Turkish police detain 97 students over university protest
The students were protesting against a conference by Nureddin Yildiz, an Islamic preacher who is known for his controversial views on early marriages. The conference was organised by a student club of the university.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
an hour ago
- Economic Times
Nuclear-capabilities of Pakistan and Iran have brought India and Israel closer
Show and Tell Aviv Is the Pakistan question so different from the Iran one? From New Delhi's standpoint, probably not, when compared to the threats Israel has faced from Iranian proxies like Hezbollah. Pakistan poses a similar threat to India, backs terror attacks like the one in Pahalgam, and seeks to equate Kashmir with what links them both inextricably is their nuclear weapons programme. The only difference being that Pakistan was able to achieve enrichment, staying out of NPT, while Iran has struggled within NPT, but actively aided by A Q Khan's nuclear smuggling network in the 1980s-90s. So, today, when an IRGC (Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps) general claims on national Iranian TV that Pakistan will use the nuclear bomb on Israel to defend Iran, it's an expression of an umbilical link that connects programmes of Iran, Pakistan and North Korea to the A Q Khan network. China supported this, actively giving shape to the proliferation network by illegally providing designs and dual-use items. Pakistan sought to clarify Iran's claims on Monday through a convoluted statement, which attacked Israel but also tried to distance itself from Tehran. But it ended up putting into question its tall claims of being the only Islamic country with an n-bomb. That's exactly the political logic that drove the A Q Khan is under pressure trying to take up OIC leadership against Israel through its presence in UNSC, aligning with China and Russia in SCO, while at the same time, making certain it does not trip itself on to Trump's wrong side. For years now, the West has believed it has sufficient security safeguards on Pakistan's nuclear button. In fact, Islamabad has used its WMD programme as leverage when needed, evidenced by the recent scare it raised during Operation Sindoor. But this picture is changing, given growing radicalisation within the Pakistani system. It would be a mistake to underestimate the degree of anti-Israel sentiment in Pakistan, which is what the military establishment has actively fuelled over decades to justify the anti-India terror infrastructure. The rise of Asim Munir, the first upfront Islamic radical chief of Pakistan Army, signals worrying shifts in the command-and-control system of Islamabad's Trump may continue to make nuanced distinctions between what he views as a more accommodating Pakistan and a recalcitrant Iran, the message on India is about the same as on Israel. The big difference is that unlike Israel, India is dealing with a nuclear weapons state in Pakistan, whose 'blackmail' it's now willing to a result, both India and Israel have drawn closer in the last few months. New Delhi's need to keep political cover on the relationship is now much reduced, largely due to the similarity, if not commonality, of threat both countries face. Israeli weaponry performed exceedingly well during Op Sindoor, the Harpy and Harop loitering munitions/suicide drones being key to destroying five Pakistan air defence systems. Unlike the Turkish YIHA-III and Songar UAVs used by Pakistan that proved ineffective against as core security interests come into play, military supply lines also become congruent with political lines of support. India's positioning with Israel, a reliable weapons supplier, is changing. This was evident in GoI's decision to distance itself from the SCO statement condemning Israel's actions. Conversely, India's positioning against Turkey, a supplier to Pakistan, has ahead, India will want more Russian S-400s, but will be concerned over Moscow's dependence on Beijing and the latter's renewed efforts at bridging Islamabad's military gap with New Delhi. But what's clear is that India and Israel have an unimpeded political path ahead that's likely to grow deeper as India seeks to bolster its defence the action on Iran has done is that it has provided a space to raise the question on Pakistan's n-weapon status, an aspect on which Israel has always shared India's concern. Back in the 1980s, for three consecutive years, the Reagan administration certified to the US Congress that Pakistan had