The John Batchelor Show

Tuesday 23 February 2016

Air Date: 
February 23, 2016

Photo, left: Chinese People’s Liberation Army staff chase brave CNN reporters who’ve figured out that the PLA is hacking into everything not permanently sealed inside the US.  Under the unelected tyrants of Beijing, the notion of an actually free press is as alien as a social philosophy from Mars.  Thank your lucky stars that you’re reading this in a constitutionally-protected zone. See: http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/20/world/asia/china-unit-61398/
PLA Unit 61398 (Chinese: 61398 部队, Pinyin: 61398 bùduì) is the Military Unit Cover Designator (MUCD) of a People's Liberation Army advanced persistent threat unit that has been alleged to be a source of Chinese computer hacking attacks. "UglyGorilla," "KandyGoo," and "WinXYHappy" are some of the aliases used by the Chinese accused of hacking U.S. companies on Monday. The men behind these handles are officers of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) under a unit known simply by the code 61398. Little is confirmed about the mysterious unit 61398, a section that the Chinese authorities have not officially acknowledged. The Chinese defense ministry said the country's military "has never supported any hacker activities."
But the U.S. indictment notice pinpoints a non-descript building on Datong Road in Shanghai's Pudong District as one of the locations for unit 61398's alleged cyber espionage activities. When CNN tried to visit the building last year, our correspondents were chased away by security guards, as seen in the video above. http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/20/world/asia/china-unit-61398/
JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW
Co-host: Larry Kudlow, CNBC senior advisor; & Cumulus Media radio
 
Hour One
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 1, Block A: James Pethokoukis, AEI  [Richard Cohen wrote a wonderful article in WaPo on Larry’s speech last week, where the speech spoke emphatically of the incomparable benefit of staying sober and clean.], in re: the leading GOP candidate has a negative opinion of foreign trade; is protectionist.  Endorses the most protectionist trade policy since the Depression.  . . . Huge middle-class revolt because they’ve made no economic progress for a decade or more.  Thus [opportunistic] candidates point fingers [to wherever].  Or, in fact, Trump is the only one who really understands this.  Trump aims to create trade conflicts with America. Do not think that this or anything else will being a flood of jobs back to the US – the work has been automated.  We’ve had $500 billion of foreign investment in the US.    If you lower corporate taxes, you can be sure that investment will pour back into the US.  Read John Cochrane of Hoover.  The pound sterling is now below $1.40  Why??
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 1, Block B:    James Pethokoukis, AEI; in re:  Interest rates are plunging everywhere – a bad sign.   Am less worried about recession – 25% - but more about falling profits.  CNBC says it's 50/50 for a recession; JP says: “one in three.”
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 1, Block C: James Taranto, WSJ, in re: Is John Kasich the kingmaker? Probably not unless he wins Ohio (a winner-take-all state) on 15 March. He said he’ll stay in at least till 8 March – Michigan.  GOP has never won the presidency without Ohio, so Kasich would be a good second to any leading candidate.  . . .  If Rubio lost Florida or Cruz lost Texas – that’d extinguish their campaigns. Second-place finishes don't work.  If Trump wins tonight’s Nevada caucuses, that’d be the third straight win – which is big.  Under normal circumstances, people would say it's already over, but Trump is sui generis.   . . . I’m sceptical of poll questions – those that are post-hoc rationalizations.  Discontent of a beleaguered, furious middle class.  Remodelling the GOP is a good thing – it’s sclerotic and Trump is [forcing] change.   . . . My reaction to the Muslim ban was different from most – the way it actually was framed was more reasonable: no Muslim entry until our leaders can figure out what's going on. . . . JT: The theory of the Trump ceiling: people will be to put off by his [wild remarks], but I don't subscribe to that.
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 1, Block D:  Gregory Zuckerman, WSJ, in re: The British whale: the large J P Morgan scandal in 2012, Bruno Iksil built of huge positions, was nicknamed “the whale,” and that led to $6 bil in losses. Now Bruno Iksil finally has just broken his silence: New York knew all about it. Congress condemned Jamie Dimon of J P Morgan. If the whale took bad risks and the bank knew about it – the bank would punish him.  But is this grounds for a govt prosecution? Being stupid is not against the law. The issue is the superiors – two are abroad and refuse to be extradited from Spain or UK; that claim is that they mismarked, misevaluated, to hide how risky the positions were and there are signs that Bruno objected.  . . .  Banks are down almost 20% (which would qualify as a bear); foreign banks never took the pain that the US banks did so aren’t as sound. Lots of rumors, and Deutsche and others don't have as good a capital base.  Need an inverted yield curve to have a recession – it's not.  I might want to sell gold, buy banks, even buy energy.  Right – banks look cheap. 
 
