World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Andy Burnham, Labour's Mayor of Greater Manchester on what the Labour party needs right now in May 2026 with the faltering leadership of Keir Starmer. Brexit will not be revisited. His program is to give the public relief from cost of living pressures in daily life, and do this faster than Starmer.  Reports in The Times of London show Burnham with strong support to win leadership of the Labour Party. Polls from You.Gov show Starmer has favorability rating from British public of just 23%. The Mandelson affair and appointment of Mandelson as Ambassador to the US after concerns were raised about his record further eroded public confidence. Starmer relied too much on the work and influence of his chief of staff, a young person who resigned and whose influence of removing key Labour working class representatives split the Labour party from its roots in working class neighborhoods. Previous leaders of Labour were ostracized and the party won the general election in 2024, but was much weaker than appeared. He is seen as lacking the vision of his own for Britain for the next decade to 2040. Andy Burnham is popular in the North of England, and has called for more power to go to local government across Britain from the London centric view of the last 4 decades. His redesign of the bus and transport system, the Bee network in the Manchester area is popular, after the sometimes failed  performance of privatization of water, transport and other infrastructure by the Conservative party governments. He has experience in running a large Metropolitan Area for three terms, as MP in a Parliament, and Cabinet experience as Chief Secretary of the Treasury, Health Secretary under Gordon Brown. He is one of the rare persons in British politics who has experience in all areas of government, including Shadow Home Secretary, that would make him a rare leader that Britain can use to build a better future for the people of Britain. With the experience in Greater Manchester giving him a headstart in the work of reviving Britain, something similar to the experience Narendra Modi gained in Gujarat state of India for three terms to lead India in 2014.  ...
dw.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Sanae Takaichi press conference with DJT at White House March 19 2026- there is no mention of Japanese help with clearing Straits of Hormuz. US Japan relations after the meeting of Takaichi and DJT at the White House appear to be in good shape. Japan will invest $73 billion in US investment projects in 2026 as part of the $550 billion commitment made at the time of the US Japan trade deal in 2025 under the previous LDP prime minister. Takaichi is coming with strong support in Japan after winning a landslide victory in the general election. Japan's main concern is the belligerent North Korea and China's posture in Asia as it relates to Taiwan. Agreements were reached on critical issues- to develop alternative supplies of critical minerals, to rebuild the shipbuilding industry which US and Japan had given up after dominating it for most of the 20th century. This is critical to ensure open navigation on the oceans of the world. Agreements on high tech and AI, and agreement to purchase Alaskan oil to cut Japan's 90% dependence on volatile Middle East supplies. Japan has managed Middle East supply by keeping over 254 days of inventory but this looks to be very risky as Germany learned from its dependence on Russian oil which went in the wrong direction under Merkel. Japan has released about 18% of its total reserve amount of the 254 days inventory (146 days in national reserves and 101 days in private mandated reserves). It uses 3.14 million barrels a day in 2026 down from 5.8 million barrels a day in 1996, using about half today through conservation and using renewable energy showing the potential for the US and Europe. Germany has cut oil consumption by a third in comparison from 2.9 mbd in 1996 to 2.0 in 2026. And the US remains stagnant with oil demand highest in 2005 at 20.5 mbd and 20 years later at 20.5 mbd mainly because 14mbd or 70% goes to cars and trucks on the road for 347 million people over continental spaces (compared to 297 million in 2005) for a reduction of oil use of 15%. ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
DJT MAGA factions in general support action in Venezuela and in Western Hemisphere for Monroe Doctrine, this includes J.D. Vance, Steve Bannon and Hispanic supporters from Cuba and Latin America in Florida. They support action to bring drug traffickers to justice in the Western Hemisphere. Essentially supporting the Monroe Doctrine that no colonial European or other foreign powers should interfere in the running of Latin America in the western democratic tradition set by Britain and the United States, and now popular throughout Asia and Latin America and Africa. The government in Venezuela say Canada and Britain is illegitimate and lost the 2024 election by a huge margin 30% or lower to 67% for the opposition under Machado and Gonzalez. And the drug trafficking by Maduro and his associates against the US is an offence that can be tried in US courts, is something Republicans support, and has general support in America. Worse drug trafficking to the European Union constitutes something the Europeans should be worried about because of its growing scale and damage to Europe. ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
