Putin Says New ‘Invincible’ Missile Can Pierce US and European Defenses
March 2, 2018 by admin
Filed under Lingerie Events
Comments Off
He also used the speech to reassure Russians that the military buildup was taking place even as the government was spending big sums to improve the quality of their lives.
But the main attention grabber in the speech was the weapons, which Mr. Putin described as a response to what he called the repudiation of arms control by the United States and its plans for a major weapons buildup.
The Trump administration has said that countering the world’s two other superpowers, Russia and China, was becoming its No. 1 national security mission, ahead of counterterrorism.
It has largely blamed Russia’s military modernization for that shift and has justified new work on nuclear weapons and bolstered missile defenses as the appropriate answer.
Mr. Putin may have further fueled the tension on Thursday by essentially declaring that Russia’s military brains had made America’s response obsolete.
He said a team of young, high-tech specialists had labored secretly and assiduously to develop and test the new weapons, including a nuclear-powered missile that could reach anywhere and evade interception.
“With the missile launched and a set of ground tests completed, we can now proceed with the construction of a fundamentally new type of weapon,” Mr. Putin said.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
He showed a video that illustrated the weapon flying over a mountain range, then slaloming around obstacles in the southern Atlantic before rounding Cape Horn at the tip of South America and heading north toward the West Coast of the United States.
Given that deception lies at the heart of current Russian military doctrine, questions arose about whether these weapons existed. American officials said that the nuclear cruise missile is not yet operational, despite Mr. Putin’s claims, and that it had crashed during testing in the Arctic.
The threats evoked the bombast of the Cold War. But this time they are not based on greater numbers of bombs but increased capabilities, stealth and guile.
Mr. Putin’s boasts about undersea nuclear torpedoes and earth-hugging cruise missiles emphasized the uselessness of American defenses against such weapons.
Oddly, apart from a reference to renewing the American nuclear arms enterprise in his State of the Union address, Mr. Trump has said almost nothing about the new era of competition with Mr. Putin or Russia. With multiple investigations into whether his campaign’s connections to Russians had influenced policy, he has neither protested the Russian buildup nor publicly endorsed, in any detail, his own administration’s plans to counter it.
The cruise missile was among five weapons introduced by Mr. Putin, each shown in video mock-ups on giant screens flanking him onstage. He threatened to use the weapons, as well as Russia’s older-generation nuclear arms, against the United States and Europe if Russia were attacked.
“We would consider any use of nuclear weapons against Russia or its allies to be a nuclear attack on our country,” he said.
Mr. Putin said he could not show the actual weapons publicly, but assured his audience of Russia’s main political and prominent cultural figures that they had all been developed.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
If Mr. Putin was not bluffing, said Aleksandr M. Golts, an independent Russian military analyst, then “these weapons are definitely new, absolutely new.”
Newsletter Sign Up
Continue reading the main story
Thank you for subscribing.
An error has occurred. Please try again later.
You are already subscribed to this email.
“If we’re talking about nuclear-armed cruise missiles, that’s a technological breakthrough and a gigantic achievement,” he said in an interview. But, he added, “The question is, is this true?”
Several analysts writing on Facebook and elsewhere leaned toward the bluff theory. Given the recent history of Russian launch failures or premature crashes, the idea that Russia suddenly possessed a new generation of flying weapons strained credulity.
“The real surprise in among all of this is a nuclear-powered cruise missile,” said Douglas Barrie, a senior fellow for military aerospace at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. “It was talked about in the ’60s, but it ran into a lot of obstacles. To the extent that the Russians are seriously revisiting this is pretty interesting.”
Such technology could alter the balance of power, but Mr. Barrie questioned whether Russia was even close to deploying it.
“Does reality mean you have an item in the budget saying, ‘Develop nuclear propulsion for a missile?’” he said. “Or does it mean, ‘We’re going to have one ready to use soon’? I’d certainly want to see more evidence to believe that.”
Mr. Putin said Russia had developed the weaponry because the United States had rejected established arms control treaties and was deploying new missile defense systems in Europe and Asia.
President Barack Obama said that he was willing to negotiate cuts deeper than the 1,550 arms that Washington and Moscow are permitted to deploy under the 2010 New Start treaty, which took full effect last month. But it expires in a few years, and neither Mr. Putin nor Mr. Trump has shown interest in renewing it.
The United States has also accused Russia of violating the Intermediate Nuclear Forces treaty. After Mr. Putin’s speech, Heather Nauert, the State Department’s spokeswoman, said Mr. Putin essentially confirmed that by trumpeting the country’s development of new nuclear weapons.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
Mr. Putin was correct that the United States is investing in expanding missile defenses. But those were not meant to counter Russia’s huge arsenals, but rather the launching of a few missiles by a state like North Korea.
The new Russian weapons would render such defenses obsolete, Mr. Putin gloated, and if anyone found a workaround, “our boys will think of something new.”
Other weapons the Russian leader discussed included a ballistic missile called Sarmat that could round either pole and overcome any defense system; hypersonic nuclear weaponry that fly at 20 times the speed of sound; and unmanned deepwater submarines that could go huge distances at enormous speed.
Mr. Putin said that some of the weapons were so new that they had yet to be named, and announced a naming contest on the Ministry of Defense website.
Political analysts said it was an effective campaign ploy whether the weapons existed or not. “He’s giving people the image of a desired future, of a future for Russia, and that’s appealing for his domestic audience,” said Aleksei V. Makarkin, the deputy head of the Center for Political Technologies, a Moscow think tank.