Hour Two
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 2, Block A:  Stephen F. Cohen is Prof. Emeritus of Russian Studies/History/Politics at NYU and Princeton. He is also a member of the Board of the recently-formed American Committee for East-West Accord (eastwestaccord.com); in re:  . . . the so-called Syrian ceasefire.  John Kerry: proof in actions.  Groups don't acknowledge, no one complying, and Turkey routinely shoots artillery into Syria. While Ukraine is he new cold war epicenter, Syria may be the locus of the new hot war.  . ..  note that Ash Carter, not Kerry, called “Russia our enemy number one.”
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 2, Block B:  Stephen F. Cohen, eastwestaccord.com; in re:
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 2, Block C:  Stephen F. Cohen, eastwestaccord.com; in re:
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 2, Block D:  Stephen F. Cohen, eastwestaccord.com; in re:
 
Hour Three
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 3, Block A:   Dr Lara M Brown, George Washington University, & Salena Zito, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, in re:She daintily picked over a late lunch at Brown's Bar-B-Q along U.S. Route 52 in Williamsburg County. A rural county that is more than 65 percent black, Williamsburg routinely holds one of the state's highest unemployment rankings; nearly 30 percent of its residents live in poverty.
“McKnight lives on disability; she has just spent the morning at her weekly dialysis treatment. Neatly dressed in a purple blouse with silver jewelry, she is slow but powerful in describing life in the county seat.
“All around, evidence of decayed manufacturing is overwhelming. ‘Jesus Save’  signs dot the road every mile or so, as do small churches offering clever signs to persuade the traveler to walk inside.
‘I don't want both of my kids to stay here and continue this feeling of being stuck,’ she said, describing the emotional and financial toll of poverty. ‘I am trying to encourage them to move out.’”
“In South Carolina, you come to play hard and take the fight a little bit on the edges. ... The stakes are high here to win this state, and we make sure you are up to the task,” bit.ly/1otGdJt
 
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 3, Block B:  Dr Lara M Brown, George Washington University, & Salena Zito, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, in re: CNN town hall: Clinton, Sanders make pitch to minority voters  Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders confronted issues of race Tuesday at a CNN town ...
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 3, Block C:  Steve Krasner, Hoover, in re: The Hoover Institution released today findings from our bipartisan foreign policy working group, made up of scholars from Stanford University and the Hoover Institution.   (Hoover Institution Bipartisan Working Group Releases, National Security Strategy for the Future)  http://www.hoover.org/research/pragmatic-engagement-amidst-global-uncertainty-three-major-challenges (1 of 2)
..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..
STANFORD, CA – The Hoover Institution today released Pragmatic Engagement Amidst Global Uncertainty: Three Major Challenges, a national security strategy written by the Hoover Institution’s Working Group on Foreign Policy and Grand Strategy. While the United States continues to face unprecedented foreign policy challenges, there has been no consensus on a strategy to address specific problems. Thus, this bipartisan group of Hoover Institution and Stanford University scholars was convened to assess current threats and outline guiding principles for a smart national security strategy.
“We are living in a world of uncertainty and anxiety when it comes to foreign policy,” said co-author Amy Zegart, Hoover Institution senior fellow and Center for International Security and Cooperation co-director. “While presidential campaigns may be polarized when it comes to issues of national security, Americans are unified in their desire to make our country strong and secure. This strategy serves as a foreign policy road map in hopes that the United States will become the leader in a more peaceful world.”
The working group’s findings focus on three orienting principles:  The first is that the United States should be unapologetic about its pursuit of our economic and security interests and more tempered in the pursuit of ideals. Second, the United States should leverage existing strengths by nurturing alliances and adapting institutions that have formed the cornerstone of the international order for seven decades. This includes standing by NATO against Russia, bolstering networks in the Asia Pacific, and modernizing governance structures such as the International Monetary Fund and the United Nations. Third, the United States must develop flexible unilateral capabilities that can be deployed against varied threats. This begins with establishing a strategic energy policy and drawing more attention to counter-messaging.
“Our leaders appear to be distracted by the day-to-day headlines, allowing for more pressing foreign policy challenges to fester and grow,” said co-author Stephen D. Krasner, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. “In this complex threat environment, reactive and ad hoc measures are not adequate.  We need a strategy that makes clear what we stand for, what our goals are, and what capabilities we need to achieve them.”
The Hoover Institution's Working Group on Foreign Policy and Grand Strategy is a bipartisan group of Hoover Institution and Stanford University scholars who for the past two years have sought to better understand the challenges facing our nation and develop orienting principles to better serve America's interests.
Edited by: Stephen D. Krasner, the Graham H. Stuart Professor of International Relations at Stanford and senior fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and the Hoover Institution and Amy Zegart, the Davies Family Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution and co-director of the Center for International Security at Cooperation.
With the Assistance of: Karl W. Eikenberry, the William J. Perry Fellow in International Security at the Center for International Security and Cooperation and distinguished fellow with the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at Stanford University; James D. Fearon, the Theodore and Frances Geballe Professor in the School of Humanities and Sciences, professor of political science, and senior fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies; Francis Fukuyama, the Oliver Nomellini Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies; David M. Kennedy, the Donald J. McLachlan Professor of History, Emeritus, at Stanford; Abraham D. Sofaer, the George P. Shultz Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy at the Hoover Institution.
..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 3, Block D: Steve Krasner, Hoover, in re: The Hoover Institution released today findings from our bipartisan foreign policy working group, made up of scholars from Stanford University and the Hoover Institution.   (Hoover Institution Bipartisan Working Group Releases, National Security Strategy for the Future)  http://www.hoover.org/research/pragmatic-engagement-amidst-global-uncertainty-three-major-challenges (2 of 2)
 
