil for India and Japan, and China in tacit cooperation with the US to find alternative sources as well as make more efficient use of oil. China is now doing without the 4 million barrels it was getting from Hormuz and has decided to do without these supplies altogether. For the UAE and Saudis to find alternative routes to get most of the oil out, UAE to increase output outside of OPEC to reduce prices. All of these actions are taking place and the ceasefire offered a breather for that to get established creating a new situation where if Hormuz remains unopened the rest of the world will be able to go on as before without being seriously affected. Better management of overall oil supplies is already taking place, inventories are building up, so that at some point Hormuz does not affect oil prices significantly. This is the best and most realistic option and the US, China, India, Japan, the EU, are going ahead with it. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
More than a retreat it gives the US, EU, India, China and the nations in Asia and Africa, Latin America most affected by higher oil prices and lower economic growth a time to pause and rethink dependence on the Gulf region for oil supplies. It is not mentioned in the media yet there has to be a link between the US president's visit to Beijing and Beijing's support for a normalized US China relationship, and offering its support for a settlement. This gives EU, China, India, Japan, and poorer nations in Africa, Asia, such as Pakistan, Turkey, Indonesia and Brazil, some relief from reduced access to oil supplies. US is also planning a supply from Venezuela to India to take pressure off oil supplies in Asia by offering Venezuela as an alternative source. China is in many ways joining the US to bring about a denuclearized Middle East, doing it in a quieter way with Iranian public opinion making a shift to put its economic development ahead of missile development. As the two sides have different interpretations and it is still only a Memorandum of Understanding it is not a situation where the US is sending billions of dollars to support the military in Iran as Obama had done. Attention will shift to the Iranian economy over the next 12 months.  US conveys that it has nothing to gain from wrecking the Iranian economy or nation as the Iranian people if avote were held today would clearly choose putting the economy first by huge margins considering the widespread protests in Iran in 2025 that started this crisis. The US naval blockade was effective and is always an option, with US and partners having greater experience in the situation presented by the narrow straits in Hormuz. Arab partners also acted with restraint and is itself an opportunity for Iran to change direction. China's making cuts of 3 million barrels a day in oil supplies from Hormuz is itself along with acceleration of renewable energy in both China and India is one of the dividends of this crisi. Another is the gradual shift to alternative supplies from other regions of the world so that Hromuz region can no longer dictate oil prices in the world. Accelerating Venezuelan and UAE, US, other oil and gas  supply growth will also put increase supply and renewables reduce  demand growth as a result of the crisis to break the hold on oil prices of the oil cartels of Qatar, and Saudis. As a transition fuel oil can be be kept below $50 a barrel, not at prices at the whims of the princes in the Middle East at the expense of the people of the Arab world from Egypt the most populous and Tunisia, Morocco, to the Muslim nations such as Turkey and Pakistan,Iran itself which bore the brunt of this Hormuz crisis. The US has several priorities including in its relations with oil cartels dominated Mexico that  brings drugs and people across US borders, with other nations in EU and Asia that have benefitted through deindustrialization in the US leaving it poorer across a vast part of America. Advancing objectives in one area such as denuclearization does not mean not addressing priorities at home and in relations with other regions. China shares American interest in denuclearization of the Middle East this should now be put to the test. It is an entirely different situation in 2026 than what weak leaders from Bush to Obama allowed to happen by  wars in the Middle East - the US naval blockades of 2025/2026 are entirely different in cost in terms of men and dollar investment and used to convey America's determination not to waste vital resources of the Nation. The best policy is not to pursue policy for absolute wins but make intelligent choices and in some situations pause to reflect on the best course of action and other ways to reach goals. By getting China and the US as world powers for denuclearization even though this is not vocally said, both gain and both will come up with solutions. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
BBC reports on Iran protests January 2026. Protests happened with students, with women periodically over the last two decades. Iran over the years since the monarchy in the 1880's and democratic movements (parliaments) in 1900's, monarchy in the 1930's and 1960's, socialist governments 1960's. Cold War and restored monarchy in 1970's, religious theocracy 1990's till today has gone through many different governments. It was part of the British Empire (that included India/Pakistan) and Russia's buffer region in the 18th and 19th century.  After economic sanctions from US and Europe the economy depends on sanctioned oil exports. Its defense operations divert much of the funding from oil based resources away from economic development . Much of that was a result of the anticolonial socialist ideologies that spread from North Africa (Algeria, Egypt) to Iraq and Syria that led to wars in Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan- which also led to Iraq's version the Baathist ideology invading Iran. Russia and the US have extracted themselves at much loss from these conflicts by 2025 and are posed at a historic rapprochement in relations. For Iran there is today no danger from the region or from European powers, and like the US the people and the country are asking questions about the economic and living conditions from so much in resources now diverted to external conflicts- like the US the people in the region of Iran and the entire Middle East apart from a few small oil rich regions with a tiny part of the overall population- maybe 5% in Qatar and UAE, and Saudi- feel the impact of little investment in rapid economic development of the overall region. A region with a population close to the European Union of 500 million but a tiny fraction of economic development investment for the vast majority of people in Egypt and other parts of North Africa and regions of Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Sudan. Most of the investment of $1 trillion is concentrated in the 10% of the population of over 500 million people in oil resource Saudi Arabia, UAE/Qatar monarchies, the rest languishing in war, and now meaningless- in terms of living standards- of anticolonial ideologies or militant religious ideologies, or internecine/ethnic conflict. