Photo, left: . . . In reality, Xi's attempt to tighten his control over China's vast and unwieldy bureaucracy reinforces global fears that China is starting to lose control of its foreign policy. This disturbing truth goes a long way towards explaining why the international community was so alarmed by China's announcement of a new "Air Defense Identification Zone" (ADIZ) in the East China Sea, followed shortly thereafter by a "no-fishing zone" in the South China Sea. Even if these new zones were carefully planned years in advance, they also represent part of a larger pattern of aggression - propelled by China's hostile and uncompromising form of nationalism - that is beyond the ability of China's leaders to control.
That is what really underlies the collective anxiety of the United States, Japan, and Southeast Asian countries every time China makes aggressive moves overseas. Ironically, China's new zones of control only serve to underscore deep concerns among a global community that is starting to realize that China is incapable of controlling the nationalist sentiment which has hijacked China's foreign policy.  --  Thanks to Asia Times for this text, and much gratitude to media2.intoday.in/ for the graphic!
JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW
 
Co-hosts: Gordon Chang, Forbes.com.  Dr. David M. Livingston, The Space Show.
Hour One
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 1, Block A: Scott Harold, deputy director, Center for Asia-Pacific Policy at The Rand Corporation, in re:  China Throws Lifeline to Russia Amid Economic Crisis Beijing and Moscow move closer with deals that could undermine Western sanctions China is providing an economic lifeline to Russia by boosting its imports of Russian oil, the Wall Street Journal reports.  Russia’s economy has deteriorated with the recent drop in oil prices and levying of sanctions from the West in response to the Kremlin’s destabilization of Ukraine. Moscow has now turned to Beijing for support despite their long-time rivalry:  But Chinese customs data released Friday show that China’s crude imports from some big OPEC nations have plummeted, while imports from Russia
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 1, Block B: Alan Tonelson, independent economic policy analyst who blogs at RealityChek and tweets at @AlanTonelson, on the trade aspects of China attacking VPNs [virtual private networks].  Raising the Great Firewall and discouragement of VPNs:  cracking down on foreigners in China as China cuts itself off from the rest of the world.  Trade war: use tariffs or trade cases against the antagonist.  "No-tariff trade barriers" – the whole array of measures that almost all govts around he world use to slow or stop commerce across borders to secure bargaining chips. China is a past master at this.  Blockage of Internet traffic looms as an immense barrier.  Beijing says, "It’s a matter of natl security to prevent citizens from looking at Facebook." Blocking some and not others is called trade discrimination, is illegal.   World trade system from the 1940s was to prevent the division of the world into trade blocs such as led to WWII.  The West is clueless abut what to do abt China's overt malfeasance against free speech and free commerce.   . . .  Very bad behavior due to US inability to deal with China's predatory practices, incl the one bldg in Shanghai (military) that hacked into Google to get vast amounts of data.  New York Times this morning: Two major Internet systems – one inside, one outside, China. "The lights are going out all over Asia."
Background: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_12/b4220029428856.htm
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 1, Block C: Michael J Listner, spacelawsolutions.com [a legal and policy think tank], in re:  SpaceX has a Falcon Heavy vid of lift-off and return - it got to the barge, ergo successful.  Extremely complicated matters coming up in court these days.  SpaceX vs US Air Force from April 2014 contesting the sole-source contract they never could bid on; that the "block buy" needs to be broken up.  Over 170 different filings to date.  Court obliged them to go to mediation, reached a settlement.  When the Feds are your customer you have to abide by their procurement rules, but now SpaceX is in a better position to protest in future.  If you go up against the Feds, you better go with your A+ game. 
 
The U.S. Air Force and SpaceX have released the following statement:  The Air Force and SpaceX have reached agreement on a path forward for the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program that improves the competitive landscape and achieves mission assurance for national security space launches.  Under the agreement, the Air Force will work collaboratively with SpaceX to complete the certification process in an efficient and expedient manner.  This collaborative effort will inform the SECAF directed review of the new entrant certification process.  The Air Force also has expanded the number of competitive opportunities for launch services under the EELV program while honoring existing contractual obligations.  Going forward, the Air Force will conduct competitions consistent with the emergence of multiple certified providers.  Per the settlement, SpaceX will dismiss its claims relating to the EELV block buy contract pending in the United States Court of Federal Claims. / Blue Origin has a patent on landing on a barge; SpaceX suing before a group of judges claiming that Blue Origin's patent is not valid.
