Steel Dome: Is Turkey's air defence system better than Israel's Iron Dome? It is capable of...
Turkey's Steel Dome: Is Turkey's air defence system better than Israel's Iron Dome? It is capable of…
Ankara: Israel's Iron Dome is considered one of the most effective air defence systems in the world. The world has seen its prowess time and again, as it intercepted and destroyed hundreds of enemy rockets and drones simultaneously. But now, Turkey is also working on technology that could potentially surpass Israel's Iron Dome. In the recently held NATO meeting, all the member countries accepted the suggestion of United States President Donald Trump that NATO countries, including Turkey, should spend five percent of their GDP on security. Ankara stated that it will strengthen its air defence system. Steel Dome Air Defence System
Turkey's Steel Dome will protect the land and sea area of the country. According to experts, Israel's Iron Dome provides primary-level security, while the Steel Dome is a multi-level air defence system. The sensors of the Steel Dome are very powerful, which makes it more accurate. Can Steel Dome Provide Security at Sea?
Steel Dome is deployed in several crucial locations in Turkey including Ankara, Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant. However, Ankara is planning to deploy the defence system all over the country. The Steel Dome becomes active on the inputs received from Artificial Intelligence (AI) and is capable of shooting down the enemy's missiles mid-air. Apart from this, its speciality is that it provides cover on the sea as well as on land. What Is Included In The Steel Dome System?
Thanks to the Iron Dome, it has become difficult for groups like Hamas or even Iran to successfully target Israel, as the air defence system intercepts missiles mid-air. Now, Turkey has announced plans to accelerate the development of its own version, Steel Dome. This defence system will include a combination of short- and long-range missiles along with interceptors. The Steel Dome is designed to neutralise enemy attacks before they reach the ground.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
43 minutes ago
- First Post
Harvard & Toronto Universities join hands to host international students amid Trump's visa blockade
Harvard University and the University of Toronto came out with a plan that would see some of the Harvard students complete their studies in Canada if visa restrictions prevent them from entering the United States read more A Harvard sign is seen at the Harvard University campus in Boston, Massachusetts, on May 27. Image used for representation. (Source: AFP) Harvard University and the University of Toronto are collaborating to host international students who are facing visa restrictions imposed by US President Donald Trump. Both institutions came out with a plan that would see some of the Harvard students complete their studies in Canada if visa restrictions prevent them from entering the United States. The pact between the two institutions reflects how schools are willing to collaborate to ensure that students are not affected by the tumultuous policies introduced by the current Trump administration. The deal was struck between the Harvard John F Kennedy School of Government and the University of Toronto's Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In a letter to the students, Jeremy Weinstein, the Harvard Kennedy School Dean, noted that the plans were meant to ease concerns. He maintained that a formal program would only be unveiled if there is 'sufficient demand' from students who are unable to come to the United States. 'We are deeply grateful for the support of the Munk School and other partners, who are helping to ensure that we can continue to provide all HKS students with the excellent education they deserve,' he said in his letter. Harvard's struggle with the Trump administration The American university is locked in an acrimonious legal battle with the Trump administration after it claims the Department of Homeland Security improperly revoked its ability to enrol international students. It is pertinent to note that nearly a quarter of Harvard's students come from outside the US, and their students are a key source of funding for the school. So far, Harvard has won two preliminary injunctions against the DHS, probably clearing a path for international students to obtain entry visas. 'These are exceptional times,' Janice Stein, the founding director of the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, said in a statement. 'If Harvard Kennedy School international students are not able to complete their studies in Cambridge, Mass., the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy looks forward to providing shared academic and co-curricular experiences for students from both our schools.' In addition to the HKS at Munk School program, institutes are also announcing HKS Global, which will have both an online and in-person component. The University of Toronto made it clear that Harvard students attending their college will still have to apply for Canadian study permits and will be enrolled as full-time, non-degree students at the Munk School. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The program is only open to students who have already completed a year of study in the United States. Interestingly, Canada has put its cap on international students and curtailed the number of visas it will allow. The University of Toronto said the plan with Harvard 'would not reduce the number of spaces available for U of T students in any academic programs or university housing'.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