Hour Four
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 4, Block A: Eli Lake, Bloomberg, in re:  Obama Administration Argues over Support for Syrian Kurds Syrian Kurds are now attacking U.S.-supported rebels, but U.S. officials disagree about whether the Kurds have switched sides -- and about whether the U.S. should continue increasing its arms support for them, as opposed to focusing support on Sunni Arab rebels.
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2016-02-23/obama-administration-fights-itself-over-role-of-syrian-kurds
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2016-02-23/obama-s-irrelevant-outmoded-case-against-guantanamo  Obama's Irrelevant, Outmoded Case Against Guantanamo   Watching President Barack Obama make his end-of-term push Tuesday morning to close the Guantanamo Bay prison, my thoughts turned to terrorists. I tried to imagine what two hardened jihadis must think about the president's plan. "Are we still on for the car bombing at the embassy?" "I don't know. The infidel leader says he wants to close the prison in Cuba. Let's wait to see what Congress does."  It sounds absurd. It is absurd. And yet, it gets to one of the main arguments Obama has made for closing Guantanamo since taking office in 2009. He said Tuesday that the prison's existence is "counterproductive to our fight against terrorists, because they use it as propaganda in their efforts to recruit." The president is not alone in this view. In 2008, when Obama was running for the White House, no less an authority than General David Petraeus said he favored closing Guantanamo because it was a recruitment tool. George W. Bush and John McCain have said as much themselves.  This is true in the narrowest sense. For years, the Taliban, al Qaeda and other jihadis have featured Guantanamo in propaganda. When James Foley was beheaded in 2014, he was wearing an orange jumpsuit, the same color as the jumpsuits worn by early Guantanamo detainees.  But in a more important sense, Guantanamo doesn't really matter in the battle for the hearts and minds of would-be terrorists. Charlie Winter, a senior research associate at Georgia State University's initiative on transcultural conflict and violence, and an expert in jihadi propaganda, told me Tuesday that Guantanamo is a part of the general message about the abuse and unlawful detention of Muslim prisoners.  But Winter stressed that Guantanamo is "one of many things held up by radical Islamists as evidence of the anti-Muslim conspiracy." For the Islamic State in particular, a bigger propaganda tool has been portraying the U.S. and Iran as allies in tormenting Syria's Sunni Muslims. Other jihadis have featured U.S. drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan in recruitment propaganda. There is also the U.S. support for Israel and Saudi Arabia.  None of which means that Obama should cancel the Iran nuclear deal, suspend aid to Saudi Arabia and Israel, and end the drone war. The enemy gets a vote on whether there is war or peace, but it doesn't get a vote on strategy.  So why then does Obama insist on closing Guantanamo? It's not that the prison is counterproductive. Rather, the president has said it "is viewed as a stain on our broader record of upholding the highest standards of rule of law." This is not really a strategic argument. It's a moral one. Obama wants to close Guantanamo because he thinks it's an example of how his predecessor exceeded the rule of law in prosecuting the war against jihadis.  But this argument too is disingenuous. It's true that Obama has winnowed the pool of Guantanamo detainees to 91 and he plans to transfer 35 of these prisoners to third countries. But for those remaining, Obama does not propose an end to their indefinite detention -- which, let's face it, is what troubles their supporters in the Muslim world. Rather he plans to indefinitely detain these prisoners at a new facility inside the United States, where they will face a modified military tribunal. To do this, Obama would have to persuade Congress to change the law that would prohibit such transfers.  All of this is too much for the American Civil Liberties Union. In a statement Tuesday, the group's executive director, Anthony Romero, praised Obama's efforts to close Guantanamo. But, he said, "his decision to preserve the Bush-created military commissions is a mistake."  He added, "the president’s continuing embrace of indefinite detention without charge or trial will tarnish his legacy.”  Romero should criticize Obama. He has a fundamental disagreement with the president on whether America should treat global jihadis as enemy fighters or as suspects for law enforcement. Back in 2008, . . .
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 4, Block B:  Marcus Weisgerber, in re: "Back to Iraq: US Military Contractors Return in Droves": Marcus Weisgerber reports that behind the president's directive to 'accelerate' the counter-ISIS campaign came a surge in the number of contractors assisting in the campaign against ISIS. Weisgerber writes that, "The sharp increase..underscores the military's reliance on civilians even for missions with relatively small troop presence." 
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 4, Block C: Robert Zimmerman, behindtheblack, in re:  (1 of 2)
Tuesday  23  February  2016   / Hour 4, Block D: Robert Zimmerman, behindtheblack, in re:  (2 of 2)
..  ..  ..