LyrArc Article Gist
Nuclear arms control SALT treaties expire Feb 2026 - need for new negotiations as the treaties were obsolete, did not include China, smaller nuclear weapons, and weapons from space. The SALT arms limitation treaty was first signed in 1972 by Brezhnev with Nixon. These treaties went through a second version and were renewed. The US no longer thinks this is relevant as China is not included, and smaller nuclear weapons, ones from space are not included and new negotiations are the best way to conduct true arms limitation. An accompanying video in NYT by David Sanger goes into these aspects of talks. Rafael Gross, head of IEA International Atomic Agency, says- You wouldn’t negotiate the same treaty again. There are new technologies that are not covered by the treaty — hypersonic missiles, undersea nuclear weapons, space weapons. And there are many other countries that, for one reason or another, feel now as if they may need a nuclear arsenal of their own.” This is the reason. It also happens that in 2026 US and Russia could coordinate their efforts, so that new US weapons may be needed as other risks could emerge from other places. There are smaller nuclear powers and new nations that might develop nuclear weapons as the US nuclear umbrella may be seen as not fully dependable. This new thinking would be that US and Russia may not see themselves as adversaries but work together to prevent nuclear risks from other sources. This is also why the US (and Russia) may want to wind down smaller regional conflicts, reduce their reliance on their own alliances, so that nuclear cooperation between nuclear powers US, Russia, China, and India may lead to control of nuclear weapons in a larger sense from space and from smaller countries that might develop nuclear weapons as has happened in Iran, which might create new risks that cannot be managed. A belligerent North Korea could lead to South Korea and Japan developing a nuclear weapon. This is also why the Ukraine conflict has run its course and it is in no one's interest to let the Nordics or Britain continue the conflict. The US, Russia, China, India, Brazil should not let middle or smaller powers continue regional or historical conflicts, and promote settlement through peace talks of such conflicts, as it inevitably leads to damaging the interests of billions of people around the world in peaceful cooperation and tackling challenges that affect the quality of life. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
DJT calls for Iran to end nuclear program Feb 19 2026, at first Board of Peace meeting in Washington DC. The need for a safer world without the nuclear proliferation to smaller states that increases risks of nuclear war, to North Korea, Pakistan, and Iran. This also means that the US Russia's, China's and India's policy needs to shift to cooperation not just on arms limitation, but also in the area of preventing the spread of nuclear weapons to smaller states. One idea needs to be dispelled the idea that a state gains from its disproportionate use of the country's income and resources to develop nuclear weapons as has happened in Iran, Pakistan, and North Korea, where this has resulted in impoverishment of the country. Another that retaining nuclear weapons would have put Ukraine at an advantage, that states are better off keeping nuclear weapons technologies and weapons for the survival of governments. The world is going through a difficult period- it took many centuries of hardship for China, India, (five centuries since 1500) and other countries to modernize and industrialize, and no one wants to see everything put at risk in the coming generations. Europe and America also have a lot at stake with the countries being poor for most of the period before the 1950's and industrialization. All the achievements of science and technology, all of modern life are at risk of disappearing with this one threat. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US and Iran accept Pakistan's mediation of the war with a 2 week ceasefire and opening of Straits of Hormuz- April 7 2026. The mediation by prime minister Sharif of Pakistan gave both sides in the war a way to back down. Both sides agreed to talks in Islamabad, Pakistan. As a partner of Pakistan, China may also have a role in setting up a settlement as China and Japan have the most to lose from the Straits of Hormuz being closed, oil prices rocketing up to $115 and higher, and even a prolonged shutdown of Hormuz Straits. Both China and Japan get 90% of their imports from Hormuz Straits. Oil prices drop to the $100 level from $115 after the announcement of talks in Islamabad. This is not a long term settlement. After the two weeks US president meets president Xi of China in Beijing shortly afterwards on May 14-15. It is likely that preparations for that trip will involve China and Pakistan working together to get the US and Iran to agree to an extension of the ceasefire. One outcome of this war is as Le Monde has noted- the unreliability of Hormuz supplies and shift to imports from US and Venezuela and other parts of the world for fossil fuels. And with this a renewed effort to reduce the fossil fuels needed by accelerating renewable energy supplies in Europe, India and China. More attention will also be focused on reducing the proliferation of nuclear weapons by all major powers. Removing US involvement in NATO may also turn out to be positive in some ways to bring Russia and US as nuclear powers to better working relationships, and reduce the nuclear arms race and weapons race. For Europe it means meeting needs of Ukraine and improving military capabilities. The overall result may be positive for all countries. The Middle East region will be seen as one in which no powers should get involved in and the Middle East will also find it has squandered its valuable oil dividend in five decades of wars and mismanagement and fall behind the rest of Asia and Europe, the US in economic progress and development. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The 28 Point Peace Plan offers a basis for further work to arrive at an agreement acceptable to Ukraine and to the European Union, is the view emerging at the G20 talks in Johannesburg, South Africa. The leaders of Finland, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Italy and Spain met on Saturday, November 22 2025. Separately Leyen and the EU council president Costa meet with Meloni of Italy and Macron of France on Saturday after conversations with Zelensky on Friday.  British prime minister Starmer has this view of the 28 Point US plan negotiated with Russia-  “There is only one country around the G20 table that is not calling for a cease-fire, and one country that is deploying a barrage of drones and missiles to destroy livelihoods and murder innocent civilians.” Ms. Von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, says-  “Ukraine can count on us because this is not only an aggression against Ukraine, but it is an aggression against the principles of the U.N. charter." “It’s on European soil. Therefore, we will support Ukraine for as long as it takes.” Macron of France commended American efforts to reach a peace deal but said EU nations would work with Ukraine to map out a plan for way forward in 48 hours.  "What is at stake is Ukrainian sovereignty and European security.” It is this aspect of European security that may be the reason the EU and Germany may decide to modify the plan to offer a counter proposal on several points. One on limits to the size of Ukraine's defense forces to ensure its defense. Another on the stationing of forces by NATO in a peacekeeping role in Ukraine as proposed earlier. Third on the ceding of territory now in the hands of Ukraine so that these parts of Ukraine can remain independent after 4 years of ragged defense. Germany under CDU Merz and with Pistorius of SPD at Defense in a strong coalition government may be the deciding factor as Merz has already set the goal for the Bundeswehr to become the strongest army in Europe, with plans and action to prepare for this transition to defend European interests. It is true that Ukraine is at a difficult point yet if the Europeans see this as a "capitulation" and a US DJT deadline of one week to push this through Europeans may come up with a counter offer that includes these points that would make it clear that they are not an obstacle for peaceful resolution of this conflict. The history of Europe shows that in such situations with most of Europe on one side and Russia or some other major European power on the other side, eventual settlement ends up with all sides making some concessions, and in no way seen as "capitulation." Asian powers China and India have been pulled out of the conflict to a large degree in 2024-2025, with US shifting to a neutral position. Making this a purely European conflict with the Russian economy mobilized for wartime yet facing all the nations of Europe led by Germany, France and the UK in a transition towards military preparedness and unwilling to see any form of capitulation. In such a situation the larger economies and resources of the EU could effectively counter a Russian threat leading to a settlement that is better for all parties to the conflict.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
  Newly elected US president says he wants to end the Ukraine war and save lives- 300,000 dead, twice that number wounded. The Wall Street Journal conducts this important interview with Retired Brigadier General Kimmett on Ukraine. He says- the Ukrainian goal of restoring sovereignty over eastern Ukraine is unrealistic. Did European Union and American leaders making a principle of sovereignty of borders, and then applying it over the Donetsk Luhansk region of eastern Ukraine which share Russian culture and language, make an error.  About 4/5th of Ukraine is away from the battlefield frontlines and not involved in the war. Ukrainians in younger ages 18-29 are needed to rebuild Ukraine and same to rebuild Russia after the war with serious losses on all sides. Europe does not have the excess capacity, the industrial capacity and capabilities to supply arms and other materials to Ukraine. The newly elected US president says he wants to end the war and his goal is to save lives- about 300,000 dead and twice that number wounded. He also wants to save US strained resources with DJT saying every visit of Ukraine leader costs US $60 billion. Ukraine can hold intact its positions through 2025. But the point of prolonging the war is the issue when the goal of restoring sovereignty over eastern Ukraine and Crimea is unrealistic, and won't happen. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Germany's SPD Deputy Chancellor says in Kiev on August 25, 2025 after the abortive effort by DJT in Alaska for peace talks that improved Russia -US relations as two leading world nuclear powers but did not have the basics in place for Ukraine- Russia direct talks, with Putin asking for territory in the east. "In the three and a half years that this war has been going on, we have always shown that we are not ducking away, but stand by the side of the Ukrainians. And that will also apply to security guarantees."  The big change is that the SPD under Klingbeil in Germany is now working with CDU's Merz to build up Germany's defense forces to act as a deterrent for Europe. There is a change in the mood in Germany and in Europe, from Sweden and UK , France, Italy, for concerted action in Europe that was not seen before. By taking on responsibilities for Europe with 2-5% defense expenditures this has removed the differences between the US and Europe. It means a prolongation of the war but also means this may lead to a stronger Europe, better Russia- US relations, and a Russian and Ukraine more willing to come to a peace agreement based on terms where no side appears to be the loser. Klingbeil added- It is important to have a "really strong Ukrainian army that is also capable of defense. And the second thing is that armaments production is also being ramped up here in Ukraine as well, thereby putting Ukraine in a position to defend itself and deter attacks." If European history since 1400 is any guide when the powers on either side were eventually counterbalanced the power that took a an aggressive position early had to settle for a peace settlement with both sides not appearing the loser. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
DJT was asked if China's celebration of Victory Day with Russia recently in Tianjin had any message for the US. He said he did not see it that way, that US has good relations with China. In this context the Smithsonian Museum exhibit on military history of the US shows a real aspect of the World War II in loss of life- Russia 17 million dead, China 11 million dead, Germany 10 million dead, Poland 5 million dead, Japan 2.5 million dead, US 1 million dead, UK 800,000 dead. Russian and Chinese losses of 28 million dead are 15 times the losses of US and UK combined of 1.8 million dead. With the scale of losses of such magnitude Victory Day celebrations in Tianjin can be seen in the context of this shared history and major losses overcome as much of the world knows with US help. A sobering view is that the colonial powers Imperial Japanese Army, French and British policies caused famines in World War II leading to 6-7 million deaths in India, Indonesia and Vietnam which is 4 times the 1.7 million US and UK deaths. Views of China in the Context of the Ukraine War and Russia are very different in US than in France and Europe and are widening in differences in 2025. In the US as in this report in the WSJ China is seen as a trade partner and competitor with certain issues, many of China's university leaders and experts question the prospect of a long term alliance with Russia, and for DJT Russia is a nuclear power with which US seeks good relations and a political settlement of the Ukraine War. In France as shown in the article in Le Monde adjacent to this the European attitudes towards Russia throughout European history since 1700 of regional rivalry between France and Russia, Germany and Russia since 1900, Britain and Russia since 1700. FDR led the alliance with Russia against the Nazis and Imperial Japanese in the 1930's and 1940's. Herbert Hoover led the effort to bring relief supplies and aid to Russian in the period of the Civil War after the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917. With China America kept the government in China functioning as it retreated from the invasion by the Imperial Japanese Army in the 1930's and 1940's and the only hope with Gen. Joe Stilwell in China alongside Chinese leaders. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Landers and Gale of the WSJ show how undersupplied conscript soldiers, high inflation and industrial breakdowns during wartime have led to major upheavals in Russia. Three conflicts led to such changes in Russia's domestic situation. The Russo-Japanese war in 1905 led to Russia seeing one fourth of 340,000 Russian troops killed in a battle near the Chinese city of Shenyang, and loss of most of its Baltic fleet in a Japanese attack on Port Arthur. The war ended with a peace treaty arranged by president Theodore Roosevelt of the United States. The Russian czar gave up most of his absolute powers in 1905.  