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 Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Internal Bank of England data showing Britain inside European Union 6-8% higher GDP and 75 billion pounds of higher exports of goods in 2025. This is the only objective assessment one can accept in judging what would be best for British workers and their families.  Also lost on the 2014 -2016 period that led to referendum on Brexit in 2016 just three years later is that it came after the 2009-2011 period for recovery from the financial crisis, the first entry of Conservatives and sharp austerity cuts in public spending by 2012, and the period of Covid that followed just 3 years after 2016 in 2019. The process of improving productivity and increasing competitiveness that could have happened, is a cost Britain suffered from Brexit becoming topic No.1, skewing priorities from reindustrializing to debate on a non priority item Brexit- with a lost decade as a result in addition to the 8% of GDP and 75 billion pounds that could add to these numbers. In this way UK lost about 10% of its GDP and 100 billion pounds of exports that without the that  additional public investment  did not happen from 2009 financial crisis, from Brexit divisiveness, followed by Covid. The result is 1.5% growth in GDP in UK compared to closer to 3% in the US. The lower growth alone can mean additional losses in exports in 2025 than are seen in numbers, and additional losses in GDP. This is the economic weakness  that hangs over Britain as it tries out a new leader in 2026. Only a bold action plan under a bold leader can reverse this decline. As shown elsewhere on these pages in Lyrarc, this is why a new leader needs to articulate a bold and well thought out plan to execute with the support of the British people. Andy Burnham has the potential to make this happen starting in 2026 over the next 5-7 years. He has to build on the work he did in the Greater Manchester region, and like Modi in India applying the lessons learned in his home state of Gujarat, step by step, year by year, build the industrial and economic capacity of Britain by 2035. It is not a feat for the timid, struggles will abound, yet it can be done with one step following the previous step in a continuous stride. In fact Burnham can now work with India to add about 1% of GDP because of the close trading relationship and centuries long synergies with India to get closer to 3% growth in GDP per year. At that point public spending and investment would rise to propel further growth. It is in the interest of every sector in Britain to pull together, the same in India, to lift these two main countries of the Commonwealth by the bootstraps. ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in BBC looks at how couples are using time apart to pursue interests that they are passionate about or put off for some time. In such situations it says the experiences can actually bring people closer as long as the other aspects of the relationship are on good ground.

The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Lewinsky scandal broke out in January 1998. Bill Clinton admitted "an imprpper relationship" in August 1998. The vote to impeach Clinton was in December 1998. The acquittal took place in Jan-Feb 1999 with the lack of a two thirds majority of 67 votes in the Senate. The damage is not just in reputations. It is in distraction sufficient to lead to flawed legislation that lacked key provisions for the China US Relations Act of 2000 that was taken up by the Senate in May 2000. Could such a major step be taken in the last year of a lame duck administration? Republicans returned to the White House in December of 2000 with George Bush. There were no provisions in the China Relations Act for abuse of the status after joining WTO through unfair trad practices. The result is millions of jobs lost and the entire manufacturing base of the US and Europe shipped to China by 2019. Under Xi Jinping China returned to an adversarial relationship with the US on the issues of Hong Kong and Taiwan. It could have done serious damage to the 1.4 billion people of India as the gap between China and India opened up dangerous security implications for South Asia, a time when governance model of the Nehru era had failed by 2014 leading to fragmentation of the kind that happened in China when Japan had surged ahead in the 1920's and 1930's leading to the devastating war and Japanese invasion of China in the 1930's by provoked incidents. It shows the grave consequences of poor governance including the periods under Bush and Obama that led to decisions to get into wars in remote mountainous and desert regions. A series of such events can as shown by Joel Mokyr of Northwestern University, that can lead to permanent decline for regions and nations. Under both Biden and DJT an effort is underway to respond to these challenges. ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The European Union's trade relations with China, and the trade and industry relationship between Germany and China built during the Merkel years is a part of the overall trade setup of the Free World that is likely to be questioned by Habeck, Baerbock of the Greens and chancellor Scholz after Mr. Biden's launch of the IPEF economic alliance for Asia. During her period in office Merkel also built the German trade relationship with Russia leading to Germany being dependent on Russia for 51% of its oil and natural gas supplies. The German dependence on Russia for energy is now being reversed by the efforts of Economy Minister Habeck of the Greens party in the Scholz coalition. The supply chain renewal and redesign by president Biden is likely to be followed by Germany and France and the EU. With it more investments will be shifted back to the US and the EU and allies in Asia such as India that offer a large pool of well trained workers similar to China's. In this sense the IPEF arrangement will be repeated in European Union's new relationships with Asia under the Greens SPD German coalition's leadership. ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The title of this BBC report is a misnomer as the content of the report is that India and the US are actively negotiating a Trade Agreement after some disagreements on Indian oil purchases from Russia bumped up from 2% before 2019 to about one third to 40% of its imports by 2024. This is being rapidly reversed and some estimates by consultants CLSA show India only made $2-3 billion from Russian discounted oil sales, a miniscule amount. On American interest in agricultural exports India can take in some products other than grain which it sees as important to feed 1 billion people and food security.  