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Hubbard and Erdbrink report on U.S. president Trump's visit to Saudi Arabia to begin a new chapter in relations with the Gulf nations and the Saudis. Under president Obama the U.S. distanced itself from the Saudis and the Gulf nations, preferring to pursue a policy of closer relations with Iran and signing the Iran nuclear deal. This included a policy of staying out of Syria to the point of turning down a decision to deploy U.S. airpower to maintain no-fly zones to protect refugees. Syrian government forces fighting rebels were supported by Iran. The new policy is dictated by the new conditions in the Middle East. The U.S. has sought since the presidency of Reagan to balance the power relations in the region. With the nuclear deal signed and Iran respecting the deal according to independent reports, the U.S. allied with Iran in the battle against Islamic State in Iraq,  a shift was needed to balance the support provided to Iran by Russia which worsened the refugee crisis in Syria. The Republican party and Mr. Trump were critical of the Obama Iran policy during the nuclear deal negotiations. The safety of Israel is also a factor as non-state actors were supported by Iran threatening Israeli security. For these reasons the shift is an effort to rebalance the relations in the region. The arms deal in its size and president Trump's statement that Iran had "fueled the fires of sectarian conflict and terror," can be seen as this rebalancing. A business aspect of the large arms deal is that it will promote job growth in the defense industry in the U.S.. Other countries including Germany have seen growth in their defense industry. This is not the best way forward for the Middle East, yet it is a way the U.S. and nations in the region are adjusting to realities- the collapse of the Arab Spring from within and without the help from outside, the sectarian conflict arising from the Shiite pushback from Iran following the Baathist and Sunni control of Iraq which collapsed with the U.S.invasion, where the majority of people are Shiite yet with a strong Sunni presence. Elections brought Shiites in power, leading to a Sunni response in the form of Islami State caliphate move into Mosul, Iraq's second largest city after Baghdad. A decade of conflict and the efforts by the Bush administration ended in failure and sectarian conflict, resulting in the U.S. policy of rebalancing in favor of Iran to negotiate the nuclear deal. In this sense the arms deal does not solve anything. A similar rebalancing under Reagan by arming one side, followed by arming the other, led to involvement with ground forces under president Bush. It only leaves the region poor after years of sanctions against Iran to the point where a NYT reporter was not sure whether it was safe to fly from Tehran to Mashad with Iran Air because of the lack of spare parts for the airline. War torn, with millions of refugees in Syria and Iraq, the region remains broken in many ways, waiting for a sensible non sectarian view to prevail in the interest of the people in the region. The election of Rouhani in Iran by 57% of the vote is only a sign that young people in the region given a chance would opt for a different course in future. The rest of Asia has moved forward and shows a path that can be followed. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Scott Shane of the NYT provides this exceptional account of how the ideology of Wahhabism on which the Saudi monarchy is based has influenced the evolution of Islam, but not in the way other religions have evolved into more moderate and open religions. Christianity evolved from the period of religious conflict, and evolved to the point that the basis of progress was based on education and technology in most of northern and southern Europe. Where the evolution did not take place because of more intolerant behaviours such as in Spain with the Spanish Inquisition and ideas from the medieval period, this development based on education and technology lagged severely behind.  Wahhabism developed as a result of a sect started by a religious cleric Wahhab in a poor desert region around Mecca and Medina, now the Saudi Kingdom, who sought the help of a tribal chief Ibn Saud. They used the religious-political alliance to gain tribal dominance in the region. Wahhabism sought to change Islam by banning worship and religious rites at tombs common in that period. It also as Brookings scholar William McCants cited here says, drew "sharp lines" and intolerance between believers and non-believers- all non-believers including other sects of Islam, Shiites, Christians. The movement spread throughout the region, but was crushed by the Ottoman Empire based in Istanbul, Turkey, by the 1850's, only to be revived in the 1920's following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. A Norwegian expert Heggenhammer cited here says clearly Islam did not benefit from the evolution that other religions had, and Wahhabism has slowed this evolution into and open, tolerant religion because of its "sharp lines" and intolerance of other faiths and ideas with the Wahhabism from a medieval perod. In India the British rule brought enlightenment thinkers (John Stuart Mill for example was a clerk for the British East India company). But no such change happened under Ottoman rule to inspire leaders like Gandhi and Nehru to setup a new constitution that made changes from medieval Hindu beliefs such as caste and religious practices based on superstition.  The development of an oil rich state in Saudi Arabia with the discovery of oil, and the dependence from 1950-2010 of the global economy, has led say experts to the export of the Wahhabist kind of Islam to other countries in Middle East and South Asia. This they say made the evolution to democracy and peaceful coexistence difficult or impossible in the region. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Obama visits Saudi Arabia in April 2016. President Obama presents arguments for forging "a cold peace" between Iran and Saudi Arabia after proxy conflicts in the Middle East. During the visit president Obama will encourage dialogue between Iran and Saudi Arabia, at a time when Saudis are skeptical about U.S. policies in the region. Saudi Arabia has reduced the economic gains to Iran from lifting of sanctions and entering the oil market by ramping up Saudi production to bring down prices. The situation also affects Russia and Venezuela.