not acquired a nuclear weapon. It was a sleight of hand made possible by the Pressler Amendment that tied aid to Pakistan with ensuring non-possession of nuclear weapons, but left enough leeway for the programme to develop, stopping short of exactly this additional time, critical for enrichment, that Iran was trying to obtain by dragging out the negotiation with the US, but failed. At that point, Pakistan made itself useful to the US in Afghanistan, and gradually got China to do its bidding with Washington. In 1980, Deng Xiaoping urged the US not to stop economic aid to Pakistan because of its n-weapons managed to gain not just concessions but also high-end platforms like F-16. US acceded on the logic that at least it will be able to wield influence on preventing Islamabad-Rawalpindi from carrying out a nuclear test. The story changed once India decided to conduct the 1998 Pokhran tests. But the playbook has continued. Its reinvention is still playing out with Trump taking a different line on Iran and another on Pakistan, not realising that the A Q Khan network had supplied gas centrifuges for the Natanz facility in Iran in the late 1980s when the then-US government thought it had the Pakistan programme under control - a reality that returns to bite each time, be it terror or nuclear proliferation. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. Worrying cracks hiding behind MG Motor's own 'house of Windsor' Is India ready to hit the aspirational 8% growth mark? INR1,300 crore loans for INR100? Stamp duty notice to ArcelorMittal, banks. Why failed small businessmen die by suicide when those behind big blow-ups bounce back? Stock Radar: Falling trendline breakout on daily and weekly charts likely to push stock to record highs; check target & stop loss Handle volatility in conventional & unconventional ways: Capital gains & dividend yield. 6 stocks with dividend yield of 4-8%; return of over 22% Keys to wealth creation: Strong balance sheet & patience. 5 large-cap stocks from different sectors with upside potential of up to 38% Defence stocks: Black & white, and many shades of grey. 10 stocks with an upside potential of up to 30%
India.com
2 hours ago
- India.com
Bad news for Israel and US as Iran proposes 'Islamic Army' to fight against Israel; Pakistan, Turkey and Saudi Arabia are now...
(File) Iran-Israel war: In a significant turn of event in the ongoing war between Iran and Israel, a senior military officer of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has called on Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to form an 'Islamic army' to fight Israel. Mohsen Rezai said in an interview to Iranian media that influential Islamic countries like Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan should form a joint 'Islamic army' to fight Israel. 'We want to form an Islamic army together with Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and many other countries', Mohsen Rezai told Iranian media about the Islamic army they want to form. 'Pakistan has assured us that if Israel uses nuclear bomb on Iran, they will attack Israel with nuclear bomb. Israel has targeted Iran, Yemen and Palestine. If Muslim countries do not unite now, everyone will suffer the same fate', Mohsen Rezai added in his comment. The statment from the senior IRGC senior military officer gained more significance after Pakistan's Defence Minister Khawaja Asif called on Muslim countries to launch a united initiative against Israel in his speech addressing Pakistan's National Assembly on June 14. Israel pounds Quds Force Headquarters in Tehran as conflict intensifies In another significant event during the ongoing Iran-Israel war, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) announced that Israeli Air Force fighter jets struck Quds Force command centres in Tehran, intensifying the already deadly confrontation between Israel and Iran. As per a report by IANS news agency, the IDF was quoted as saying that the attacks were carried out using 'precise intelligence' and targeted facilities involved in orchestrating terrorist activities against Israel. 'The Air Force attacked Quds Force headquarters in Tehran. Air Force fighter jets attacked the headquarters of the Quds Force of the Revolutionary Guards and the Iranian army, under precise intelligence guidance from the Intelligence Department,' the IDF posted on X. (With inputs from agencies)
Scroll.in
3 hours ago
- Scroll.in
How does Israel's missile-defence system work – and how long will it be effective?