DJT says the "special relationship" between India and the US is important, and says "there's nothing to worry about. We just have moments on occasion". India has much bigger stakes in trade with the US. In fact it's growth into the third largest economy in the world means doubling or tripling its trade with the US and the European Union in the next few years. This would narrow the difference in GDP and per capita between India and China, as India and China started at the same GDP and per capita in 1950. Only in 1990 with China's trade with the US has the Chinese GDP and per capita income increased to create the huge gap with India. ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Thucydides, Greek historian on the Peloponnesian War between Sparta and Athens 431 BC, cited by Xi Jinping of China during DJT visit to China, May 2026. “Can China and the United States transcend the so-called ‘Thucydides Trap’ and forge a new paradigm for major-power relations?” "Thucydides Trap," is about one established power being threatened by another rising power, as Sparta felt threatened by a rising Athens in the Greek world around 431 BC, leading to a long over 30 years war.  “The Taiwan question is the most important issue in China-US relations,” Xi said, of Taiwan, an island near China's coast where ChiangKaishek set up his government after the fall of his government in Beijing in 1949 to Communist People's Army of Mao Zedong. “If mishandled, the two nations could collide or even come into conflict, pushing the entire China-US relationship into a highly perilous situation."  What China sees is a future of strong economic growth based on China having built its industrial strength and world trade to exceed 1.2 trillion dollars of trade surplus in 2026. Yet this is only the beginning. US and European Union, and India+Japan are three economic regions compared to the situation in Greek history. The combined three economic regions potential for scientific and industrial advances in the future till 2045 in a synergistic fashion one building on top of the other's advances, far exceed the potential of the Chinese economy and industry by itself. This is why any such conflict may over time fizzle away as three economic regions of EU, US and India advance, particularly the 1.4 billion people of India, which will see growth rates of 20% annually for 10 years to 2035 in Eastern Indian region of the size of the EU. That region extends from Lucknow and Patna to Vizag and Chennai. Another aspect of this concerns China itself which sees slowing growth of 5% in 2026. Growth could slow further as US, European Union and India/Japan push back on Chinese exports during a period of reindustrialization in US, EU, Japan and rapid industrial development in India to 2040. China's development is only midway in terms of per capita GNP which lags most of Europe and the US, Japan. Thus the main concern in China is that China will not be able top go beyond middle income country as its demographics and aging population look more like Japan's over the period 2026-2040. China needs the US EU trade and markets for it to meet the needs and aspirations of its 1.4 billon people as the other engines of development such as housing construction, infrastructure building, have lost momentum. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report from Germany in DW.com says Germany tried to build a softer relationship with Russia during the leadership of Adenauer of CDU and  Brandt of SPD. This continued under Schmidt and Schroeder. Under Merkel of CDU the emotional aspect of the relationship as Russia retreated from Bolshevism and Soviet Union collapsed was lost. Little attention was paid to East Germany and to how the fall of the Soviet Union had affected Russia negatively,and became purely focused on German industry and trade with cheap Russian gas supplies. Even as Germany did not invest in shared burden for defense with the US, and Germany under Merkel increased dependence on Russian gas supplies to 55% with the Nordstream gas pipeline from Russia, and shut down nuclear energy.  As a result the emotional or mental health aspect of the relationship with Russia of Germany was lost under Merkel. The focus on purely financial aspect of things has been proved wrong both for the economy as physical infrastructure was neglected under Merkel and social infrastructure such as child care and other social aspects of society were sorely neglected. A new broader framework that needs to be built will have to keep this in mind.  All the hard work and good intentions of the Adenauer and Brandt years has been lost with the short sighted basis of relations based purely on finance and trade under Merkel's leadership. This happened also in the US relationship with China with the relations based purely on finance and trade under Clinton, Bush, Obama proving to be too fragile as they did not protect other social aspects within the two countries as inequality widened and whole segments of society were neglected.  ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A big win for the US and a win-win for the European Union in the sense that it brings stability to the trade relationship. For the US it brings a level playing field in world trade that had suffered fo far too long from unfair advantages taken by Japan, Canada, European Union and other nations, in addition to the serious distortions of the world trade system with China's state version of capitalism financing an export model. So the first step was to straighten out the situation with partners and allies the US has supported in the past 75 years. US European Union Trade Agreement is reached July 27, 2025, at meeting between Von Der Leyen of Eu and DJT of the US in Scotland. It includes $750 billion EU purchases over 3 years of US oil and gas, LNG, nuclear fuel, semiconductors, etc and $650 billion in investments in US, including military purchases. It puts a 15% tariff on all products from the EU entering the US, replaces the tariff of about 5% under Biden. On Pharmaceuticals it is what the US president decides says Leyen, though for now it is included.  The EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefovic says- “I think that what was most important for us was to make sure we would have this predictability and we would have stability for our businesses." ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Brexit and Scotland's referendum both have similar consequences economically for Britain and Scotland. This hurts both countries in unwinding relationships built over many years, unwinding 44 year membership for Britain, and 310 year union for Scotland. Britain exports to EU are 45% of total exports, and for Scotland the number is 63% for exports to the rest of the UK.  Scots benefit about 1200 British pounds more for average citizen than a average citizen of UK, and pay 400 pounds less to the government. Scotland would start with a 90% debt to GDP ratio if it takes a proportionate share of UK government debt from the beginning of independence. Fidler correctly points out the economic risks to Britain and Scotland which are being ignored or not fully taken into account by politicians.