In 1914 Ukraine was involved in regime change as the Germans fought to take Ukraine. The czar wanted to keep Russia's expansive sphere of influence. Without Ukraine's agriculture and industry and its population Russia would not be a great power, says an expert on Czarist Russia. At the time the Russian military was ill prepared in motorized vehicles and communications equipment, and industry lacked the ability to resupply the military. Inflation jumped leading to unrest and protests. Fighting in the First World War led to millions of refugees. In 2022 experts see the same old problem of seeking spheres of influence leading to wars, and the lack of sufficient ability to cope with prolonged wars when short wars were expected by the regimes in power in Russia. Dissent inside Russia and protests led to the abdication of Czar Nicholas in March 2017, and Bolsheviks led by Lenin seizing power in November of 2017. By 1979 Ukrainian leader Leonid Brezhnev was leader of the Soviet Union as Russia's economy could not keep up with modernization. Seeking spheres of influence Brezhnev pushed into a long war in Afghanistan in the mistaken idea that a quick strike on Kabul with a change in government would achieve Soviet goals in central Asia. By 1989 the Russian army withdrew from Afghanistan and in 1990 the protests led to the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union and emergence of Russia as a separate country. Landers and Gale of the WSJ see these events in Russian history showing how wars have led to domestic changes and upheavals in Russia when leaders projected power beyond Russia's capacity to handle the results of conflict. Russia's economy is about the size of Italy or Britain say experts and its industry much smaller than the European Union economies and the US, Japan combined.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Chinese views on the India war of 1962 are shown at the Beijing Military Museum in a display effort "One Hundred Questions on the China-India Border Self-Defense Counterattack."  China's PLA on its 95th anniversary looks at the 33 day war and calls it a "counterattack." It also says China withdrew because its goals were accomplished of getting back the territory it lost since August 1959 to India, that on the Indian side "the decision making was in the hands of civilian officials who did not understand the military at all," and called it "chaotic." It also brings up the international situation that Russia supported both China and India in the conflict and India had the US on its side. It says PLA withdrew because of the difficulty of supplying the military in the Arunachal region at a great distance from China particularly after the famine that resulted from the Great Leap Forward. Today there is a clear chain of command and joint work by the Indian Air force and the Army, infrastructure to support mountain operations being built at rapid speed, and building of modern defense manufacturing capabilities for the airforce and army as shown at the Defense Expo in Gandhinagar, Gujarat, this week.  One of the first aspects of the border that one sees in the region is how close it is to large population cities and towns in India and how remote it is from large population towns and cities in China. In this sense China after the experience with Russian conflict before 1900, later a large Japanese invasion in 1931and 1937 appears to have responded to its period of semi-colonialism with an aggressive policy of extending its frontiers to regions that were throughout history acting as large buffers between India and China- such being the case of Tibet which was occupied in the 1950's leading to the war with India and a border dispute that had never existed before in history. Other aspects today are that in 1962 the PLA had fought the war against the Japanese and the war agains the Americans in Korea all within a 20 year period. In 2022 China has focused for 50 years on modernizing its economy. The supply chain in the Ukraine war showed shortcomings in the Russian army, and the difficulties of supplying forces at great distances. There is also the question of morale when it is about  miles of icy terrain at heights over 10,000 feet, thousands of miles away from major population cities and towns in China- for reasons of Russian and Japanese semicolonialism behaviour not to be found in regions that had never seen large armies in history such as Tibet or Arunachal or the Himalayan border regions. The distances tell much of the story- the distance from Shanghai, Shenzen or Beijing, to Tibet is over 4000 kilometers and the border region with India additional thousands of kilometers over some of the most rugged terrain on earth with only remote mountain communities existing in the most difficult environments.       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Finnish president Niinisto provides a new understanding of Mr. Putin and the thinking that led to the invasion of Ukraine. Mr. Niinisto has an advantage having spoken with Mr. Putin countless times says this report in WSJ, and spoke again to Mr. Putin on May 14 to tell him that Finland was planning to join NATO. Putin simply responded that Russia does not pose a threat and "you made a mistake." He says it was not the Finnish way to not call Putin and tell him directly, and that not doing so would be like sneaking away around the corner. Mr. Niinisto says WSJ, has a rare insight into the thinking that led to the behavior of Mr. Putin in launching the war. Here are some insights from this report by Adam O'Neal of WSJ. On the situation in Ukraine Niinisto says " I would be a lot more worried about Ukrainians than about how Russians feel." Mr. Putin's willingness to see Ukraine's industrial centers, its infrastructure and cities destroyed, turning them into moon craters in the east compares with the relative ease of life in Moscow, St Petersburg and other cities, cushioned by Russian oil and gas exports and financial reserves. As a student of Finland's long and violent history with Russia Mr. Niinisto has some unique insights into Russian thinking. He tells WSJ's Adam O'Neal  that if a Russian is angry, yes, be careful, but if he's calm, be even more careful. The Russian invasion of Finland led to loss of 200,000 lives in 1939-40, and another 250,000 Russian lives in fighting between 1941-1944. Finland has 300,000 men or women in military reserves and men between 18 years and 60 years are called up for military service with the Finnish Constitution requiring every citizen to contribute to national defense. Recently Finland ordered 64 F-35 fighter jets from the US. What led to the invasion of Ukraine by Mr. Putin? Niinisto says that "somehow Mr. Putin has a feeling that Russia was betrayed in the 90's by the West. Over time this thinking continued feeding the negativity says Niinisto and led to the thinking that Russia could be betrayed once more.  