Photo, left: 
 
JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW
 
Co-hosts: Gordon Chang, Forbes.com & Daily Beast.
 
Hour One
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 1, Block A: Dean Cheng, senior research Fellow, Asia Studies Center, Heritage Foundation, in re:  “A Sino-US war in view of the crisis cannot be considered implausible.” Chinese have psychologically have painted themselves into a corner – will not repeat the century of humiliation; argue that the South China Sea is theirs. The Hague disagrees, as does everyone else, but the Beijing leadership holds this true.  This becomes a matter of defending one’s own territory. Today’s PLA is not your father’s PLA – substantial resources ot fight in space, IT joint operations.   Five or ten years from bow – see the RAND study – is when [this could get rough].  Is this about Ch’ing Dynasty?  Flame is kept alive through the CCP educational system, a steady drumbeat.  First Sino-Japanese War – 1894-95: enormous symbolism lost Taiwan to Japan and Korea in sphere of influence. Note that no one in present Chinese military has been tempered by the horror of war.  This is true for every one of our allies in the region.   . . . Should we keep our eye on Tokyo, as perhaps the most militant in the region? The problem is that the region is unhappy that Japan has never come to terms with t he Second War the way the Germans have.  This makes it hard for the US to create a coaliti0n against China. Lee Kwan-yu said: “It’s dangerous to offer an alcoholic a liqueur-filled chocolate.”  We should have listened to him.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-specter-of-an-accidental-china-u-s-war-1471360811
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 1, Block B:  James Holmes, professor of strategy at the Naval War College and a former surface warfare officer, in Foreign Policy in re:   Cam Ranh Bay: part of the way of dealing with the aggression of the Chinese navy. After the Vietnam war, the USSR moved in and upgraded the naval base; now, you may see the US in there again.  Philippines are the weakest state in SE Asia; can prevail against China by: remain consistent anent the Hague decision; and stay consistent in order to keep your allies with you. Duterte seems to be willing to barter away everything to China.  Cam Ranh Bay plus regional nations are a confluence of mice; is that enough?  Well, it's a best-case scenario.  Best you can hope from South Korea is an occasional freedom-of-navigation sail.  Europeans could do that too, and it’d be helpful.  How about India? A great power, but somewhat reluctant; lot of cultural influences slow it down.  / Yes, both sides are looking at each other. Gaming? I hope every permutation is being looked at – both for strategy and to demonstrate to friends and allies that there’s no substitute for cooperative action.
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 1, Block C: Patrick Tucker, DefenseOne, in re: Allegations of Russians, or bad actors, et al., hacking into DNC and other institutions.  “Zero days” are exploits to gain access to a target’s system: called “zero day” because the target has seen this ploy zero times in the past.  Here, called APPT28 and APPT29; Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear;  linked to FSB and GRU (Russian intell, civilian and military).  State actors have a lot more zero days than would a conventional actor.  In sum, Russia has weapons we can't stop; we can limit the damage. The difference is the scale.   . . . Need to render stolen info valueless as rapidly as possible.  . .  . Wikileaks potentially being weaponized by an enemy in order to affect US elections. 
Russian-Linked Group Leaks US Lawmakers’ Phone Numbers, Emails
Late Friday, an online figure linked to Russian intelligence groups released the personal information of several lawmakers, part of an established pattern.
Russia Wanted to Be Caught, Says Company Waging War on DNC Hackers
That fits a pattern of increasing bold moves over the past year by the groups, which are also known as FANCY BEAR and COZY BEAR, one expert says.
How Putin Weaponized WikiLeaks to Influence the Presidential Election
Evidence suggests a Russian intelligence group was the source of the most recent WikiLeaks intel dump, which was aimed to influence the U.S. election.
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 1, Block D:  Patrick Tucker, DefenseOne, in re: . . .  Would the Russians actually want us to know that it was they who hacked? Could just as well be DPRK, or even an American. Telegraph one’s ability to do this.   Extremely effective. 
Felix Dzerzhinsky, of Polish descent. In the Presidium, now the Russian Natl Defense Council, they no longer use computers; thy use typewriters with carbon paper.  Simply need end to end encryption. This group also broke into US Joint Chiefs of Staff civilian email. Use sound cyber hygiene. Also create consequences for this behavior: hack into enemy server? Sanctions? Above all, make a policy and publicize it. 
 