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 1, Block D: Michael Auslin, AEI in re:    First, a celebration of Reagan's ranch: on one side, a valley; on the other, the Pacific. It’s beautiful and restorative, dissolves cynicism.  In China, I'm struck by how the purported collective leadership increasingly is the purview of one tyrannical man; and by the cynicism of the Beijingpoplace and their hatred of the regime.  As it's got stronger it’s got more aggressive, but no articulation of why it’s important that China liberalize. Instead, our [talking heads] say that we ought to accept it as it is.  [Not wholesome, not good for the West, or even for Chinese people.] That Valley of the Shadow of Death – no, that hole in the ground – named Xi Jinping.
Last year, $188 billion outflow of Chinese capital, most of it hot money.
Misha Auslin writes: I recently had the opportunity to tour Ronald Reagan's ranch near Santa Barbara, and found that it unexpectedly revived my optimism about America's strength and future. I wrote about it today in The Week
Lessons of the Reagan ranch: America must rediscover the simple, civil life "It casts a spell. There's such a sense of seclusion. And, I suppose, it's the Scriptural line, 'I look to the hills, whence cometh my strength."  That's how Ronald Reagan described his beloved ranch in the mountains above Santa Barbara — Ranch of the Skies — to his close friend, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.
More than three decades later, the spell still exists, instantly showing a visitor to the ranch why Reagan loved this place more than any other. A drive up a winding, narrow road, past other ranches, fruit groves, gullies, and arching trees suddenly opens up onto a beautiful vista of rolling hills and woods. Stepping out of the car, the air is so crisp, it's like biting into a thin lemon wafer. The Reagans lived here part time for more than two decades, then sold the ranch in the mid-1990s, after the president was diagnosed with Alzheimer's. The Young America's Foundation bought the entire property and restored it to the exact state as when the Reagans owned it, including only original items, many donated by Nancy Reagan. Closed to the general public, it now opens for special events and visits. More than any other presidential site I've visited, Rancho del Cielo seems a living place, inhabited by the spirit of its owner. In fact, the site is so perfectly preserved, not as a museum, but as a home, that it seems to be waiting for him. Ronald and Nancy Reagan should be riding horses over its 688 acres, or walking the trails, staff and Secret Service bustling about, media lurking nearby. I kept expecting Reagan to appear from around the tack barn or tool shed.
Hour Two
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 2, Block A: Charles Burton, professor at Brock University, in re: . . .  Xi is becoming the new Stalin, has gone after a bunch of competitors for power.  Can he undertake such comprehensive campaign, alienating so many at once?  Simultaneously, lower-level elements supporting the comprehensive rule f the Party n China are much inconvenienced by an anti-corruption campaign. IS this a parallel with 1964-65?  Also, the campaign of 1957, where intellectuals are being condemned by name. "Rule of law and democratization" are suppressed by a sledgehammer of Marxist ideology.  Isolate people and put them to torture to confess – some commit suicide in advance out of terror.  This is the essence of Chinese Communist control up till now. If Xi succeeds in making all elements of society subservient: what then?  No policies or vision for China's future yet known.   Is anyone in Washington keeping track?  No – most people are extremely disappointed by Washington : not wiling to see the implications. This is the closing of China – has consequences for trade, for everything, Any Plans B?  I don’t think so. Looks as though no one has come to terms with the purge.  It’d be quite helpful if the CIA bestirred itself and collected the needed data, to which we don't have open-source access. Once you start a purge you must go all the way – or they’ll come and get you!
http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2015/01/26/chinas-xi-builds-support-for-big-move-putting-politics-ahead-of-the-economy/?mod=chinablog
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 2, Block B: Nitin Gokhale, independent security analyst and author of Beyond NJ 9842: The Saichen Saga, in re:  http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-30978185
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 2, Block C:  Sadanand Dhume, AEI & WSJ, in re: Pres Obama gave a terrific speech in India, had breakthroughs that could be called "springtime" – but how to bld a successful relationship?  Pres Obama's record that way in the past hasn’t been too good.  China will help by its charming habit of marching soldiers into Indian territory, as well as bullying southeast Asian neighbors; but in the past Obama just quit paying attention. He says, "ABC" and it doesn't happen. To Pres Obama's credit he's accepted Modi's hand in friendship; now we'll see if it [solidifies]. Ash Carter was an excellent Secy of Defense, but India had a defense minister so worried about his rep for being Mr Clean that he decided to take no decision on anything.  India is on an upswing but not as good as a few years ago, Modi's single-point mandate is economic improvement, for which he need foreign investment.  Some credit China as expert diplomats, but right now they're clumsy and ham-handed. China has long had its fingers in Pakistan; more in future? Probably yes.  See economic corridor from Guadar on hte Indian Ocean to the Himalayas, it’s striking how China is making Pakistan a dependent – although the policyakers are stunningly incompetent at modernizing their economy. even the Chinese cannot get the Pakistani economy moving. 