LyrArc Article Gist
Bolton warns that the policy of negotiating with Iran has failed. He points to the dangers of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, with Saudi Arabia's intention to acquire a nuclear weapon in the rivalry between Shiite Iran and the Sunni led coalition led by the Saudis.

LyrArc Article Gist
King Salman appoints Mohamed bin Nayef, 55 years-old, as the deputy crown prince in Jan. 2015. The crown prince is Muqrin Abdulaziz, 69 years-old. Mohamed Bin Nayef is the son of the Interior Minister, who worked under his father from 1999 till he became the new Interior minister in 2012. Nayef has pursued an aggressive program to remove Al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia. By taking action against all dissent inside Saudi Arabia Nayef has also jailed human rights activists, including the flogging of a blogger critical of the government. The defense minister Prince Mohamed bin Salman, is a son of King Salman. King Salman was defense minister till he succeeded his half-brother Abdullah. Ali al-Naimi continues as Oil minister, a position he has held for decades. Saudi Arabia established a panel in 2006 to work with future kings after King Salman to appoint an heir to the throne. Even with the appointment of Nayef, a grandson of Saudi Arabia's founder, Abdulaziz ibn Saud, as deputy crown prince, the leadership of the country remains within a small number of princes of the royal family. Under the Obama administration the relations between U.S. and Saudi Arabia have become strained with president Obama's failure to intervene in Syria. The Saudi have pursued their own policies since then, in first Bahrain and then Egypt the Saudis supported the monarchy and the military respectively to maintain power in the face of the Arab Spring. The danger is that Saudi policies may be contrary to the U.S. position supporting freely elected governments and basic rights, particularly when it comes to suppression of all dissent including peaceful dissent and normal criticism of government, and yet with the rise of Islamic State the U.S. puts itself inadvertently behind these very policies. The Saudis would say this has happened because U.S. president Obama failed to support the effort for freedom in Syria and a transition in Libya and Iraq (with the added complication of Maliki's sectarian policies), creating a war torn neighborhood in which the Saudis had to act on their own. These are the hidden costs of the policy of the U.S. president for the U.S. and for the Middle East- more sectarianism with Shiites and Sunnis openly in conflict, reversal of hard won gains in Iraq, reversal of the Arab Spring except in Tunisia, war torn Libya and Iraq- with a withdrawal that never truly happened because it required a firmly guided transition period of support in the region with lower cost and involvement of an extended period leaving no room for reversal of gains. It leaves both the Saudis and the U.S. in a more precarious position than a decade ago....

LyrArc Article Gist
Karen Elliott House, a widely respected expert on Saudi Arabia, gives her assessment of the Saudi situation as the Obama administration completes a nuclear deal with Iran in July 2015. She says the Saudis have few options in the short term. She also points out that the unfreezing of $100 billion in assets of Iran by the end of 2015, and the lifting of economic sanctions, could exacerbate tensions in the Middle East if Iran uses the money to increase support to proxies in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia has a large population of young people and high youth unemployment, increasing political risks, says Karen House.

LyrArc Article Gist
This report by David Sanger in the NYT cites insiders in the Obama administration suggesting that the Saudis never really considered the peace talks in the region organized by Secretary of State Kerry as a serious effort with the escalation in the bombing by Russia, and other events including Iran's two ballistic missile tests. Turkey was drawn into the conflict with Russian bombing of ethnic Turkish groups at the border with Syria. By ignoring these events affecting Turkey, Saudi Arabia and other countries, the Obama administration appeared to be calling for a peace effort that seemed to have little prospect of succeeding. As Trofimov suggests in a separate report in the WSJ the Saudis were more focussed on winning domestic support from conservative Sunnis, seeing the Obama administration as ineffective on the issue of refugees from Syria and the conditions for the civilian population.