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Europe ten years ago invested heavily in gas fired electricity plants thinking that natural gas will be plentiful in the future. Now with global demand rising with the emergence of China and Russia. and Western Europe's own reserves, such as Norway's depleting, Europe is in a bind. Alexei Miller told shareholders: "The Natural Gas Market is now a seller's market." Western Europe's share of global gas consumption rose to 17.4 % in 2004 from 14.9% ten years ago. Now countries like Italy and Germany are scrambling to secure supplies and build long term relationships with Gazprom while Poland and other Eastern European countries are facing uncertainty about reliability of Russian gas supplies. Italian oil company Eni is negotiating a long term relationship to cooperate with Gazprom to recover gas from the Russian North and to supply the Italian market. Eni's CEO Paolo Scaroni addressing an industry conference in Amsterdam in June 2006, provided estimates that by 2012 Europe will need 220 billion cubic metres or nearly 2 and half times Italy's annual consumption. Scaroni said: "Where are we going to find all that gas?" Like other countries in Europe Scaroni does not see Gazprom as the whole answer, but sees few other ways to solve supply problems. Italy will invest in liquefied natural gas to have flexibility of sourcing. In the end though Scaroni is relying on Gazprom and says : "This gives them a responsibility to the Italian market .. and it strengthens our relationship."...
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the Economist looks at China's relationship with Russia. It says the Ukraine conflict and western sanctions have resulted in Russia moving closer to China. Yet the two countries have competing interests in central Asia, and different relations with India and Vietnam, in the Asian region. Russia is also wary of China copying designs of Sukhoi aircraft in sales to China of advanced military technology. The major oil and gas deal signed in 2014 provides Russia with a new outlet for oil and gas with the cooling of the relationship with Europe. Yet Russia has strong ties built with Germany over the entire post war period, and differences have emerged in U.S.- German relations. Germany's relationship with Russia- cooled by sanctions and German wariness over Russian intervention in Ukraine and Russian wariness over NATO close to its borders- spans 7 decades and is likely to remain strong in the long term. This comes from the shared sense of awareness of the terrible conflicts of an earlier period, just as it has for French-German relations, and from the strong efforts made by Germany to preserve the relationship and peace in Europe. Chinese president Xi's visit to Moscow on May 9, for celebrations of victory over Nazi Germany, will be followed by a visit May 10 by Chancellor Merkel of Germany. A factor in German-Russian relations is the close trade links, cultural exchanges, and history going back to the GDR where Chancellor Merkel is from, built up over many years, that are likely to set the long term future of relations. China's dominant partner relationship in the China- Russia relations does not bode well for the future of relations, compared to the equal partner relations with its European neighbor, Germany. In this different light Ukraine is a temporary pause, in German-Russian relations and peace in Europe, a situation which is in China's long term interest as it focusses on its economy and the next phase of development for a modernized economy. Especially as China continues to build on its own vital trade relations with Germany and the European Union, the latest example being Germany, other EU nations, and India, joining the China sponsored Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Russia has 600 billion dollars in reserves and with oil prices above $100, with the Ukraine conflict lifting oil prices for Russian oil exports, there is little that the US and Europe have done to prepare for this situation. The Merkel years were essentially wasted in building a trade based relationship on cheap Russian gas supplies, and the wasted resources under Bush and Obama in two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan only distracted the US from the major issues relating to China and Europe that it now faces. 

The need is for a new overall structure to be built- for social structure supporting all aspects of infrastructure, and stronger supply chains with local manufacturing. And international structures that include India and other nations of Asia and Latin America, Africa, that would be a framework for the future- a broader framework for peaceful relations.