After making headlines the issue of TikTok is no longer making news. Here is what has happened since- TikTok took the case to the Supreme Court after the Biden Administration's effort to bring it under US security with American ownership. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government. Social media helped Republicans and DJT in the election. DJT wanted TiTok to be an American company if it was to operate in US. China was opposed to this and would not allow ByteDance the owner of TikTok negotiate this-leading to an impasse. The DJT administration worked out a relationship  with China by September 2025 following tit for tat tariffs in May 2025. Xi's strategy was to put rare earths on the table after it had gained a 90% monopoly on rare earths processing technologies and supplies. Some supplies include a site in Greenland, so that the Greenland issue as opponents of US acquisition have made appear is not fiction. DJT Administration pulled back and negotiated a deal with China but realized how the US had left key gaps in its security which is why the Greenland issue came up in 2025. Similar to how Democrat president Harry Truman had done as the Soviets expanded influence in Greece and Turkey by 1948. Little of this making it to almost the entire US press and the entire European press, including Democrat Harry Truman's 1947 offer of $100 million ($1.5 billion in 2026) for Greenland, rights, title and ownership similar to Alaska purchase by Seward, and US Virgin Islands purchase in 1916 from Denmark.   The deal makes TikTok an American/ China investor run company with Byte Dance ownership of 20%, Oracle 15%, Silverlake US equity firm 15%, Abu Dhabhi (UK type) MGX 15%, and prior investors 30%. Prior investors are General Atlantic, SIG, Steve Case's Revolution with JD Vance having equity, Dragoneer, NJJ Capital. The company now valued at $20 billion based on 200 million US users. Yet this does not address the dangers and damage done by social media hours for youth in the US, endless hours from education shifted to phones and social media videos. Australia has banned it for under 16 year olds, UK parliament has voted to ban, French parliament has also voted for a ban, China has strict rules that protect its youth for use specifying hours and restrictions, leaving the US and India, Brazil vulnerable to dangers of social media. Strictly speaking You Tube is considered as social media even though it serves an information function, Facebook and TikTok are where a lot of the damage to education takes place in social media. US is entirely leaving its young people especially women unprotected. Once the fentanyl issue is tackled attention will again focus on these dangers to creating good citizens in the US  with civic education if democracy is to be preserved, something endless numbers of lobbyists- which even in Teddy Roosevelt's and FDR's, JFK's days have opposed- will again oppose.     ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The other title of this article in the NYT was "California's fading Political Machines and volatile race for Governor." Gone are the days when Pat Brown was able to put his son Jerry Brown in the race for governor, there are 9 persons running for governor of California in 2026. The current governor Gavin Newsom is said to be promoting his book in Nashville, Tennessee, where many Californians are moving with the inflated cost of housing in the state. Gavin Newsom's grand father gave a $5000 check to Pat Brown in 1943 to run for District Attorney, this report says citing the book. From that time Pat Brown became Attorney General and then governor of California in 1958, defeating Richard Nixon in 1962. In 1962 Pat Brown seemed vulnerable as his signature accomplishment setting up the UC system of college campuses and the water reservoir, tax increases to pay for this, were in their beginning stages and their lasting value not recognized at the time. Nixon from Whittier, California, was a former Vice President and was seen as likely winner. This toughly fought election created the Pat Brown myth and so called machine that helped his son Jerry Brown to two terms as governor 1975 to 1983, and again after serving as Mayor of Oakland and Attorney General to come back to governors race again in 2011 (because term limits came after 2011) and be governor again 2011-2018. Another way of looking at it is that in his last two terms it was also Jerry Brown's careful balancing of the budget and finances of the state, his environmental support, that made him a reliable figure for the public interest not just the political machine backing him.  California to be sure has had popular governors on both sides Reagan won in 1966 as governor of California to succeed Pat Brown. The Kennedys and Pat Brown are matched by the Reagan supporters in the state. In today's situation where China's dominance in industry and manufacturing has affected all parts of deindustrialized America, California is no exception, where much of the middle class has seen their savings eroded, the issues are different and the challenges are different. ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Twenty Democrat Governors meet with Biden on July 3, 2024. All says they support Biden. Governor Newsom put it this way- "I heard three words from the president tonight. He's all in. So am I." Newson said he was not just a defendor of the president, he was a passionate supporter of Biden. Most say those who can hear understand that his achievements are undeniable. Governor Whitmer said "He is in to win it. And I support him." Kamala Harris said "We will not back down. We will follow our president's lead." Governors from Minnesota and Maryland said "He had our backs during Covid. We have his back." The problem it appears upon closer look is that the media did nothing, nothing to question where it should ask questions about what is not in character with Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, Truman, Ike, not in character with the founders Jefferson, Adams and Washington. It did not look closely at what president actually said- only the delivery which can depend on the day- an educated media would never do this. The media's credibility today is the lowest it has ever been, on this basis the media including the largest television stations and the newspapers have failed, and failed the Nation. In the UK the media supported Brexit and failed the British nation, this is how the British people feel today as they go to vote in the general election on July 4th. It is the reckless behavior of the unelected media that is put to the real test in 2024. ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