$30bn for Iran? Never heard of this 'ridiculous idea', says Trump; dismisses report, calls it a 'hoax'
US President Donald Trump (AP) US President Donald Trump on Friday (local time) firmly denied reports in the US media that his administration is considering a $30 billion deal to help Iran develop a civil nuclear programme. "Who in the FAKE NEWS MEDIA is the SleazeBag saying that 'President Trump wants to give Iran $30 billion to build non-military Nuclear facilities.' Never heard of this ridiculous idea," he wrote on his Truth Social platform. "It's just another HOAX put out by the Fake News in order to demean. These people are SICK!!!," he added. Trump Truth Social post Under the alleged proposal, first reported by CNN, the Trump administration in recent days has explored possible economic incentives in return for the Iranian regime halting uranium enrichment. Iran would also be allowed to receive assistance from regional countries to help it build the civilian nuclear programme, granting Tehran access to as much as the reported $30 billion. If true, the potential deal would mark a major reversal in policy for the MAGA leader, who, in his first term, pulled the United States out of the previous Barack Obama administration's nuclear deal with Iran, in 2018. At the time, he had argued that the sanctions relief and unfreezing of Iranian assets had provided a 'lifeline of cash" to the regime in Tehran to continue its "malign activities." Last week, the US struck three key nuclear facilities in Iran amid the conflict between US ally Israel and the Islamic Republic. The following day (June 23) Trump managed to broker a ceasefire deal between the Asian rivals.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
2 hours ago
- First Post
Israel-Iran ‘12-days war': How West Asia is on a strategic reset
The future geopolitical landscape of West Asia is likely to be multipolar, prompting both global powers and regional actors to recalibrate their strategies accordingly read more West Asia has witnessed over a dozen major conflicts since World War II due to the contentious nature of its security dynamics, attributed largely to the interplay of external, regional and domestic factors. The recent skirmish between Israel and Iran amply vindicated the above intricacies. The sudden eruption of recent hostilities leading to a full-scale war was the result of simmering belligerence between Tel Aviv and Tehran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Iran's strategy to prosecute a proxy war without getting entangled in a conventional conflict with Israel was finally challenged. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD On June 13, 2025, Israel launched Operation 'Rising Lion' against Iran in a preemptive effort to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear capabilities and avert an 'existential threat'. In the massive aerial strike, Israeli fighter jets pounded around 100 sites across Iran, primary targets being nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan, besides key military installations. Iran was caught by surprise, and as per the experts estimate, lost almost 15 per cent of its missile arsenal and crucial air defence systems. Several Iranian top military commanders were also killed. Iran's retaliation came a day later by way of large-scale drones and ballistic missile strikes against Israel. The initial strikes were followed by intense exchanges of missile barrages by both sides. Having achieved complete air domination, Israel was able to inflict colossal damage on Iran's war-fighting machinery. On the other hand, Iran's retaliation was confined to waves of missile strikes, as its air force, being weak, was missing in action. This notwithstanding, Iran's hypersonic missiles were able to penetrate the Israeli air defence and cause considerable damage to the infrastructure. Given the lack of strategic depth and doctrine of fighting swift, short wars, the war of attrition was proving unaffordable for Israel, costing hundreds of millions of dollars a day. Iran, on the other hand, was well poised to sustain a longer conflict, as around two-thirds of its missile arsenal (estimated to be around 3,000) was still intact after a week of fighting. Ten days into the conflict, there was a major escalation when the US joined Israel in the fight against Iran by launching Operation 'Mid Night Hammer' in the wee hours of June 22, 2025. The aerial strikes were undertaken by a package of seven B2 bombers, wherein Iranian nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan were struck with GBU-57 deep penetrating, bunker buster bombs. President Donald Trump declared that all three nuclear sites had been completely obliterated. Iran vowed to avenge the American aggression, which it did the following day in the form of a symbolic missile strike on the US air base at Al Udeid in Qatar, but there was no damage or casualties. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD On June 23, Trump, with mediation from Qatar, announced a phased ceasefire between Israel and Iran, declaring that the '12-Day War' was over. There were few truce violations before Israel and Iran accepted the ceasefire, which came into effect on June 24 and has held on so far. The stage appears to be now set for the next phase – diplomatic duels at the negotiation table, as talks are expected to resume in the near future. The wars are fought to be won, with precise politico-military aims. In this case too, both Iran and Israel claimed to be winners, having attained their respective objectives. Iran declared national victory over the Jewish regime and America. Concurrently, the Israeli foreign ministry also strongly claimed that Israel has not only achieved all objectives in the war but also killed hundreds of terrorists in Iran. Tel Aviv also announced that the outcome of the war has placed Israel in the ranks of the world's leading powers. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Well, Israel did succeed in degrading Iran's nuclear capability significantly, albeit with American assistance. Israel did demonstrate its ability to dominate the airspace and operate deep inside Iranian territory, thus taking a heavy toll on Iranian military installations. While Iranian nuclear installations have suffered considerable damage, as per Rafael Grossi, the head of the UN nuclear watchdog, 'It would be too much to assert that Iran's nuclear has been wiped out after the Israeli-American campaign.' Israeli Ambassador to France Joshua Zarka has stated that 14 key Iranian nuclear scientists were killed, implying a serious setback to Tehran's nuclear programme. In the Israeli attacks, as per Iran's Health Ministry, 627 of its citizens were killed and 4,870 were wounded. Iran, despite taking heavy losses and having an adverse air situation, was able to cause damage to Haifa port, Ben Gurion airport and a few military bases. 29 Israelis were reported to be killed and 3461 injured during the Iranian strikes. This did have considerable impact, causing fear of psychosis amongst the civilians. Iranian proxies' militias Hamas, Houthis and Hezbollah kept a low profile, as these militias have been considerably weakened by the Israelis sustained operations over the years. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The global polity favoured diplomacy and dialogue. Whereas the US was actively involved in the conflict, Russia and China – Iran's close allies – only extended diplomatic support. While Moscow advocated restraint and offered mediation, Beijing supported negotiation and projected an image of neutral peacemaker. Given the apprehensions of an oil crisis manifesting, renewed calls for negotiations and support for Qatar and Oman in mediation did accelerate the efforts for de-escalation and ceasefire. The Islamic world stood factionalised, keeping in view their national interests. The Arab nations, especially the Gulf countries, evidently are not in control of their foreign policies. The future geopolitical and security architecture of the Middle East is in for a makeover. The superpower rivalry is bound to intensify with the US deepening its role as a security guarantor for Israel and Gulf states. China will leverage its economic influence to expand its mediation role and align with Russia to ensure regional stability. Russia will strive to adopt a balanced role, supply military technology to Iran and simultaneously cultivate ties with Israel and Arab states. Turkey will continue with its quest for regional dominance and project itself as a balancing force vis-à-vis Iran and Israel, as well as consolidate its position in Syria and Iraq. India, given its immense strategic and economic interest in the region, will need to be proactive given the prevailing fluid situation. Stable West Asia is in India's interest to progress its key initiatives like the 'India Middle East Europe Economic Corridor' (IMEEC) project and Chabahar port. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The new security framework of the region is in the making, wherein Israel and Iran would be engaged in a mutual threat containment regime, with heavy reliance on precision weapon systems. Tehran will retain the ability to reactivate 'non-state' proxies and is unlikely to give up its nuclear ambitions easily. Gulf states could be working towards evolving 'integrated regional defence systems' while engaging in deeper defence cooperation with the US and Israel, besides consolidating their role as mediators. The Abraham Accord tent is expected to get wider as more nations are likely to join in for security insurance. This will weaken the Palestine cause. Will the Arabs allow Tehran to take the lead? It is a moot question, given today Hamas's main backer is Iran. The salient strategic trends indicate the likelihood of weaponisation of energy infrastructure and militarisation of sea lanes of communication around the Red Sea. The global polity will be working to obviate this situation by seeking diversification of the energy supply lines. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Like all the major conflicts, the '12-Days War' leaves behind a trail of destruction and demolished geopolitical structures, leading to major strategic shifts. The future geopolitical landscape of West Asia will be multipolar in nature, with global powers and regional players recalibrating their strategies accordingly. The general environment is likely to remain highly fragile, marked by intense competition and confrontations fuelled by religious, ideological and identity politics, with the possibility of conflict looming large. Given the overarching complexities, the West Asia region is set to remain in a state of flux, lasting peace being a distant possibility. The writer is a war veteran, currently Professor of Strategic and International Relations. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