Another aspect of Mr. Putin which was covered during the last decade of relations with Ukraine in Lyrarc, was his perception that Ukraine under various leaders before Zelensky was basically led by corrupt leaders including one president he supported but lost power in the last decade. Mr. Putin saw protests in Kviv and Lviv that ousted a president he supported recently as orchestrated from outside. This led to thinking that Ukrainian nationalism did not exist and he believed that Kviv would not be defended and would fall easily within a week or weeks. As his nationalist perceptions and that of a small group that included his partner in office Mr. Medvedev became stronger in the last ten years Mr. Putin made the decision to take the option for invasion in the thinking that the response of the US and Germany would not be to support Ukraine with arms and other aid. The CDU and SPD was perceived as weak in Germany and Scholz not seen as able to cut down oil and gas imports to the EU. Biden was seen as not willing to stop Russia by taking on a difficult conflict because of China allying itself with Russia, considering China's interconnections with the American economy. The timing was seen as good considering that this level of dependence on oil and gas imports of Europe on Russia would never be the case after planned shifts to renewable energy. The Russian economy was cushioned by its $620 billion in reserves and by the world's need for energy even as the shift to renewable was taking place. This window my have induced Mr. Putin to take what appeared to be a rational decision that ignored the common feelings of humanity of risking the destruction of a brotherly people that spoke Russian, prayed in Orthodox churches, and where Russia as a state started in the year 1000. Cambridge historian Brendan Simms in his new book "Europe : The Struggle for Supremacy 1453 to the present," has shown all European powers susceptible of reasoning and calculation of this type in their wars since 1453 in the struggle for supremacy in Europe up to the present- the Portuguese, the Spanish, the Dutch, the British, the French, the Germans, the Russians, the Danes, the Swedes. This also led to British and French empires in Asia and Africa with subjugation of Asian and African people. The Second World War had created the perception that somehow this had changed after the loss of millions of lives- that was the perception of Merkel a pastor's daughter who had grown up in the former communist state of GDR in East Germany, and of SPD leader Steinmeier who felt strongly about the loss of lives from the Nazi invasion. Merkel and Steinmeier built the relationship of Germany with Russia that has collapsed under Germany's new leader Scholz and Habeck-Baerbock of the Greens party. Merkel and Steinmeier also built the trade relationship with China that also faces collapse with China's support of Russia under Mr. Jinping, and the unexpected shifts in Chinese leadership and policies from that pursued by premier Deng and his successors in 1990-2010 of interconnected economic links with US and EU. Mr. Scholz, the new chancellor of Germany has Brendan Simms book on Europe on his reading list for 2022 as he ponders over the lessons of 2022 and the pandemic. Mr. Biden with long experience in the Senate of the US has a memory and understanding of what happened since World War II, how America got to this point, and what it will have to do to bring back the American spirit to the Free World that America has led for most of the last two hundred years. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial board opinion lists all the reasons for continuing the war in Ukraine without answering the question raised by Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg about- what US interest calls for losing an entire generation of Ukrainians and Russians young men to war? The US as a beacon of hope in the world requires asking this question. Kellogg is a 80 year old veteran who has seen hand to hand combat in Vietnam and survived, attended the US Army College in Kansas, and has decades of experience in the Army, and was National Security Adviser. The US should ask questions about what is its right role? NATO was started in 1949 against the wall coming up in Eastern Europe under Communism, the Warsaw Pact was formed to oppose NATO in 1955. Yet after the Warsaw Pact was  disbanded by July 1991 after the fall of Communism there was no effort to reassess forming a new architecture that is based on the new situation. Shouldn't NATO have been replaced after Warsaw Pact was no longer in existence? Russia was too weak in the 1990's and till 2010 and there was no one to make the case for a new defense architecture. And no effort to reconsider and see that there is no fallback to positions from the Cold War and before that to British Empire positions about protecting its dominions in India and Asia from Russia. Considering that Russia is the only major nuclear power other than US in 2025, and within the years of a pandemic that destroyed an entire generation of older people- American, Russian, Chinese and Indian.