BBC News provides a look at the first proposals of the Boris Johnson minority government to the European Union. This includes replacing the Irish backstop. The Irish backstop is a way set up by the EU and the previous UK government of prime minister May in negotiated agreement to prevent a hard border in Ireland. It means Britain would remain in the customs union with the EU after December 2022 if no agreement for withdrawal is reached by then. Conservative Party hard liners oppose it because they say it leaves the UK indefinitely in the customs union. The EU insists on this to protect the interests of a member state Ireland. The moderates in May's Conservative government agreed to it to keep the peace accord in Ireland. Boris Johnson wants to get rid of it, and his proposals include customs checks between Northern Ireland and Ireland which removes the free flowing border between the two Irelands, a major achievement of the Irish peace accords.  Which is why the negotiations could end up going nowhere, with each side presenting the other as the side that wouldn't negotiate terms of withdrawal. The Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National Party, and the Labor Party except for its leader Corbyn's neutral stance, oppose leaving the European Union. And parliament opposes leaving without a negotiated agreement pitting Boris Johnson against parliament and the opposition.  Another referendum or a general election would settle the issue with Boris Johnson thinking he can flip former safe Labor seats in working class areas in the north of England to win the election. Labor party's McDonnell says he has miscalculated and Labor party is buying time to organize an effective election campaign to get back the working class vote lost under Blair with his confusing Third Way that lost workers on the way.   ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mr. Trump's conflict with the Justice Department in the last weeks of his presidency to appoint a new Attorney General with intent to contest the results of the presidential election of 2020, is shown in this report in NYT. This created risks for American democracy. The cracks in social cohesion following four decades of foreign wars 1980-2021, irresponsible behavior of financial institutions leading to financial crises and impoverishment of America, incompetent elites, neglect of rural America, ceding of technology and competitive position to China, failure to fund education, healthcare and infrastructure, under presidents Reagan, elder Bush, Clinton,  Bush, Obama, led to a situation of revolt against the status quo by a maverick politician using a new and proven dangerous form of communication social media. Ultimately this put democracy at risk. Lessons from this are only now being learned as people in the Biden administration and outside of it reflect on what happened. In this WSJ report Mr. Trump is seen pressuring officials of the Justice Department to agree to appointment of a new Attorney General shortly after the election. This was seen as an effort to question the results of the 2020 presidential election. A leading senator on the Judiciary Committee says this would lead to "shredding the US Constitution to stay in power." Of this and also of four decades of neglect in America Washington has this to say in his first Inaugural Address on April 30, 1789- "The blessed religion revealed in the word of God will remain an eternal and awful monument to prove that the best institutions may be abused by human depravity; and that they may even in some instances be made subservient to the vilest of purposes. Should, hereafter, those entrusted with the management of this government, incited by the lust of power and prompted by the supineness or venality of their Constituents, overleap the known barriers of this Constitution, and violate the inalienable rights of humanity: it will only serve to shew, that no compact among men (however provident in its construction and sacred in its ratification) can be pronounced everlasting and inviolable- and if I may so express myself, that no wall of words, that no mound of parchment can be so formed as to stand against the sweeping torrent of boundless ambition on the one side, aided by the sapping current of corrupted morals on the other." ...
The Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Conservatives get a big boost from the 2021 budget. This budget increased the corporate tax to 25% by 2023 from 20% under previous Conservative governments of Cameron, and 19% under May. A survey by YouGov shows 55% of the British public thinks this budget is "fair," only 16% saying it is "unfair." This is the highest rating for any British budget since 2009. For Boris Johnson's Conservatives this means a 4% increase in popularity just in the last week up to 45% and Labour under Keith Starmer dropping 4% to 32%. This has opened a 13 point lead for the Conservatives likely to show up in the local elections coming up. This Conservative lead is higher than the 44% vote share for Boris Johnson's Conservatives in the general election.

The Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US Supreme Court hears arguments from D. John Sauer Solicitor General of the US on DJT Tariffs Wednesday, November 5, 2025. The Supreme Court will hear about a case brought by a small wine importing company with 19 employees. The US president used the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) that allows the president to impose tariffs. The IEEPA was introduced by president Jimmy Carter in 1977. It was used during the Iran hostage crisis. It has been used for the Venezuelan regime after elections were rigged with human rights violations, on Belarus as early as 2006, and on Mexico for drug cartels. This increases the responsibilities of the Justices of the Court as these sanctions have broad support of the American people. Tariffs were imposed on China for illicit fentanyl flows and a 25% tariff was imposed on Canada and Mexico under Executive Orders 14193, 14194, and 20% on China under Executive Order 14195 in 2025 for illicit drug traffic flows across their borders into the US. Illicit flows that has taken the lives in the case of fentanyl of more young people than were killed in the Vietnam, Korean and First World Wars combined.  For the reason that the economic aspect of tariffs now overlaps with trading partners abuse of basic rights of their largest trading partner the US in the case of Canada, Mexico and China not stopping such flows, the issue before the Supreme Court is basic to the US as a Nation to protect its citizens under these Executive Orders and IEEPA- not the kind of interpretation of the law the USC does for most or almost all of its cases. In 2025 a lot of the discourse is distorted and does not reflect the way citizens of the Nation should show concern for the welfare and safety of their fellow citizens in communities around them severely hurt by the scourge of fentanyl and other opioids making their way from other countries conducted by drug trafficking gangs outside the US.  Also relevant is that the tariffs are correcting trade deficits of $1 trillion of the world with China that threaten the economic security of the US, EU, India and other countries. Larger companies are moving their supply chains out of China to reduce concentration in China, impact on inflation is slight with 3.0 % inflation in September 2025. Smaller companies such as the wine company in this lawsuit are unable to do so. Most of the smaller businesses affected can be compensated with a fund from the tariffs revenue of $500 billion in 2025-2026. In this way the goals of the US as a Nation can be achieved of reducing the supply channels concentration in China, cutting supply chain concentration in China, for fair trade with trading partners EU/Japan, and for action on fentanyl and drug trafficking. Justice Roberts and his team have a lot to think about in this effort by the Nation to correct abuses that should never been allowed to happen. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The sense that one gets from the confirmation hearings for Pam Bondi is that after Matt Gaetz pulled out, Pam Bondi with her relaxed and thoughtful manner, her experience as Attorney General of Florida, is a decent choice. Most Senators felt she had the votes for confirmation. She brings the same skills for Republicans as Susan Wiles, DJT's chief of staff- she brings a calm demeanor to balance DJT's penchant for speaking in a blunt manner.  Pam Bondi confirmed that if nominated as head of FBI Kash Patel would report to her. Chris Coon accidentally calls her "Attorney General," and says he looks forward with working with her. Coons is the Senator from Delaware that was closest to president Biden.  Senators questioned Pam Bondi, a former Attorney General of Florida who has done work for companies seeking to work with DJT, and defended DJT in the first impeachment hearing, at her confirmation hearing in the US Senate. The back and forth exchanges happened with Democrats Adam Schiff and Hirano. With Padilla Pam Bondi was not given the opportunity to respond as he insisted on a yes or no answer. Democrats Schiff wanted to know whether she would investigate Lynn Cheney or Jack Smith. Bondi said she had not seen the file and it would e improper for to say anything without studying the matter, and that she did not want to drag politics into the work at the Justice Department as had been the situation before. Hirano asked if president Biden won the 2020 election. Pam Bondi responded that "Joe Biden is the president of the US."   ...
dw.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Annalena Baerbock, 44 years, of the Greens is Germany's nominee for president of UN General Assembly in 2025. She was nominated by chancellor Scholz. As a leader of the Greens and in the coalition government of chancellor Scholz she has tried to show that Germany is a modernizing nation and innovative more than is seen in its political class. As one of the youngest politicians she has presented Germany in a new way as a young face for Europe. DW.com shows the evolution of the Greens as a party since the 1980's. Baerbock joined the Greens at age 25, four years later in 2010 she was head of the Brandenburg state section of the party, becoming a board member of the European Green party. She is still only 44 years old. She studied public law and political science in Hamburg, and gained a Masters degree in international law at the London School of Economics, one of Germany's first leading politicians to study in Britain. She started studies for a Doctorate at the Free University of Berlin, which she left in 2013 as she was elected to the Bundestag. By 2021 Annalena Baerbock was with Robert Habeck co-leader of the party heading into the general election. At one point the Greens were polling 5 months before the 2021 election at 27% with Annalena Baerbock running for chancellor against Armin Laschet of CDU and ahead of the CDU by 3 points in Sonntag poll. The Greens came in at 15% of the vote in 2021 dropping slightly to 12% in 2025. This time the Greens will sit in the parliamentary opposition headed by Robert Habeck. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
British prime minister Theresa May makes a bid for working class votes in the 2017 election, just as the Labor party under Jeremy Corbyn announces its own manifesto seeking working class votes. May has proposed increasing the minimum wage to 60% of median earnings by 2020, and increased funding for the National Health Service by 8 billion pounds over 5 years. Corporate taxes will be reduced from 19 to 17% compared to Labor Party raising it to 26% under Corbyn's manifesto. Some of the Labor Party's supporters in the north of Britain are leaving the party because of dissatisfaction with Labor's leadership.