Late last week, Israel began a wave of attacks on Iran under the banner of Operation Rising Lion, with the stated goal of crippling the Islamic republic's nuclear programme and long-range strike capabilities. At the outset, Israel claimed Iran would soon be able to build nine nuclear weapons, a situation Israel regarded as completely unacceptable. Following Israeli strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities, and targeted assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists and key members of the Iranian armed forces, Iran retaliated with a large barrage of ballistic missiles and drones against Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. The first wave consisted of some 200 ballistic missiles and 200 drones. The conflict continues to escalate, with population centres increasingly being targeted. Israel's missile defence systems (including the vaunted Iron Dome) have so far staved off most of Iran's attacks, but the future is uncertain. Ballistic missiles and how to stop them Iran possesses a large arsenal of ballistic missiles and long-range drones, alongside other long-range weapons such as cruise missiles. Ballistic missiles travel on a largely fixed path steered by gravity, while cruise missiles can adjust their course as they fly. Iran is approximately 1,000 km from Israel, so the current strikes mostly involve what are classified as medium-range ballistic missiles, alongside long-range drones. It is not clear exactly what type of missile Iran has used in its latest strikes, but the country has several including the Fattah-1 and Emad. It is very difficult to defend against ballistic missiles. There is not much time between launch and impact, and they come down at very high speed. The longer the missile's range, the faster and higher it flies. An incoming missile presents a small, fast-moving target – and defenders may have little time to react. Israel's missile defence and the Iron Dome Israel possesses arguably one of the most effective, battle-tested air defence systems in service today. The system is often described in the media as the 'Iron Dome', but this is not quite correct. Israel's defences have several layers, each designed to address threats coming from different ranges. Iron Dome is just one of these layers: a short range, anti-artillery defence system, designed to intercept short-range artillery shells and rockets. In essence, Iron Dome consists of a network of radar emitters, command and control facilities, and the interceptors (special surface-to-air missiles). The radar quickly detects incoming threats, the command and control elements decide which are most pressing, and the interceptors are sent to destroy the incoming shells or rockets. Ballistic defence systems The other layers of Israel's defence system include David's Sling, and the Arrow 2 and Arrow 3 interceptors. These are specifically designed to engage longer-range ballistic missiles, both within the atmosphere and at very high altitudes above it (known as exoatmospheric interception). Spectacular footage has been captured of what are likely exoatmospheric interceptions taking place during this latest conflict, demonstrating Israel's capacity to engage longer-range missiles. The US military has comparable missile defence systems. The US Army has the Patriot PAC-3 (comparable to David's Sling) and THAAD (comparable to Arrow 2), while the US Navy has the Aegis and the SM-3 (comparable to Arrow 3) and the SM-6 (comparable again to Arrow 2). The US deployed Aegis-equipped warships to support Israel's defence against missile attacks in 2024, and appears to be preparing to do the same now. Iran possesses some air defence systems such as the Russian S300 which has some (very limited) ballistic missile defence capabilities, but only against shorter range (and thus slower) ballistic missiles. Further, Israel has been focusing on degrading Iran's air defences, so it is not clear how many are still operational. Iran has been focusing on developing technology such as maneuverable warheads, which are harder to defend against. However, it is not clear whether these are yet operational and in Iranian service. Pretty spectacular clip of the exoatmospheric interception of an Iranian ballistic missile by Israeli air defenses just now. — Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (BlueSky too) (@Archer83Able) June 13, 2025 Can missile defences last forever? Missile defences are finite. The defender is always limited by the number of interceptors it possesses. The attacker is also limited by the number of missiles it possesses. However, the defender must often assign multiple interceptors to each attacking missile, in case the first misses or otherwise fails. The attacker will plan for some losses to interceptors (or mechanical failures) and send what it determines to be enough missiles for at least some to penetrate the defences. When it comes to ballistic missiles, the advantage lies with the attacker. Ballistic missiles can carry large explosive payloads (or even nuclear warheads), so even a handful of missiles 'leaking' past defensive systems can still wreak significant damage. What now? Israel's missile defences are unlikely to stop working completely. However, as attacks deplete its stocks of interceptors, the system may become less effective. As the conflict continues, it may become a race to see who runs out of weapons first. Will it be Iran's stocks of ballistic missiles and drones, or the interceptors and anti-air munitions of Israel, the US and any other supporters? It is impossible to say who would prevail in such a race of stockpile attrition. Some reports suggest Iran has fired approximately 1,000 ballistic missiles of an estimated 3,000. However, this still leaves it with an enormous stockpile to use, and it is unclear how fast Iran can make new missiles to replenish its resources. But we should hope it doesn't come to that. Beyond the tit-for-tat exchange of missiles, the latest conflict between Israel and Iran risks escalating. If it is not resolved soon, and if the US is drawn into the conflict more directly, we may see broader conflict in the Middle East.