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in DW.com says Donbas, the eastern region of Ukraine with fierce fighting, was sparsely populated till the mid 19th century. It was only after industrialization that Donbas began to develop with its large coal reserves. During this period the public use of Ukrainian was suppressed in the Russian Empire, and Russian established as the language of education says Hausman from the Leibniz Institute. After the Russian Civil War it was made part of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. During this Soviet period more and more Russian came to Donbas. People in Donbas always spoke Ukrainian and had ties to both Russia and Ukraine. Up to 2014 it was an important industrial region of Ukraine. After 2014 it has suffered considerably from the mines, and fighting in the separatist areas wanting to join Russia leaving it derelict and in a very poor state says DW.com. Between 2014 and 2022 Russian supported separatists fought the Ukraine army till a ceasefire was arranged with the Minsk Agreements. It is this disputed region that Russia is fighting for after the failure to take the capital Kviv which is closer to the Polish border in western Ukraine. Closest to Poland is the city of Lviv. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
One hundred years after the First World War Germans look at memorials and museums in Kiel about the naval buildup in Germany in 1910-1914 in a different light. Germany's effort to match Britain's naval supremacy and the increasing tensions and nationalist rhetoric led to the war- worse, the defeat created conditions for a larger conflict in 1939-1945. To put this period behind it Germany has emphasized the dangers of war and getting people to realize what war is. Kiel itself was 80% destroyed at the end of the Second World War.

LyrArc Article Gist
This response by experts on transatlantic relations rejects the other view expressed in Zeit Online that the U.S. under Trump remains estranged from Germany and the EU. These experts from the American Institute for German Contemporary Studies, American German Council, and Centers at John Hopkins and Georgetown for German Studies, reject the view that the Trump administration and Germany are that far apart on many issues as it appears from media coverage.  Foremost it points out that civil society relations are sound and growing. About 50 million Americans trace their descent to Germany, including president Trump, much larger to over half the U.S. population considering European descent. Much larger is the sense of a culturally shared future with the European Union, with the nations of Europe including Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the nations of Eastern Europe, and Britain. The civil society relationships run deep in a way that is hardly affected by the Trump administration. Within the Trump administration the policies to Europe these experts remind the reader, are determined by the "adults" in the administration, who are senior members of the administration. This is a crucial point as Trump administration policy is not determined by the president's liking for tweets as much as by senior cabinet members Tillerson at the State Department, Gen. Mattis at Defense, Kelly at the White House, and senior members of Congress including Senators Corker and other senior committee members. This is why Republican Senator Kay Hutchinson was chosen as Ambassador to NATO. It should be noted in this context of German-EU relations in president Trump's first year that there was a period of German disillusionment with president Obama, exacerbated by the NSA spying on German chancellor Merkel and on the EU delegation to the UN, with president Obama's failure to offer any apology. Relations recovered from that low point. No one suggested that there be a German led decoupling of the EU with America at that low point, or at another low point in German-U.S. relations with the setup of American Pershing II nuclear missiles on German soil under the Reagan administration when there were large scale protests.  The American view that the U.S. should not have to shoulder major responsibilities for defense and foreign relations by itself is not new say these experts, and goes back to earlier administrations before Trump.  