Buy Side from WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
With Labour leading in polls Mr. Johnson faces a no confidence motion in parliament after 53 Tory members called for the motion. No elections are planned before Jan 2025. There are no choices for the Tories other than Mr. Johnson who could hold his broad coalition of working class districts in the north of England and affluent districts in London. Mr. Johnson has also taken England through the pandemic, vaccination drive, and pandemic aid programs to help the UK recover, which he reminded Tory members of parliament.  The partygate scandal refers to parties that Mr. Johnson says never happened but took place during the worst part of the pandemic which have created an impression of callous behaviour and disregard of rules. The Conservatives face another problem in that the US and the EU including countries such as Denmark, Germany and France are moving in a direction that favors leaders who are promoting a revival of manufacturing locally, creating local jobs instead of job shifting overseas, increasing minimum wage, and promoting interests of workers and families. Labor had lost credibility during the Blair years similar to SPD losing credibility during the Schroder years, France's Socialists losing credibility under Hollande, and the Democrats under Clinton-Obama, and a general loss of credibility of socialist leaders who failed to work for the interests of workers and families. Biden, Scholz, the German Greens under Habeck, and French under Melenchon are changing this today wtih a new and genuine commitment of respect for the dignity of workers and families, and women. There may be a sense of unease among Tories about how long the working class districts in the north of England will vote Tory when no investments are being made to fulfill the promises Boris Johnson has made. Yet Tories have no alternate leader and may be stumbling their way into the remaining part of their period in office as Britons look for a new future where the massive investments needed in manufacturing locally and in infrastructure take place to benefit workers and families. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Emmanuel Macron graduated from Sciences Po University in 2004 with a degree in public affairs. He joins the Finance Ministry as an inspector and then buys himself out of government service contract by 2008 to join a private bank. He arranges an acquisition from Nestle and other business deals during this period. In 2012 he is appointed as deputy secretary general for the president's office after Francois Hollande a socialist is elected to the presidency. In 2014 he is offered the position of Minister of Industry and Digital Affairs in the second Manuel Valls government. He makes some changes to French government but opposes the wealth tax or tax on business, and is generally pro-business, though he acts as a member of the Socialist party.  He uses this period to build momentum for his own run for the presidency as support for Hollande falters having lost support from his working class base with Macron and Valls inspired changes.  Macron finally announces he will run for the presidency forming his own En Marche movement which he finances with his own fund raising. Throughout this period right up to the election in 2017 Macron has not run for public office. When he wins the presidency in that year he lacks the experience needed as the youngest president in French history at the age of 39. Like another young president Obama he handles his public image with the media for his En Marche movement promising to unblock France. This public image and his lack of experience makes him impervious to the social changes going on in France that lead to the yellow vest protests in 2018. This is a period when there are changes in the midwest as workers in Michigan and other midwestern states turn away from Hillary Clinton and Obama.  French workers are in the position of workers in the US with the decline of manufacturing, much of it shifted with the supply chain to China and Japan, and the gap opening between rural and urban tech educated areas. Macron follows Obama's quick rise from Senator to run for president yet lacks experience, and lacks sufficient grasp of the social changes with loss of manufacturing, the wide gaps between rural and urban tech educated people, conditions in the rural and farming areas. Macron survives this period, is reelected in 2022 with the help of socialist Melenchon voters. He says he will govern differently, less distant from average Frenchmen, but his instincts are to push for pension reform. At a time of cost of living crisis, and when the French budget office says the change in pension from 62 to 64 was not critical at the present time when inflation was hitting the public after the pandemic. Macron does this by Article 49 in the way he has done under the Manuel Valls government, by executive action alone. This time he faces a no confidence motion in parliament in March 2023 following some of the largest protests France has seen in years, with two thirds of the French according to FR24 opposing the change in pension law. Women see this as coming at a time when age discrimination hurts their chances of earning a living after 50 years of age.  Age discrimination is widespread in France, in a way it is not in Germany, say reports in the NYT. And with the cost of living crisis acts as a major hurdle for the average French person, if pensions are delayed without addressing these cultural issues in France. The result is that the protests have substance and Macron is seen as not sensitive to this at a time when he lacks a majority in parliament. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Does a 10% reduction in tariffs on China with the October 30 2025 agreement- made in Busan South Korea at APEC meetings- make a difference for companies relocating from China? It only does for smaller companies who are stuck with Chinese sources. Larger American companies prefer to diversify their supply chain and continue to relocate part of their factories to Vietnam, India and other countries knowing that the tariffs game will end up with allies EU, Japan and India in the 10-15% tariff range as a concession to US for putting up with trade disadvantages and job losses 2000-2025. China's will still be at 47% in comparison and the fentanyl issue causing serious questions to be asked by the American people which have not been grasped in China or even in the US by companies and politicians.   Does it affect the urgency and general shift out of China? The fentanyl issue is unlikely to change and it is likely to do lasting damage to China's credibility to a degree that it not clearly understood in China, and even not fully grasped even in the US today because of the sheer size of the number dead- more young Americans dead from fentanyl than in the Korean, Vietnam and First World Wars combined. Other issues are technology that has been transferred without a proper assessment of the importance to national security, the need to shift the manufacturing base back home that US industries have inadvertently and carelessly shifted to China in the disastrous Bush and Obama years 2000-2016, and for the jobs, the wages, and cost of living concerns when supply chains are outside one's control. This article asks the question about tariffs on India and Brazil as being contradictory and showing a lack of consistency in tariffs. India is compared to China with India facing a 50% tariff because of Russian oil purchases, and Brazil a 100% tariff related to treatment of former president Bolsonaro even though US has a trade surplus with Brazil. One expects that at some point India and the US will come to an agreement that lowers the tariffs in a way that was done with the European Union to bring it closer to 10%. China's tariff to be sure is still around 47% dropping from 57% a concession for rare earths and for the upcoming elections and economic concerns not because of policy intent which has not changed on  strong action for fentanyl which is also part of the Appeal to the People in the DJT base.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ investigations of Facebook and Instagram showed how these social media companies business activity was damaging to young women's health in the US, Europe and other countries. Because of the reach of social media companies into the lives of millions of young people the damage was serious and extensive. This report in the WSJ describes the activities of management at Facebook and the resignation of one of the key executives from burnout herself. This WSJ report says that during the WSJ series on the investigations this and other key executives remained silent on the issues facing young women for mental health in the use of Facebook products.  One WSJ report in 2021 said that company documents showed Facebook knew that the company's products were toxic for teenage girls. Other issues emerged in the WSJ investigations such as the Outrage Algorithm which the WSJ says was made by tweaking some aspects of the company's algorithm as a way to counter dropping user engagement. This led to much angrier discourse on Facebook according to WSJ and other reports. The experiences at Facebook reflect the general experience of this period in 2000-2015 when business management shifted to an entirely different conception of business that ignored the importance of human values in the blind pursuit of rapid growth, profits to make acquisitions of smaller companies for further growth creating monopolistic firms. This extended to disruptions of democratic process with the Cambridge Analytica access to records of data of 87 million Facebook users as reported in WSJ, that were used to target social media users in the period leading to the 2018 election. With such activities the risks could be seen to the democratic process itself in addition to mental health by the emergence of social media in the short period of a dangerous decade 2010-2020, when there was little or no regulation of this medium.   ...