 

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
 U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, views China's response in trade negotiations as one of conducting extended negotiations that lead to little change. This has continued says Lighthizer for over a decade putting the U.S. at a serious disadvantage in trade. At a White House meeting in August 2017 Lighthizer convinced president Trump that China was in his words "tap, tap, tapping us along."  This confirmed president Trump's own instincts about the U.S. trading relationship with China. Lighthizer is a veteran of trade negotiations, having experience in the Reagan administration as the Deputy Trade Representative in 1983 in negotiations with Japan, when Japan was in a similar situation that China is today. At the time trade negotiations with Japan were getting nowhere. Lighthizer is said to have turned one Japanese response in negotiations into a paper plane and sent it flying right back. Lighthizer does not seek the limelight but is serious about his role having published op-eds in the NYT and WSJ since 2000 about how U.S. trading relationships were putting the U.S. and U.S. workers at an unfair advantage. Many of these op-eds are in the Lyrarc archive and a Search with the term "Lighthizer" would bring up these articles. This report in NYT shows how the role of Lighthizer was not anticipated by China when it sent Liu He to Washington in November 2017 to negotiate with the U.S. President Trump made certain Liu He and other Chinese leaders would have to talk to Lighthizer first. In a session with president Jinping laid out U.S. views that the past negotiations had accomplished little and new negotiations had to be undertaken very differently from negotiations in the past. Earlier in July trade negotiations conducted by Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross were "shut down" by president Trump because China continued to repackage earleir offers which meant little to the U.S. As a lawyer at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher LLP Lighhizer represented steel industry clients hurt by subsidized Chinese steel industry imports. Mr. Trump and Lighhizer have bonded well because their instincts have been the same- that the U.S. had not been well represented in earlier negotiations by lawyers who saw themselves as speaking for American exporters.  Lighthizer is also a seasoned trade negotiator and has waited for the right time and situation to tackle the unbalanced trading relationship with China. For 30 years Lighhizer represented American manufacturers as he practiced trade law at the Skadden law firm. His strategy has been to get the administration to unite behind a clear trade strategy. He says "I try to be friendly in trade negotiations. I am not the theatrical type. The art of persuasion is about knowing where the leverage is." At this time the leverage lies in the huge trade surplus of about $300 billion China has with the U.S. The U.S. goal is to bring this down by $100 billion through this new negotiating strategy as earlier negotiations have failed. ...
The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A senior Indian diplomat, and former ambassador to China, Gautam Bambawale, says China's action in the June 15 clash at Galwan Valley was the worst violence since 1967. He sees it as a premeditated and well thought out action. His view is that India's relations with China will deteriorate further. That this was an action by the PLA to take territory to what it sees as the LAC or border. For small tactical gains he says "China has strategically lost India." This will impact trade and other relations going forward in his view.  Nothing of this sort was expected says Bambawale. All the agreements put in place since 1993, everything for tranquillity at the border, all the mechanisms, have now collapsed. Bambawale has provided a very lucid and clear account of the relations and the border issues. He goes on to say that Chinese observers have given reasons for the Galwan clash with PLA- that India should stay away from the US and other democracies such as the European Union. Some reflection shows that the opposite has happened. And further reflection would show that the same situation was repeated in the period of transfer from British Empire to Republican India, and from Nationalist China to Communist China from the period 1947 onwards. Different perceptions and different leaderships that gave the perception of gaps between the two countries. In the 1950's after the Korean War Chinese perceptions about India could have led to the incursions that brought China to the borders of India in 1950, similar perceptions of gaps in development and capabilities could have led to the conflict in 1962. From 1993 peace prevailed with India after China entered the World Trade Organization under president Clinton in 2001 following a 10 year effort. Because the focus in China was on development after a series of crises, internal sense of a widening technological gap with the US and Europe, disagreements with the Soviet Union, and the experiments with market economy, internal struggles for democracy. With that period coming to a close as the new trading relationship has led to working class losses in factory jobs in the US, China is faced with protecting its economy as it and the US look at changing supply channels and how it affects both countries. It is a critical time for China as it faces governments in US, France, UK and Canada determined to protect their own interests in manufacturing jobs, renewing supply channels, and in technological advancement. The response is similar to that in 1962 when seen from the Communist party perspective as a gap has opened up with India following China's progress in the 30 year trading relationship with the US and Europe. That gap and the difficult situation China faces today with the US and EU in trade and technology has brought forward the Galwan clash and future clashes in Ladakh and at the border.  