The experts argue for an active role by Germany with its partners in Europe for defense and foreign relations, which should not be seen as a result of U.S. pressure, only responding to the situation as it has evolved upto this time. Views on immigration are also changing with effort by the EU and Germany, France, to reduce immigration from the source countries in Africa, and the changing perceptions about uncontrolled immigration in Germany and France, say the authors. A coordinated policy towards Russia  is seen as not having changed. And much as a reset in relations was advocated by Obama in the first year of his first term, the current policy of the Trump administration to work with Russia to lower tensions can be seen in the same way say these experts, and not as a fundamental shift in American policy. The deep relationship of Germany and the EU with China is another positive aspect that will also help the U.S. in framing its own policies towards China. The German-American relationship, and the European Union relationship with the U.S.  is seen as basic to the values and interests of the U.S. and Europe. This relationship is too deep and supported by civil society and Congress, the Republican Party, and the Democratic Party, by large trade relationships, to be affected by temporary differences under any one administration. Even these differences are part of a larger debate that is part of dialogue on issues in a democratic society, sometimes raucous and loud, and could be welcomed and carefully channelled in constructive ways.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
German perceptions of Mikhail Gorbachev are shown here in DW.com. He is revered in Germany because of Gorbachev's efforts to end Soviet rule in East German state called the GDR, leading to the fall of the Berlin Wall. Gorbachev supported German reunification but did not do this is in a way that ensured that ordinary Russians and citizens of the GDR could make the transition to democratic processes in a smooth way. He also failed to grasp that economic transition could be difficult and would require extensive aid and grants from the west, and that safeguards and protections for retired pensioners and vulnerable sections of society needed to be in place. The following is a reflection of the background in political government and economy of the events in Europe leading to the war in Ukraine.  As a result Gorbachev's instincts were right by first 1956 as a student, and then 1979 as government official about the need for democratic processes to realize the real potential of Russia, just as has happened in many countries that lacked these processes for change in government- Japan, Germany, South Korea, India, Brazil and many countries in Asia and Latin America. But not realizing that these countries made the transition with considerable American and British assistance. Even where there was no direct assistance indirectly the British setup the first limited Swaraj or free rule in India, with elections and elected assemblies in Indian states in the 1930's, following the pattern in Dominion states Australia and Canada. Mohandas Gandhi negotiated within these processes for rights of South African Indians and Colored people, gaining experience, including study of British law.  A son of poor farmers in the agricultural region of North Caucasus, in Stavropol, it is relevant today that his maternal grand parents were from Chernihiv in Ukraine. He came to power in 1980 after entering the Politburo that year. These were the waning years of Leonid Brezhnev, president of the Soviet Union who followed Nikita Khrushchev (1953- 1964). Khrushchev was from eastern Ukrainian region near Donetsk. Leonid Brezhnev was a protege of Krushchev since 1931, from Kamianske, Ukraine.   Gorbachev was influenced by Khrushchev's speech that denounced Stalin in 1956 in favor of a freer and more open society. Khrushchev, became first secretary of the Communist party in 1953 after the death of Stalin and set the pace of post war Soviet society from 1950 to 1964. He removed the fear of the dictatorship of the proleteriat working class, increasingly dictatorial under Lenin, and blatantly arbitrary under his successor to make Soviet Union a freer society.  Yet his tendency to make decisions on his own without consulting others, and the failure of agriculture in the Soviet Union including food shortages led to his replacement by his protege Brezhnev. Brezhnev's whole career was built under Krushchev in Ukraine, in the army in Ukraine, and as a political leader in the Soviet 18th Army that entered Prague in 1945 defeating the Nazis. Why is this relevant? Gorbachev was educated at Moscow State University when the Soviet Union was in the Sputnik era, and felt at the time that it could reach the 1950's standard of living in the US- very different from the earlier leaders. Yet he may have been too much of an optimist and not hands on in understanding the working of a modern economy as large as Russia and the interests of different groups of society that had to be be balanced and protected. His understanding of the US and of how the US and British economies had evolved was limited or nonexistent. The isolation of the Soviet period may have compounded this. The Russian state in the Soviet Union could not simply unwind the power of the state and its intervention and everything would come out right of its own accord.   