It’s Springtime for U.S.-India Relations  Here’s an opportunity for President Obama to leave behind a relationship with India that is stronger than the one he inherited. On Monday President Barack Obama becomes the first American president to preside as the chief guest at India’s Republic Day parade, an annual spectacle that celebrates the country’s democracy by showcasing its cultural diversity and military might. Before Mr. Obama leaves New Delhi Tuesday, the U.S. and India will have announced a slew of agreements spanning everything from nuclear energy and weapons manufacturing to intelligence sharing. In short, it’s springtime for U.S-India relations.
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 2, Block D: Rick Fisher, Intl Assessment and Strategy Center, in re:  Pentagon refused to agree to a major new mil exchange with China till there's agreement on airborne encounters.   Much frustration in The Building.  However, the mil-to-mil relations are based on  . . .  Air-to-air encounters are important to the US but not to China. Even the recent maritime agreement is viewed in the US with trepidation; no confidence that China will adhere to its commitment.  Mr Forbes of Virginia says he US has shared too much information with China.  In addition to China's massive thefts, we’re also sharing: US has given mountain s more info to China than they’ve given us. After Tien An Men, China held out for 15 years before considering semi-[useful] relations. At RIMPAC 2014, the US invited China to be full partners – China sent an intell ship there to sit offshore and pick up signals. Amazingly, the US failed to tell China to take their reps and spy ship and go home; now the US has set a precedent!   . . .  We’re headed back to 2003: China likes to engineer incidents to shock and amaze.  That was an intell disaster for the US. If you're a neighbor or associate of China, eventually they'll sneak up and punch you.  Hope that the carrier visit is off.
If you're a neighbor or associate of China, eventually they'll sneak up and punch you.
Hour Three
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 3, Block A:   Monica Crowley, Fox, & Washington Times Online opinion editor; in re:  At Koch brothers event, Rubio, Cruz, Paul show GOP's split on foreign policy  ;  http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-01-27/exclusive-steve-king-says-scott-walker-and-ted-cruz-won-the-iowa-freedom-summit
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/397155/2016-it-begins-john-fund
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 3, Block B: Monica Crowley, Fox, & Washington Times Online opinion editor; in re: Cruz, Paul and Rubio Defend Outside Spending in Koch Brothers Forum
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 3, Block C: Francis Rose, Federal News Radio, in re: Miller Proposes New VA Whistleblower Protections, More Accountability for Retaliators  Yesterday Chairman Miller introduced the Veterans Affairs Retaliation Prevention Act of 2015. The bill would provide VA whistleblowers with a means to solve problems at the lowest level possible, while offering them protection from reprisals and real accountability for those who reprise against them.   Specifically, the bill would:
·         Establish a new system employees could use to report retaliation claims that emphasizes addressing problems at the lowest level possible. Supervisors would be required to report all retaliation claims to facility directors, eliminating the possibility for facility leaders to claim plausible deniability of such claims
·         Codify prohibitions against negative personnel actions for employees who file whistleblower complaints or who cooperate with congressional, Government Accountability Office or Inspector General investigations
·         Establish mandatory disciplinary penalties for employees found to have engaged in retaliation against whistleblowers
·         Establish a mandatory whistleblower protection training program for all VA employees
In the months since VA’s medical care wait times and accountability crises were exposed, the department’s treatment of whistleblowers has generated much discussion and controversy. Although VA leaders have pledged that whistleblower retaliation will not be tolerated, many VA whistleblowers contend little has changed in the wake of the department’s vows to protect employees who expose wrongdoing.
Incredibly, even as the department has reached legal settlements with whistleblowers who endured retaliation, those who retaliated against them have gone unpunished. According to Phoenix VA Health Care system whistleblower and settlement recipient Dr. Katherine Mitchell, “the physician chain of command and the HR chain of command that retaliated against me remain intact and, as far as I know, have never been held accountable.” Even after paying out more than $1 million taxpayer dollars to settle recent claims from employees who endured retaliation, VA has refused to say whether it would discipline the retaliators whose actions led to the settlement.
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 3, Block D: Jim Epstein, Reason.com, in re:   Part 1: This Impoverished City Hiked Spending to $25,000 per Student to Fix Its Schools. And Nothing Changed.   ;  Part 2: How a Great School is Breaking the Cycle of Poverty in America's Poorest City  ; Part 3: America's Worst School System Will Soon Be Dead. Will What Replaces It Be Any Better?