As Mr. Jaishnkar, India's Minister of External Affairs as well as former ambassador to China,  has pointed out this is a very different aspirational India that China faces. The same kind of grassroots development that happened in China and rapid pooling of capital, human resources and technology inputs for development is taking place in India, and will continue for the next two decades, quickly bridging any gaps in modernization between the two countries. The difference between a youthful population in India and aging population in China and Japan, is likely to add another dimension. China's Buddhist culture that came from India is not likely to go away, more likely is that China will see a revival of Buddhist ideas of wellness and living more as culture than religion. The experience with British colonialism that prevailed both in India and China, and which from its base in India caused so much grief to China during the Opium wars will recede from memory. Extending borders from historical memory of Japanese incursions into border areas in Manchuria could have led leaders after 1950 in China to extend borders to remote areas in the Arunachal region of India and communist theory books may have created the perception of defensive moves. In the context of an aspirational India similar to China, and no real intention on the part of India to extend itself in any way to China's provinces in Sichuan, this extending of borders as a defensive move will be seen as stemming from memories of Japanese incursions in the 1930's, but simply costly and not relevant in any way to China's own aspirational development and progress. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Russia invades Ukraine on multiple fronts, across Belarus, across its western border with Ukraine, on the pre dawn hours of February 24, 2022. Russian foreign minister Lavrov says "tense and detailed discussions" with US and NATO are still taking place. In talks with the US, president Putin of Russia had demanded that Ukraine commit to not joining NATO. The US insisted that this was upto Ukraine and that the territorial integrity of Ukraine had to be respected. Interventions by Macron of France and other leaders failed to bring the two sides closer. The US and Europe with a reluctant Germany looked at sanctions as a deterrent. This proved to be wrong. Mr. Putin has a passionate view of Ukraine and Kviv's historical role in the formation of the Russian state, evident in his televised address only 48 hours before the actual invasion. Ukraine has shifted between Poland and the Baltic states, Germany on one side and Russia on the other in its thousand year old history. The shift away from Bolsheviks and Communists under the Soviet Union after 1990 changed the relationship of Ukraine with its neighbors once again as Ukraine became closer to Poland and the Baltics, and Germany. Germany remains reluctant to revert to the relationship with Russia that led to 2 World Wars. During the leadership of Willy Brandt and successive German SPD leaders, as well as with Konrad Adenauer and CDU leaders, the goal was to build a good relationship with Russia. Merkel of the CDU went as far as accepting dependence on Russia for 40% of its gas supplies, after shifted out of nuclear energy and supporting a new Nordstream undersea pipeline for gas supplies.  The early reaction on DW.com and German television was one of shock as no one really expected that this would lead to a full scale invasion. Scholz of the SPD the new chancellor in 2022 was not active in forging anew consensus allowing NATO's Stoltenberg who is a former Norwegian prime minister 2005-2013 to frame the response of Europe. Norway's role in European security was marginal for most of the twentieth century. Other events had detracted from bringing active German and American participation in coming up with a framework of dialogue to address concerns of both sides and still build a common ground for peace- Afghanistan, the pandemic in its third year, China's deteriorating one sided trade relationship with America that hurt American workers and manufacturing. As a result China and Germany were essentially absent in building the framework for peace. Afghanistan hasty withdrawal made it harder for president Biden to come up with new approaches to build a common framework. President Macron made some faltering efforts on the fringes even as president Putin focused on the US response and its intentions with NATO on European soil, and declared that it was directly US Russia negotiations that needed to work. With this the whole framework of relations since the presidency of Reagan and the relations with Russia and China come to a close. And a new framework needs to be constructed that draws in India already or soon to be the most populous nation in the world, in an effort to build an enduring new framework. The voices of Eastern Europe need to be heard, yet balanced with the voices from India, China, Germany, Russia, and other countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa that are affected by world events. ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The reckless behaviour of German elites in pursuing increased dependence on Russian oil and gas and ignoring American warnings is shown in this report in The Guardian. The first links to Russian oil and gas were started under chancellor Brandt in 1970. At that time the dependency on oil and gas supplies was much less than 10%. Dependence increased during the Schroeder and Merkel years to the extremes that exist today. Not much more even in the year of the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. It was the misconception of chancellor Schmidt of the SPD in his differences of opinion with presidents Carter and Reagan on the risks of increasing dependence on Russian energy that marked this period. Schmidt believed Germany was right in its conviction that increased trade would bring peaceful cooperation without realizing that economic dependency is never a good thing. Poland had a skeptical view- German elites including business elites were being corrupted. Cheap Russian energy was being used in the Schroeder and Merkel years as a competitive business advantage without considering the risks involved and the admonitions of American presidents of the dangers. With Steinmeier of the SPD there was the immense guilt of the millions of war dead from the German invasion of Russia in 1941 that acted as a brake on evaluating the increasing dependency for energy that reached over 35% by the time he was foreign minister. The fall of the Berlin Wall was seen not as a result of multiple factors including the positions taken by Carter and Reagan, the losses to the Russian economy from the war in Afghanistan, and the general decline of the Russian economy. German leaders saw this as coming from the new relationship being built with Russia. German business and Schroeder- Merkel even allowed not just new Nordstream pipelines under the Baltic Sea but also transferred ownership of reserves, the gas and oil storage inside Germany to Russia's Gazprom. German Economy minister Habeck says the storage tanks were emptied so that there would be added surge for oil and gas prices after the attacks on Ukraine. This Guardian report ends by saying that Mr. Steinmeier still needs to show why he pursued policy of cooperation with Russia with increasing dependency to the point that a cut off of Russian oil and gas supplies would lead to gas rationing in Germany in the event of a sudden cutoff. Was it a form of sensible cooperation taking dependency to such extremes. Similar questions remain for chancellor Merkel. With the added question for Merkel about the increase in trading ties with China even after the Trump administration had warned of the serious risks to US and European competitive advantage in technology and manufacturing, and the increased dependence on a supply chain that was fundamentally weak as shown clearly by the pandemic.     ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump on a three day visit to the UK promised a free trade deal with Britain if it made a decisive break with the European Union. Such a free trade deal could take years, offer small benefits compared to the loss of the much larger trading relationship with the European Union. It would face hurdles in passage through Congress because Democrats controlling the House of Representatives see a decisive break with the European Union including the customs union arrangement as affecting the open border in Ireland risking the hard won peace in Northern Ireland.  Prime Minister Theresa May proposed a withdrawal arrangement that would keep the customs union arrangement but has failed to secure the support of a faction within her Conservative party that favors a decisive break from the EU. Such a break that Mr. Trump and Boris Johnson the leader of this faction -and a favored candidate to succeed prime minister May after her resignation- would reduce Britain's GDP over the next 15 years at the higher end of the range of 0.1% to 9% a year. A decisive break called a no deal Brexit with no arrangements or agreement for withdrawal with the EU, would lead to a loss closer to the 9% estimate. British experts to the EU are about $275 billion or 44% of its total exports compared to about $44 billion to the U.S., according to HMS Customs source, showing how important it is for Britain to maintain a close trading relationship with the European Union. British farmers would also face competition through agricultural imports from the U.S. in a free trade deal. During his visit Mr. Trump also stated the National Health Service, everything would be on the table in a free trade deal with the U.S.  Theresa May responded by saying that the NHS would not be open for negotiation to American corporate involvement. Public sensitivity is high on any change to the National Health Service. The trip of president Trump to London in which he supported Boris Johnson as candidate to succeed Theresa May, with discussions between Trump and Johnson for 20 minutes, and a visit by Nigel Farage to the U.S. embassy, and no meeting with Labour party leader Corbyn, only shows the widening of differences on the issue of British withdrawal from the EU making any deal for withdrawal even less likely. Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn now favors a second referendum on whether Britain should leave the EU.  ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The relationship betwen natural gas prices and crude oil is diverging. The ratio of oil to natural gas prices which has averaged about 9 since 1990 is now at 14. Production of natural gas using new technologies will increase production by 8% in 2008 its expected, increasing from 4%the previous year, according to the Energy Information Administration. And demand is slowing from 6.5% to 3%.
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.     ...
SPIEGEL ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Ivan Rogers, UK ambassador to the European Union for three years till 2017 was sharply critical of the British government and forecast some of the Brexit problems. He has a book "9 Lessons in Brexit," which appeared in Feb. 2019. Here he is interviewed by Der Spiegel. He says he expected some of the problems but is still surprised that 4 weeks before the deadline the political class in Britain has not yet figured out what kind of Brexit they want. Here he points out that Cameron and Blair represented the centre in British politics. But that centre has now collapsed after the financial crisis and the period of austerity led to widening gaps between the different parts of British society. The public is now deeply alienated from both major parties. In both parties the populists on the left and the right have gained a bigger influence, as a result there are no centre right or centre left figures who command public influence. Rogers is a civil servant of high rank who has worked with several prime ministers including Blair and Cameron. His comments are worth listening to.  Was Theresa May the right person to tackle Brexit? Her problem says ROgers is that she started with a hardline position of reducing the number of people entering the UK from inside or outside the EU. Once you do this you cannot have free movement of goods, services and capital, so you have to leave the single market. And if Britain wanted a fully autonomous trade policy then it cannot stay in the customs union. Rogers thinks Theresa May never really understood what this meant- that it was going much further out of the European Union than Norway or Switzerland, or even Turkey. Now as she is trying to go back her right wing cries betrayal. Do British prime ministers understand the single market, the customs union, or how the EU really works? Rogers worked on European issues for a long time and he says after working very closely with British prime ministers that none of them had a deep understanding of how the European Union works. Plus they lack any emotional attachment to the EU, because of the mercantile relationship Britain has had with its neighbors. About the relationships in Europe between the Germans, the French, the British, what is it and what will it be like? Rogers says he has not seen a thinner relationship in his lifetime. He thinks the European political elites are not talking to each other anything like what was done 20 or 30 years ago. He says the Brits have to take a lot of the responsibility because the British political class lost interest in Europe. What could the Europeans have done? Rogers says the chaos continues because the British don't really know where they want to go. It opaque about the relationship on purpose. Have the Europeans thought about what kind of a continent they want to see after all this is over? This interview tells you more about the Brexit problem that many reports and opinions, bringing a thoughtful way of looking at the problem. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Italy's Eni raises production by 7% year over year for the fourth quarter of 2005, one of the better records in the oil industry for exploration. Paolo Scaroni, Eni's CEO's plan to build a long term supply relationship with Gazprom, considering the supply shortage facing Europe which relies increasingly on gas for electricity generation.