LyrArc Article Gist
Gen. Martin Dempsey took a cautious approach to U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Syria. He did not approve of the way Gen. McChrystal expanded U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, and the hasty manner in which the Iraqi army was trained under his predecessors leading to some commanders being appointed who later became members of sectarian death squads. Under his command the U.S. limited its role in Afghanistan and Iraq and handed more responsibility to local forces. Gen. Dunford who succeeded Dempsey as chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff for the U.S. follows the cautious approach set by Dempsey. Dempsey's approach extends to what he believes is an Heisenberg effect in physics where when you you observe or touch something it changes the way it functions and operates. For critics such as Senator McCain, who served in Vietnam as a pilot, if Dempsey did not want to intervene in some country, he could invent the reasons not to get involved. President Obama exceeded the caution exercized by Dempsey, leading to a situation where the U.S. after hasty action under a Republican president seemed to lurch in the opposite direction under his Democratic successor by not taking action where U.S. presence was needed, followed by a corrective course to make up for this....

LyrArc Article Gist
David Brooks of the NYT comments on the Hillary Clinton interview by Goldberg in the Atlantic magazine, where she criticized U.S. president Obama for a weak foreign policy and failure to act in Syria. Brooks says Obama's failure to act in the robust manner Clinton is advocating only leads Obama into situations where he is forced to act later as the situation deteriorates with more serious consequences for the U.S. By not acting in a timely manner the U.S. may be forced into greater involvement later, which makes Obama's "don't do stupid stuff" less of a sound idea than it appears. As Clinton points out not leading to better decisions in the same manner as the Bush-Cheney jingoistic policy making.

LyrArc Article Gist
Bernard Lewis's "The Arabs in History," is a short book which confirms Zakaria's point about the openness of Islamic societies before the 19th century, with some exceptions in certain periods. Most books or a quick look at Wikipedia shows us that the Renaissance in Europe in the 15th century got its boost from books by ancient Greek authors that were available in Arab societies long after they were forgotten in Europe. His point about Indonesia and India is also true to a large extent except for periods such as the one under Aurangzeb (17th c.). Muslim societies in British India (todays Pakistan and Bangladesh) experienced less social and educational reforms under the British than Hindu societies for various reasons leading to larger backwardness, illiteracy which breed extremist ideas. This is likely to change throughout North African Arab societies and South Asia in the next 50 years, especially with the modernization drive underway in India, which is likely to spread to other parts of the region. Islam as a missionary religion with force of arms spread in the 7th-9th century rapidly over Arab North Africa and parts of west Asia, and later to South Asia. Once established there were long periods of openness to ideas and books, and different cultures ( with the exception of preferences for Muslims), and a stress on commerce which inherently reduces religious vehemence, as the example of Britain shows. For this reason the current conditions in Islamic societies is more atypical than typical. A factor that has worsened it is that 19th c.-20th c. Islamic societies have put less emphasis on commerce and industry than historically seen in prosperous Islamic societies, on which more research is needed to understand why. Another factor is the impact of the interface with technologically and scientifically progressing Europe and America not becoming a learning experience for acquisition of this science and technology and making it one's own, a pattern seen in Buddhist societies of Japan in 19th c., South Korea in 20thc.,and China 21st c. Because Buddhism sprang from Hinduism or a response to Hindu ideas in India, India could be put alongside China for the 21st c. rapid assimilation of western science and technology making it one's own. When there is a violent collison between Japan and U.S. Admiral Dewey's ships, or China and British advances around 1900, the initial reaction of rejection is reversed with adoption of western technology and practices making it one's own. Similiar response in India. Islamic societies have had an extended period of rejection for reasons not fully understood even today. This is likely to generate the kind of internal debate about how to revert back to the usual mode of adoption in Islamic civilization, with the potential catalyst in India and other locations in the Middle East. The most respected German of the 19th century is Alexander Von Humboldt, a naturalist who advanced scientific knowledge, and a mentor to Charles Darwin in England, author of "Origin of the Species." Humboldt says- "There are no inferior races, we are all humans, and we are all destined to reach for and grasp liberty." That Humboldt spent most of his best years in Paris, France, which he compared to the provincialism in his native Berlin, goes to show how Humboldt, Darwin and Humboldt's friend Aime Bonpland of France, maintained close cooperation and friendship and anticipated the close cooperation in Europe since the second half of the 20th c., long before European politicians and governments grasped this. Commerce, science, travel, media and free exchange of ideas, are as favorable to progress as politics and ideology is inimical to it....

LyrArc Article Gist
The ruble goes from a low of 80 to the dollar in Dec. 2014 to 50 to the dollar by May 2015. The euro also strengthens against the dollar with weakening economic conditions in the U.S. leading to a reversal in the strength of the dollar.