Leonid Brezhnev, the Ukrainian Russian who succeeded Krushchev from 1964 to 1979 let the system of Soviet rule remain as it was, in the Great Stagnation, leading to lethargy, lack of innovation, and a weak economy with military expansion. Gorbachev tried to regenerate the system by opening it up, but failed to see that there was a risk that it could come apart quickly as it did in just 4 years after he became president in 1985. Only the centralized power of the state had kept the Russian state together from the Tsarist period through the Communist period. The risks of this Gorbachev failed to grasp. What if it happened too quickly without a safety net for the people who could not make the transition. What lawlessness and failure of the rule of law could happen. The US and Britain had evolved their democracies over centuries. Wars were fought in the US and Britain over rights and responsibilities of kings and parliaments. In the US Lincoln fought the civil war not just for emancipation but to ensure safeguards for free white men on the farms so that Labor did not get disabilities placed on them by Capital (entrenched forces of Capital of which the southern plantation economy was only one aspect.)  Japan and Germany were set up as democratic states through American power and constitutional frameworks with Marshall Plans or agreement to take in unlimited imports from Japan. This bad scenario happened in Russia because Gorbachev failed to set the conditions first and work patiently to achieve them including introducing limited  elections and parliamentary processes first in Russia.  Leaders such as Yeltsin who succeeded Gorbachev in 1989, winning the elections that followed, failed to provide a safety net for the vulnerable in the 1980's. Unemployment increased rapidly, life expectancy dropped in Russia, and the economy failed in the early years after 1980. A Marshall Plan like that offered to Germany could have helped but Gorbachev's failure may have been his failure to provide this transition by arranging for West Germany and the US to support a planned transition, a kind of Marshall Plan of Aid, and maintaining a gradual move to democracy as the country was given time to learn institutions of American and British parliamentary democracy. No such Marshall Plan was negotiated for a smooth transition over inevitable obstacles, no safeguards were put in place for illegal efforts to control the state by rogue elements and to seize assets of state companies, no efforts to first introduce limited elections and parliamentary processes for learning democratic process in Russia, and the people of Russia were left with a memory of the this period as a bad lawless period from 1989 to 2005.  Leading to the situation today under Putin of aspiring to the Soviet period as a kind of period that had offered Russia the world recognition it had lost. And this had happened even though the Russian economy had recovered and the standard of living had risen under Putin. Putin's career spanned the period as a Russian official in Dresden, Germany Democratic Republic or Soviet period East Germany to working in the St Petersburg City Council under Yeltsin. He personally witnessed the fall of the Berlin Wall and the fall of the German Democratic Republic from Dresden and Gorbachev's refusal to build a transition period for the changes so that it would not be traumatic for the GDR. Even after reunification these traumas remain in some segments of the older population in East Germany that saw themselves as neglected and support extreme right wing parties in eastern German states by 2020- considering the Soviet period as one in which their lives were less neglected.  After three terms as president Putin with his own traumas from that period in Dresden, and with a mother lost in the period after the Nazi invasion of Russia, a father who survived the Battle of Stalingrad, saw the period of lawless behaviour in the collapse of the Soviet Union as the"greatest geopolitical disaster of the century."  Putin and people around him made missteps and miscalculations launching a war in Ukraine, leading to the situation today- jeopardizing hard won gains for the Russian economy. By 2022 Russian standards of living had risen and the economy was in the best shape it had been in the modern period since the Industrial Revolution. Yet largely exposed because of the dependence on oil and gas during a period of climate change and focus on building future economies free of fossil fuels.  Putin in his own peculiar logic may have seen this as the only opportunity in 2022 before deliinking from fossil fuel reduced the importance of the Russian fuel dependent economy to make some territorial readjusments in Ukraine with a quick war taking Kviv. That turned into a massive miscalculation with the emergence of nationalist fervor in western Ukraine spreading to the whole country of 40 million people. In the future to 2030 with phasing out of the fossil fuel economy, Russia without the connections to the US and European Union's technology and resources it had during Putin's three terms, and facing strict sanctions from US and EU, faces a difficult future. This has cautionary lessons for all countries- the US that read too much into the fall of the Berlin wall and indulged in a losing proposition with free markets that damaged its infrastructure and manufacturing with shifts to China, China understanding of how it to was dependent on the world economy for its future development, India that had to navigate a difficult period and what lessons to draw for building a bigger economy, the EU realizing the failure of its policies of depending on Russia for energy and China for manufacturing with fragile supply chains,  and Russia that there were twists and turns and the need for safeguards and experience building democratic processes before these processes would work for the economy, its people and for Russia as a nation. ...

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. ...