Hindustan Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The full text of the letter is given here. In this letter the U.S. sets out some important facts about events that happened during the coronavirus crisis during the crucial 4 month period from December 2019 to March 2020. Every week lost in this time due to reasons of a lack of transparency, openness meant hundreds of thousands of people more infected and tens of thousands of deaths worldwide. There are questions of transparency, of openness and this raises questions about the manner in which the World Health Assembly operates with hundreds of small countries in Africa and Asia having votes equal to that of the U.S., India, Brazil, Mexico with votes taken of over 200 countries. The entire election process can now be seen as questionable, when over a billion people in one country alone such as India or hundreds of millions in Brazil and Mexico would have to bear the consequences of poor decisions made by small countries that can be swayed in one direction or another based on political bias and other considerations that have nothing to do with global health.  At the conclusion of the letter by the U.S. to the current WHO shaped by a controversial election in 2017 the following is stated about the standards set by Gro Harlem Brundtland and which helped the world prevent the SARS crisis which originated in China in 2003 from spreading to the large countries of the world India, Brazil, Mexico, and other such countries in Asia and Africa, Latin America, and the U.S. European Union. "In 2003, in response to the outbreak of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in China, Director-General Harlem Brundtland boldly declared the World Health Organization’s first emergency travel advisory in 55 years, recommending against travel to and from the disease epicenter in southern China. She also did not hesitate to criticize China for endangering global health by attempting to cover up the outbreak through its usual playbook of arresting whistleblowers and censoring media. Many lives could have been saved had you followed Dr. Brundtland’s example." Even this does not come to grips with the flawed way in which the election of WHO head is done. It can no longer be relied on when there is the danger that lack of transparency can emerge in the WHO leadership itself because of a flawed process. It risks endangering the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions in countries such as India, Brazil, Mexico, as well as in the relatively small countries of Africa and Latin America where even basic water supplies are at risk but which could tilt elections at the World Health Assembly. Consider that a cyclone just hit the Indian state of West Bengal and Bangladesh on May 20 just as the coronavirus pandemic is spreading. That this region of 1.5 billion people had just 2 votes out of over 200 cast at the World Health Assembly in 2017 shocking. And even these votes cast based on old geopolitical considerations not how good the candidate is, and how good the country he is coming from is in terms of its record  on public health. The irony here is that private foundations in the advanced countries in the U.S. and Europe some of whom are major donors to WHO did not think that more experienced candidates in their own countries with a better record of public health such as in France or Germany are better qualified, in a flawed NGO support mentality left from the Clinton years. Basically the people in these large countries such as India, Brazil, Mexico were disenfranchised, when the austerity policies were consuming the European Union, and the U.S. had just elected a new administration itself groping for ways to reverse years of neglect of public services and infrastructure priorities. They would trust good leaders no matter where they come from, who have a record of transparency, leadership, and all the values we cherish together no matter where we come from. ...