Hour Four
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 4, Block A: Jim McTague, Barron's Washington, in re: Economic Collapse Likely If Russian Spy Ring Mission to Crash Wall Street Succeeded, More Spies Still Attempting? b4in.com/jJvo
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 4, Block B:  Michael Ledeen, FDD, in re:  The real threats to us, and how to deal with them, that is.  Lots of well-known former foreign policy/national security officials don’t, or feel obliged to appear “realistic” (diplospeak for “don’t do anything, keep talking”).  Some former military officers do, although only up to a point. Three duly respected policy professionals, Denis Ross (Obama’s — and plenty of others’ — Middle East guru for a few years early on), Eric Edelman (Bush’s under secretary of defense and earlier ambassador to Turkey), and Ray Takeyh of the Council on Foreign Relations (who recently published a very important story detailing the background of the Iranian occupation of the US Embassy in Tehran in ’79), tell us it’s time to get tougher with Iran:
[It's] time to acknowledge that we need a revamped coercive strategy, one that threatens what the Islamic Republic values the most—its influence in the Middle East and its standing at home.
In other words, threaten the regime itself and its foreign legions in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen.  But just when you say to yourself, “Finally!  They’re going to call for regime change,” they tiptoe delicately into dipspeak:  “Iranian officials must come to understand that there will be no further concessions to reach an accord and that time is running out for negotiations.” Further down, they return to the “we’re almost, kinda for regime change” theme:
the United States should consider a political warfare campaign against Tehran to complement its economic sanctions policy. The administration officials and its broadcast services should draw attention to the unsavory nature of the theocratic regime and repressive behavior. Such language will not just showcase our values but potentially inspire political dissent. As if the Iranian people needed the State Department and the appeasers at the feckless Persian service of the Voice of America to tear the blinders from their eyes and enable seem to see that they are living in misery under a hateful regime!  If you really want to “inspire political dissent,” just do it.  Call for the release of the opposition leaders, support the students’ and workers’ and women’s movements, and call for a national referendum on the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic.  But the three gurus aren’t calling for . . .  [more]
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 4, Block C:  Robert Zimmerman, behindtheblack.com, in re: A drone for Mars  Engineers at JPL have begun testing prototypes of a drone that would be used on Mars to aid future rovers.   The newest solution proposed by JPL is the Mars Helicopter, an autonomous drone that could “triple the distances that Mars rovers can drive in a Martian day,” according to NASA. The helicopter would fly ahead of a rover when its view is blocked and send Earth-bound engineers the right data to plan the rover’s route.
SpaceX moving forward on manned flight  At a briefing today SpaceX outlined its plans for testing its manned Dragon capsule as well as the rough schedule for the two launch abort tests it must first fly before putting humans on Dragon.  The first test, a launchpad abort test, is expected to take place in about a month. The second, an abort test from an in-flight Falcon 9, is also expected to occur this year.   If all goes well, NASA hopes to have both SpaceX and Boeing flying American astronauts to ISS by 2017.
Tuesday  28 January 2015 / Hour 4, Block D:   Ken Croswell, Science Magazine, in re: The alarm clock rang at three in the morning.  On April 8, 1960, Frank Drake walked through the cold fog to the 85-foot radio telescope in Green Bank, West Virginia.  His mission was no ordinary one, for he was about to search for radio signals from extraterrestrial life.
Drake's first target was Tau Ceti, a yellow G-type star twelve light-years away that resembles the Sun.  Drake and his colleagues pointed the telescope at the star and began to monitor it for unusual radio emissions.  A mechanical chart recorder received the signals and wrote them out on paper, providing a continuous record of the star's output.  All morning long, as the astronomers observed this star, the chart recorder's pen rose and fell, but the signals were just random noise.  Tau Ceti was quiet.
At noon, Drake swung the telescope toward his second target, Epsilon Eridani, an orange dwarf that lies eleven light-years away.  At first, it was also quiet.  A few minutes later, though, the pen on the chart recorder went wild, jumping off scale and banging the top of the recorder eight times a second.
Now what?  Drake had never thought finding extraterrestrial life would be so easy.  To test the apparent discovery, Drake moved the radio telescope away from Epsilon Eridani, and the signal vanished, suggesting that the star itself, rather than terrestrial interference, was the source.  But when he pointed the telescope back at the star, the signal did not resume.  Puzzled, he observed Epsilon Eridani into the afternoon, until the star set.  It remained silent.
In the following days, Drake and his colleagues continued to track the star, but the Epsilon Eridanians refused to stage an encore.  In order to test the extraterrestrial nature of any additional signals, the scientists had set up a small radio antenna that picked up terrestrial noise.  A true extraterrestrial signal would therefore arrive via only the main receiver.
A week and a half after the first detection, while the astronomers were observing Epsilon Eridani, the strong signal returned, once again pulsing eight times a second.  This time, though, the scientists noted with disappointment that the pulsations came through both receivers, which meant that the signal originated nearby, probably from a passing plane.  The scientists had indeed found proof of intelligent life--on Earth rather than around Epsilon Eridani.