Putin Blinked

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman says Putin acted emotionally by letting impulsive reaction to the anti-Russian feelings in western Ukraine determine Russian policy following the collapse of the Yakunovych government. The months long Russian response in Crimea and eastern Ukraine may have secured Russian pride at a large cost. This includes the damage to the relationship with Germany, seting the EU on a path to look for other sources of energy to reduce dependence on Russian gas, a natural gas deal with China in which the price was kept "a secret" and may have provided China with a bargaining edge considering the timing of the negotiations. The most severe impact is in the loss of confidence within Russia, reminding the Putin administration that though the economy has grown in the Putin years it is still fragile and connected to the global economy. The capital outflows of the magnitude of $160 billion at a time of high inflation and sharply slowing growth actually put at risk the gains Putin and Russia made in the last decade, and risk the future agenda to improve the standard of living of the Russian people eyond the major cities. Putin's own assessment would eventually be closer to that of Alexei Kudrin. Kudrin, finance minister in Putin's previous term, correctly saw the dangers of impulsive policy concentrated in one figure, and the suppression of other voices including the opposition needed for Russia to be governed in a manner similiar to western Europe, to attain a similiar level of economic progress and standards of living. In today's global economy even the U.S., France, UK and states inside Germany need foreign investment for jobs, new ideas and technology, and the opinion expressed on media television and internet shapes investor sentiment to a larger degree than fully understood....
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
As the media in the US and world cover this issue the focus is on the war and Hormuz. In the background a different situation is playing out. US Iran peace talks with Pakistan/ Qatar mediation June 13 2026- different factions in Iran RGC and Foreign Ministry+mediators with different positions  put out conflicting reports throughout May and June. The mediators Pakistan, Turkey and also Qatar/Saudis which also have a keen interest in limiting the damage to their economies, are taking one position working with the Foreign Ministry and elected Iranian president Pezeshkian who won 16 million votes 55% in the 2024 election. Inside Iran the RGC under new leaders is pursuing its own interests that does not put the economy first in conflict with Pezeshkian and public opinion in Iran for putting the economy first.  Pakistan faces grave risks with its large population, the risks to the economy from oil prices at $125 a barrel to its balance of payments crisis. Turkey also faces risks to its economy with high inflation. Saudis and Qatar see their economic prospects as limited and need to cut economic projects as oil revenues decline. In this situation the US goal of getting nuclear material out of the country is now put into a phased process based on conditions for every step of the way by the US negotiators, yet with memorandum of understanding to accomodate a changing situation. This policy may also be now agreed on between China and the US, and to some extent Russia. This can be seen as playing out and media does not talk about it. China openly greets DJT in Beijing and US and China agree to work things out in May 2026. China cuts its oil use by 3 million barrels a day as shown in a WSJ report this week. This is a major step. UAE leaves OPEC and calls for cuts in oil prices. Next Delsy Rodriguez of Venezuela visits New Delhi, India, and meets to set up economic relationships that include large purchases of Iranian oil to replace supplies lost in Hormuz and what India can offer in exchange for these purchases to Venezuela, including infrastructure building support. This points to a Win-Win for the US, China, India, as oil needs are met from places other than Hormuz for major users of energy. China may have realized that its prolific use of oil for 25 years of rapid development may have led to wasteful use of oil- some of that wasteful use can now be cut- 3 million barrels of oil use cut accepting some slower growth for quality growth. Germany and Japan are using less energy per unit of GDP and China will be looking at their model of energy use as an example to follow. This has huge potential for limiting climate change, as without China and India becoming more efficient in energy use, nothing the US could do was going to make a big difference for climate change. This may be one of the unintended benefits of the Hormuz situation in 2026 - ways to cut energy use for climate change action. And ways to move away from Hormuz and Persian Gulf for supplies so that poorer countries and advanced economies have to pay less for oil helping the poorer countries (Pakistan, Turkey) survive and grow, helping middle economic status rapidly modernizing economies  continue rapid growth (China and India), and helping advanced economies with cost of living hurting the majority of their people (US and EU).  