Hour Two
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 2, Block A:  Rick Fisher, senior Fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, in re: China is leading everyone in experimenting with a non-hackable technique: a quantum-comms satellite launched on Tuesday.  Using entangled photons –can communicated from one place to another without any noticeable comms link, since one photon’s info will be duplicated by another photon, no matter how far, If two photons are entangled, if you shift one, the other will shift identically.  “Like writing onfo on a soap bubble; if you try to interfere, it'll break/disappear.”  Recall that China is approx. where the Wright Brothers were in 1905; but China is ahead, and propaganda is spinning . . .   Sate: China was bragging about having established such a network in a Chinese city. US has not done htat yet.   A few years hence:   .  Quantum network communicates faster than the speed of light.  Could transfer its comms to satellites ‘way, ’way out there (LaGrangian Points?), to far orbits.  China also working on laser satellites – slower than the speed of light, but transfer cast amts of data; cd manage multiple conflicts on Earth.  An arms race already under way: not just these two, but across the board. China did not dvp the concept; they're very good at following up so the US must take the lead [in order to stay ahead].  China is cutting corners: stealing, purchasing, or re-acquiring (with engineers returning home from overseas).  http://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-latest-leap-forward-isnt-just-greatits-quantum-1471269555; and laser data relay satellites, which can handle very high data throughput
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 2, Block B:  Fraser Howie, co-author of Red Capitalism: The Fragile Financial Foundation of China's Extraordinary Rise, in re:  “Public investment isn't enough to prop up China’s GDP. “  We've seen this since March: enormous amts of credit with no good result; and worse since then. The Communist Party does not recognize truth and certainly will not speak it. Data show that you can keep doing public investment but it's not working. However only state investment can come in now.  We've also seen tremendous outbound investment – “returns are  so much better elsewhere.”  If you're a large Chinese corporation looking to invest, in China it's a market where you have clear advantages; so why not invest there if there really is a 6% increase in GDP?  Chinese co’s have no outside experience,. Retail sales are declining and consumption has levelled off.  Health care, financial svcs, insurance and mobile and texting are always popular; but consumer services aren't enough to solve this. “Get a plane ticket to Bermuda; nothing you do will help.” Xi believes in regressive change. So nothing they do will help.  Sat spending: “digging holes and filling them in.” Need to close the zombie companies, do housecleaning. Recall that the key matter for the CCP is staying in absolute power no matter what. http://seekingalpha.com/article/4000138-chinas-growth-warning-signs-increase
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3e11cafa-62f5-11e6-a08a-c7ac04ef00aa.html#axzz4Hc4NuKlL
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 2, Block C:  Sadanad Dhume, AEI,  in re:
India’s Misguided Name Games  Confident countries don’t need to boost their pride by fiddling with city names.  
Can China Keep India Silent Over the South China Sea?   IPSA – India, Brazil South Africa: the only democratic countries in the BRICS.  
China wants to make sure India does not raise the issue at the upcoming G20Summit.   However, the “carrot and stick” maneuver adopted by China may be not able to guarantee India’s silence on the South China Sea issue during the G20. On the one hand, China’s “stick” seems useless. Although Wang hinted at an “eye for an eye” tactic, in truth China could not bear the cost of a rupture at the BRICS summit, which has been viewed by China as an important chance to enhance its “international positive image” around the world. Actually, China lacks an effective means to check India’s vital interests. Although India needs China’s help over the Kashmir clashes with Pakistan, China needs more cooperation from India, in areas ranging from the Taiwan, Tibet, and Xinjiang issues to counterterrorism.
On the other hand, China’s “carrot” for India does not seem very attractive. India desires to be an elephant, not a rabbit. Joining the Nuclear Suppliers Group is important for India’s great power ambition, but given the limited international support for China’s South China Sea claims, it is very likely that India’s leader will talk about the South China Sea during the G20 summit once the United States or other states mention the topic. For India, the South China Sea issue is an important chance to unite a regional alliance against China’s expansion under the “One Belt, One Road” policy. Meanwhile, India’s growing perception of China as a threat is driving New Delhi to strengthen military ties with some U.S. allies and associates in the Asia Pacific region, including Australia, Japan, South Korea, and Vietnam. http://thediplomat.com/2016/08/can-china-keep-india-silent-over-the-south-china-sea/
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 2, Block D:  Paul R Gregory, Hoover and author; in re: The Conference Board measurements of . . . Total Value . . . ; China is creating debt twice as fast as productivity; are in negative factor productivity: less output than they're putting in.  . . .  Sole source of growth has been investment – a little labor growth and improved schooling., but basically investment.  Major exaggerations for USSR were 1930 to 1955. Thereafter numbers were closer to accurate. Distinctive: their period of stagnation, beginning 1965.   Free-mkt economies employ capital more efficiently.  State enterprises can be financed at 5%: private, at 25%!
Do Alternative Estimates Show China Entering a Period of Stagnation?  The media have largely ignored the alternative estimates of Chinese growth of the Conference Board. These calculations (discussed below) claim that China’s growth has been overstated by some thirty percent over the reform era, that it has averaged around five percent for the past five years, and is little different or lower than the two large Asian Tigers (Taiwan and South Korea) during their thirty years of rapid growth starting in 1960. Alarming is the collapse of total factor productivity (TFP) since 2010, a pattern reminiscent of the USSR during its protracted period of stagnation preceding its collapse.
By way of background: The Conference Board is an international association of over 1,200 member-companies established in 1916. Along with international organizations like the World Bank, OECD, and IMF, the private Conference Board is a prominent source of data on the world economy, human capital, and technological progress. Among economists, the Conference Board is known for its productivity calculations and for continuing the path-breaking work of the late Angus Maddison’s Groningen Growth Center. International organizations report official country statistics, but the independent Conference Board prepares alternate estimates of suspect national statistics and even includes Taiwan (the world’s 21st largest economy) in its data set. Its stated goal is to provide “objective, world-renowned economic data and analyses that help business and policy leaders make sense of their operating environments.”
The Conference Board has reconstructed China’s GDP using methods reminiscent of recalculations of Soviet growth during the Cold War era. Among other adjustments, the Conference Board builds Chinese industrial production from the bottom-up from physical output series, lowers the official (and unprecedentedly-high) service productivity growth, and raises some of the inflation figures used for deflation of nominal GDP. The Conference Board sets out the details of its recalculations in a hundred page working paper. Thus, we know more about the Conference Board’s data series than about China’s official figures (China Statistical Yearbook).
As someone who earlier worked on the Soviet figures, the Conference Board recalculations seem reasonable, and should be considered as a welcome alternate perspective on China’s economic growth during its reform era.
The accompanying figure compares the Official-Chinese and revised Conference Board growth figures (five year averages from 1980-85 to 2010-15) with Taiwan and South Korea during their period of rapid growth from 1960-65 to 1990-1995. I use five-year averages to remove the effects of business cycles. http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2016/08/15/do-alternative-estimates-show-china-entering-a-period-of-stagnation/#5a79a03c36f1
 