POLITICO Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
History will see the lack of working on a bipartisan basis from the beginning of the Trump and Biden terms to stop illegal migrants and fight CMC (Canada, Mexico and China) on fentanyl flows as a blot on both parties. A remarkable change has happened in a matter of 100 days in Canada's stance on immigration and fentanyl flows. Trudeau now calling for eradication of fentanyl, his deputy prime minister saying Canada has more fentanyl deaths per capita than the US because of smaller population, and the need to wipe it out off the face of North America. The Canada Conservatives generally support DJT. The Trudeau Liberals have shifted policy to support DJT policies on immigration and fentanyl flows. In general Canada is making a pronounced shift towards support of the US position on immigration.  It is not just DJT policy as closing the border was part of the agreement agreed by Biden in 2024 with Republicans in Congress led by Lankford-Graham-McConnell which was not passed because it was too close to the election. One can only say the Covid pandemic, vaccination shortfalls, failures of supply chain distracted Biden from acting early and similar to DJT on the first phase of immigration action on illegal migrants committing offenses. The release of illegal migrants across the US is something that Democrats will years from now see as a major error in its policies. History will see the lack of working on a bipartisan basis from the beginning of the Trump and Biden terms to stop illegal migrants and fight CMC (Canada, Mexico and China) on fentanyl flows as a blot on both parties. ...
dw.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Munich Security Conference is being organized by Christoph Heusgen, the conference chair, who was an adviser to Angela Merkel and previous German  Representative at the United Nations. It will be held Feb 14-16 at the Bayerischer Hof hotel in Munich. JD Vance will be attending for the US with alarge delegation including Keith Kellogg US DJT envoy to Ukraine and Zelensky of Ukraine. German federal elections are on Feb. 23, 2025 with CDU's Merz holding a lead. Pete Hegseth Defense Secretary is not attending the conference. Hegseth has expressed views skeptical about Ukraine. Mark Rutte, the former Dutch PM is attending as Secretary General of NATO. The Munich Security Conference Report cites DJT and says- "Indeed, the notion of 'resource scarcity' has become a central premise of Republican foreign policy thinking." Germany barely spends 2% on defense. DJT wants to see 5%. DJT's comments are published in the Munich Security Report- "We were being ripped off by European nations both on trade and on NATO." "If you don't pay, we're not going to protect you." ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Tom Wright shows the results of an examination by the WSJ of the operations of 1Malaysia Development Fund BhD, setup in 2009 for economic development. This report shows lack of transparency and use of the state owned and operated fund to indirectly help the ruling UMNO party and prime minister Najib Razak in the tight 2013 Malaysian general elections. The 1MDB fund is becoming a huge controversy in Malaysia as the former head of the UNMO party and prime minister for 22 years Mr. Mahathir Mohammed, and the opposition parties in Malaysia, are questioning the lack of transparency at 1MDB fund and misuse of funds. Prime minister Najib Razak is chairman of the board of advisors of the fund. The problem is serious because of the $11 billion in debt of the fund- and the need to reschedule debt repayments. The financial report of the fund of March 31, 2014 shows interest costs taking up half of revenues. A $260 million emergency credit was provided by the government in 2015, and a Abu Dhabi state fund provided $1 billion, in an effort to meet loan repayments. Moody's Investors Service and private investment funds see the government eventually coming up with a bailout of 1MDB. Malaysia's currency the ringgit has lost 6% of its value in the first 6 months of 2015, and foreign investors are taking funds out of the country. On the questions of transparency the WSJ examination shows a questionable deal with the Genting Group which owns a casino in New York, and $ 4 billion casino in Las Vegas, plantations, real estate, and power plants in Malaysia. In one deal between Genting and 1MDB, a 75% interest in a power plant near Kuala Lumpur was bought at highly inflated prices, according to the WSJ examination. Genting is shown to have helped the UMNO in the Najib 2013 election campaign. 1MDB has also raised money just before the 2013 election with a $3 billion bond offering arranged by Goldman Sachs in March 2013. The United Malays National Organization (UMNO) party which openly favors Malays has ruled Malaysia for all the years since independence from Britain in 1957. In the 2013 election a key battleground was in Penang state which went to the opposition Democratic Action Party, and the UMNO failed to get a majority of the vote. It held onto government through electoral rules that gave a higher number of parliamentary seats for the rural areas where UMNO draws large support. The situation in Malaysia is unusual because power has shifted to opposition parties in most of the countries in the region- Indonesia, Philippines following dictatorships, Pakistan and Bangladesh following military rule, India and Japan following a long spell under the Congress party and the LDP. Only in Malaysia and Singapore have the UMNO and the PAP party of Lee Kuan Yew held on for almost 6 decades, by keeping opposition parties weak and not allowing a two party system to develop. Indonesia, another Muslim country, has moved ahead with free and fair elections with the recent election of Widodo as president, leading to significant efforts to improve infrastructure development and other parts of the economy. Experts say healthy two party systems and free elections provide economic benefits by giving voters a choice between competing economic plans for the future, as is seen in the higher future growth prospects under new leadership for India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, the Philippines, and including Japan with the shift back to the LDP with Abe. Corruption, lack of transparency, and poor management of the economy, are major issues with entrenched parties. ...