With less money Russia, Iran and other countries will face serious constraints for more military expenditures as for the first time alternative supplies (other than Hormuz) and lower oil prices are being brought about in a newly unfolding plan of the US, China, India and other nations, that is not discussed in today's world media headlines. This means when seen objectively there is room for optimism based on the one thing going for the US, China, India, EU, a host of poorer nations in Asia /Africa/ LatinAmerica, the  5 largest development blocs and population blocs today, which is that the US and China can agree on being custodians for peaceful development accepting their responsibilities for guaranteeing this world order- as DJT and Xi Jinping stated in Beijing in May 2026- with the US aim of nuclear free Iran also accepted by China, Russia, India, and large sections of the Iranian population that put the economy first. ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Katya Adler, Europe Editor of the BBC, points out the change in Germany as AKK, Anne Margaret Kampbrauer, the new leader of the ruling CDU party, brings a change of tone in its outreach to Britain. AKK is slated to be the next chancellor. Her vision was expressed in a letter to The Times saying with other Germans that her wish was for Britain to remain in the EUroepan Union, that she was asking Britain to reconsider. She also supports a second referendum on Brexit.    There is also anxiety in Germany about the effects of no-deal Brexit taking out 0.5% of German GDP at a time when Germany's economy is struggling in 2019. About 100,000 job loss is expected from no-deal Brexit in Germany. As Germany's tone is changing, AKK offers a new face in German relations with Britain that looks towards building a better relationship with Britain. Could this change minds in Britain as a new mood takes place in Germany, and in some ways in France with the emergence of populists in recent years calling for France to leave the EU. AKK tell BBC that Brexit has been a strain for all of us, that in some ways it has paralyzed us. She tells the BBC's Adler that anything that keeps Britain in the EU is something that would make her personally very happy. Rarely have German leaders or public expressed it in this way. Compared to the indifference of the past Germans and Britons having second thoughts offer some more light to the issues of Germany and Britain at a more personal level. ...
The Indian Express Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What this Editorial board opinion in the Indian Express is saying is that India should concentrate its efforts on modernizing its economy on a scale that is similar or surpasses that of China because of its access to the latest technologies. Just as China capitalized on the opportunity presented by its entry in the World Trade Organization in 2001, through an economy wide effort to build a manufacturing and export logistics base. India is presented with the opportunity of building its own manufacturing and export logistics base as supply chains are being redesigned in 2023. This requires a longer term plan with clear thinking and concentrated effort with the entire resources of the nation. What looks like a small or gradual shift in supply chain with the US and EU adding India and Vietnam to their Chinese manufacturing base is going to change with every change in world events, as the US concentration of manufacturing in China becomes a situation that is impossible to to maintain. The only logical way for the US and following the US the EU to create a proper balance in its political relationship with China is to change fully its lopsided concentration of manufacturing in China. Biden is only making the initial moves, the EU is only waking up to the need to make its own changes to reduce this concentration. How much distance does the US need to cover to reduce its concentration in China? By a large amount because the shift of manufacturing was excessive and ill advised done as companies in the US raced in a competition to shift outside over 2 decades and simply outdid themselves and performed a disservice to the workers and families of America whom they served. Just for the US to get workers and families to benefit from return of good manufacturing jobs to the US and restore its manufacturing base that has shriveled, it will have to be a massive enterprise, where day by day it becomes more evident that more and more needs to be and accomplished in an accelerated way. What this also means where appropriate to leave a progressively year after a year larger base in India, and also Vietnam, much larger than is envisaged today. This situation is even more acutely felt in Japan which to bring a proper balance in its political relationship with China needs to even more urgently reduce its concentration of manufacturing in China. It must be the task of the Modi government to have a clear view of the road ahead- build the needed logistical base for exports using the latest technologies and set higher and higher targets for manufacturing.  If you look at the map of Asia this is the Global South- India is 60-70% of the Global South with its population of 1.4 billion people mostly young with aspirations for a modern economy like that of the US and Germany. Add to that Indonesia and Vietnam, and other nations already in the redesigned supply chain in 2023 and you have 2 billion people in Asia. Concentrate on this for the next 2 decades for a complete transformation of India, that is what the younger generation demands of its government. ...

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