Hour Three
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 3, Block A: Monica Crowley, Fox, & Washington Times Online opinion editor; in re: Sopan Deb  @SopanDeb  Giuliani says last night's Trump’s the speech is the greatest speech ever given by a Republican: wapo.st/2bniRnz pic.twitter.com/pruAkUzqhk
Clinton campaign: The Hill  @thehill    State Dept to release all of Clinton’s deleted emails hill.cm/Kij92U0 pic.twitter.com/gKEeodGZ10
Clinton strategy:  Top Clinton ally calls for Clinton Foundation to be shut down if Hillary wins: hill.cm/uHKmBFU pic.twitter.com/vd7rGCeWux
Clinton:  The Hill  @thehill   Clinton vows to take on high prescription drug costs hill.cm/UDa3Ipo pic.twitter.com/KPOenuV7Bo
Downballot:  The Hill  @thehill   "No evidence of a downballot wave in 2016" hill.cm/8Sbu8jx pic.twitter.com/EP0pi2cpeP  (1 of 4)
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 3, Block B:  Monica Crowley, Fox, & Washington Times Online opinion editor  ( 2 of 4)
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 3, Block C:  Monica Crowley, Fox, & Washington Times Online opinion editor (3 of 4)
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 3, Block D:  Monica Crowley, Fox, & Washington Times Online opinion editor  (4 of 4)
 
Hour Four
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 4, Block A:  The Romanovs: 1613-1918, by Simon Sebag Montefiore  part I of II (segment 1 of 8)
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 4, Block B:  The Romanovs: 1613-1918, by Simon Sebag Montefiore  part I of II (segment 2 of 8)
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 4, Block C:  The Romanovs: 1613-1918, by Simon Sebag Montefiore  part I of II (segment 3 of 8)
Wednesday   17 August 2016 / Hour 4, Block D:  The Romanovs: 1613-1918, by Simon Sebag Montefiore  part I of II (segment 4 of 8)