WSJ Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wilson Center Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Anton Harder in this Wilson Center publication of research uses correspondence between Jawaharlal Nehru and his sister Vijaylakshmi Pandit ambassador to the US in 1950, to show that the US made an offer for India to take a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. India had supported two resolutions on June 25, and June 27, first condemning the invasion by North Korea and second the organizing of a UN force of 29 countries to push back the North Korean invasion. Even though the US is not seen as actively engaging with India during that period and seeing through British eyes the colonial policies of encouraging  different powers in South Asia, that may not be true.  Who was India's foreign minister in 1950? Jawaharlal Nehru was both prime minister and foreign minister till 1964, which means there was less discussion of foreign policy than happens today during the Ukraine invasion with Jaishankar a career diplomat with 30 years experience, Rajnath Singh, and Mr. Modi, in talks with president Biden recently, and in further discussions Modi had with EU's Von der Leyen and UK's Boris Johnson, Kishida of Japan. Who was India's defense minister in 1950? Baldev Singh, a Sikh independence struggle leader was Minister of Defense for 1947-52 and tackled partition of Punjab and Kashmir issues. The rest of the years to 1957 when India faced the Chinese invasion of Tibet India's defense minister was also for most of the period Mr. Nehru, except Ayynagar in 1953, and Kailash Katju in 1955 and 1956. The controversial V.K. Krishna Menon was Defense Minister from 1957 to 1962, when Indian defenses were further neglected leading to the Chinese invasion of India in 1962, and his replacement by Yashwantrao Chavan. The purpose of this is to look back at what happened in earlier periods to understand where India stands today- and what choices it makes today. Clearly the US was looking for allies then and now. Nehru saw things from his own reading of history seeing China and India as both suffering from western invasion, not realizing that China's experience under Mao was different- that of Japanese invasion and bombing of China's major cities not just colonization of Hong Kong and other ports for trade under British trade based policies in 1850-1900. Thus a Communist Chinese version of China's defense involved taking over border regions such as Tibet putting China in direct and open opposition to India. Nehru never really grasped what was happening in Tibet and the war China fought against the Nationalists. American general Stilwell loved China deeply and had an understanding of its people as shown in Tuchman's account in her book Stilwell and the American Experience in China 1911-1945. Stilwell during that war had a better understanding of China, the strengths and weaknesses of Mao's China and of the Nationalists under Chiang, than Nehru. Some of these errors post 1950's and a concentration of foreign, defense and embassy positions in the person of Mr. Nehru and of Nehru family member such as Mrs. Pandit led to the Indian failure to act on Tibet and see it as see it for what it was -facing a Communist Mao led China that had fought the Japanese invasion as different from Bodhidharma's China of the history books. Bodhidharma's China will outlast Mao's China, yet it is Mao's China that India faces today. This also tells us that India has to think in new ways- as Lincoln said during a period when America was also making its own progress as an industrial nation in the 1860's. "The dogmas of the quiet past are not adequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise to the occasion. As our case is new, we must think anew, we must act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and we shall save our country." India's values are values of democracy heightened not just by Mohandas Gandhi's ideas with Hind Swaraj written in 1910 just as powerful in 2022, but also by the heights of Ladakh where elections are held in remote regions of the Himalayas. India's values are values that are also shared in the best that America has in its values and culture and in the defense of freedom.    ...
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This election is seen as a turning point for Britain. The Liberal-Conservative coalition has come up with a radical plan to cut spending and decentralize services in the areas of education, policing and health care. The plan is to cut the deficit quickly from 11% of GDP in 2009-10, to 2.1% in 2014-15. By comparison the outgoing Labor government's plan was to balance the budget by 2016-17. And the fiscal impact of Labor's budgets would have been 4% by 2014-15, compared to the Cameron government's looking at 6.3%, with larger and accelerated cuts in spending. It is something of a gamble by the Tory-Liberal government. If the severity of the cuts in spending stifle growth, then Plan B will be needed. The size of the cuts are not seen as feasible. With growing interest payments with the large borrowing by the government, and no real cuts in healthcare spending, departments delivering public services in Britain face cuts of 25% by 2014-15. With defense and schools limited to cuts of 10%- other departments would face cuts of 33%. According to the Institute of Fiscal Studies one way to reduce the severity of these cuts in department budgets, would be to find additional savings in the welfare budget. In June, Mr Osborne, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, announced 11 billion pounds in savings in this area (with half coming from using a different measure for inflation in calculating benefits). Additional savings of 14 billion pounds in welfare budgets, can reduce the size of the cuts needed in departmental budgets to 20%. One example cited is means-testing payments that go to the affluent as well as to poor people, such as child benefits, and cutting winter-fuel payments. Tories and Liberals agree on the need to decentralize government and services in the areas of schools, policing and the NHS. In schooling the idea is to give more choices to parents and children. Current schools can apply for academy status and new "free schools" will be run be non-profits, charities, churches, and parents. These schools will have freedom to set pay, select curriculum, and still receive state funding. In policing, the idea is to have directly elected police and crime commissioners for every constabulary in England and Wales. The elected commissioners would appoint constables and determine budgets and priorities. For the National Health Service the move is to give groups of general practitioners a significant role in the delivery of health care. ...

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us