Mr. Putin’s guns-and-butter, Russia-can-do-it-all speech came 17 days before the March 18 election. It seemed intended to reassure voters that expanded social spending would help solve the economic problems of the past four years, while sending the message that Mr. Putin was their best hope in protecting a Russia portrayed as a besieged fortress.
The reality that the country lacks the money to pay for a giant increase in social spending combined with a new generation of weapons was beside the point, Mr. Makarkin said.
“People may say Russia depends on oil, Russia doesn’t have the money, but the population at large doesn’t care about that,” he said. “They just want to know that we are a superpower.”
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
On the social front, Mr. Putin promised to double government spending on health care and raise pensions. He said Russia would reduce the poverty rate — official statistics indicate that around 14 million Russians live below the poverty line — by 2024.
Mr. Putin also said that life expectancy, currently at 73, a leap from when he first took office in 2000, should exceed 80 by 2030.
Critics doubt that Russia will ever have the means to deliver so much, given its stumbling economy and relatively depressed oil prices. Max Trudolyubov, a newspaper columnist and political analyst, called the speech a modern version of the Czar Cannon, a giant 16th-century piece of armament that sits on the Kremlin grounds and that legend holds never really worked.
For years, Mr. Putin has chafed at the perceived disrespect showed to him and Russia by the United States. “Nobody listened to Russia,” he said near the end of the speech, to huge applause. “Well, listen up now.”
Correction: March 1, 2018
An earlier version of this article misstated the age of the Czar Cannon. It is from the 16th century, not the 15th century.
Continue reading the main story
Share and Enjoy
Deal for Weinstein Co. Is Back On, Investor Group Says
March 2, 2018 by admin
Filed under Lingerie Events
Comments Off
The Weinstein Company has been struggling to remain afloat since October, when The New York Times and The New Yorker magazine disclosed decades of sexual harassment allegations against the company’s co-owner Harvey Weinstein. The deal also includes a victims’ fund worth up to $90 million.
Mr. Weinstein has denied ever engaging in “non-consensual sex.”
He and his brother, Bob Weinstein, who jointly own about 42 percent of the Weinstein Company, would receive no cash from the sale. Other equity holders would also be wiped out.
The Weinstein Company had said on Sunday that it would file for bankruptcy after the collapse of talks with Ms. Contreras-Sweet’s group, which includes the billionaire investor Ron Burkle. The Weinstein Company’s board said at the time that promised interim funding from the group had not materialized, leaving bankruptcy as the only option.
But on Thursday, Mr. Schneiderman got the sale back on track by holding a meeting in his offices with Mr. Burkle and Ms. Contreras-Sweet and members of the Weinstein Company’s board, including Bob Weinstein and Lance Maerov, an executive at the advertising giant WPP Group. Mr. Burkle, who has a long history with the Weinstein Company, stepping in to help Harvey Weinstein finance films like “Our Idiot Brother” in 2011, asked for the meeting.
Mr. Schneiderman sued the company and the Weinstein brothers on Feb. 11, alleging that they violated state and city laws barring gender discrimination, sexual harassment and coercion. A deal for the company had been expected to be formalized on Feb. 12, but the lawsuit brought sale talks to a halt.
Amy Spitalnick, the press secretary for Mr. Schneiderman, said on Feb. 11 that his office had recently reached out to representatives of Ms. Contreras-Sweet to emphasize the importance of adequately compensating victims, protecting employees and not rewarding those who enabled or perpetuated Mr. Weinstein’s misconduct.
Newsletter Sign Up
Continue reading the main story
Thank you for subscribing.
An error has occurred. Please try again later.
You are already subscribed to this email.
“We were surprised to learn they were not serious about discussing any of those issues or even sharing the most basic information about how they planned to address them,” Ms. Spitalnick said.
Ms. Contreras-Sweet was stunned by Mr. Schneiderman’s public call for assurance that any sale ensure that victims are compensated, according to one person briefed on the matter, because she had already built funds into her proposal.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
By the end of that week, Mr. Schneiderman had started to get what he wanted. The Weinstein Company, for instance, fired its president, David Glasser, on Feb. 16. Mr. Glasser had been expected to run the new studio; Mr. Schneiderman had pointed to him as being one of the managers who perpetuated Mr. Weinstein’s behavior.
Ms. Contreras-Sweet also met with Mr. Schneiderman and laid out her plans for a victims’ compensation fund. In the end, the settlement fund was increased; up to $90 million will be made available, including an estimated $30 million in insurance money.
Ms. Contreras-Sweet outlined her plans for the company in a letter to its board in November, when she first made her offer.
“I will be chairwoman of a majority-female board of directors,” she wrote in the letter. “Women will be significant investors in the new company and control its voting stock.”
After failing to find other buyers who would keep the studio intact — Lionsgate, Shamrock Capital Advisors, Killer Content and the Qatari company beIN Media Group were among those considering various pieces — the board entered into exclusive negotiations with Ms. Contreras-Sweet’s group in late January.
Ms. Contreras-Sweet has no experience in Hollywood, but she is known in Los Angeles business and political circles. Much of her business career was spent at a California 7Up bottler, where she became vice president of public affairs and a part owner, according to her website. She then ran the California Business, Transportation and Housing Agency, managing a $14 million budget. After that, she co-founded a private equity firm and in late 2006 founded ProAmerica Bank, which focused on Latino small business owners. The bank struggled and was sold in 2015.
“We are grateful to the New York State attorney general’s office for their efforts in helping us reach an agreement, and we are grateful to our investors who have believed in this process and in the compelling value of a female-led company,” her statement on Thursday said. “We also want to thank all the parties who returned to the negotiating table to help us reach this development.”
Continue reading the main story