Meet TF-2000: Super advanced air defence destroyer developed by Turkey, it is capable of..., is it a matter of concern for India?
TF-2000 Destroyer: In another major move to boost its military power, Turkey announced that it will build an air defense destroyer ship and four additional patrol ships to bolster the maritime capabilities of the Turkish Navy. According to media reports, state-owned ship builder ASFAT, has secured the contract to build the TF-2000, Turkey's first homegrown warship, which will be built in about 60 blocks, and is expected to be completed by 2030.
The company will also build four patrol ships based on Turkey's existing Ada-class corvettes, within the next 36 months, reports said. What is the TF-2000 destroyer?
As per Turkish media reports, the TF-2000 destroyer will be about 149 meters in length, 21 meters in width, and will feature a landing platform for a 15-ton military helicopter. The destroyer will be designed to operate in violent seas and able to withstand tidal waves as high as 4 meters, they said.
Additionally, the TF-2000 will be able operate for 45 days with requiring any re-supply, and will be capable of remaining at sea for 180 days, while receiving receiving support from the shore. On the weapons front, the state-of-the-destroyer will be equipped with a vertical launching system, a 127 mm naval gun, torpedo launcher, close-in weapons system and electronic warfare sensors.
The ship is expected to have a service life of over 40 years, as per the reports. How TF-2000 will boost Turkey's naval strength?
While primarily designed for air defense, the TF-2000 warship will essentially be a multirole destroyer, capable of anti-submarine, anti-surface and electronic warfare, anti-insurgency and special operations, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance tasks.
AFSAT will also build four additional patrol boats, based on Turkey's previously developed Ada-class corvette design. The 100 meter long, and 14 meter wide boats will be capable of carrying military helicopters like the S-70B Seahawk, and feature a wide array of weapons including 76 mm naval guns, vertical launchers, close-in weapon systems and anti-submarine and missile systems.
Experts believe the TF-2000 and Hisar-class ships will significantly bolster Turkey's naval capabilities and will also strengthen the security of its maritime borders with rival nations like Israel, Greece and Cyprus. Additionally, the new ships will further boost Turkey's reputation and presence in the global arms market. Why India is concerned?
Turkey, along with China and Azerbaijan, were among the few countries that openly supported Pakistan during the recent India-Pakistan conflict. Ahead of Operation Sindoor, Turkey, which has strengthened its military ties with Pakistan in recent times, had reportedly docked its warship at the Karachi Port, to deter any sea-based attack on the country by the Indian Navy.
Additionally, Turkey also armed the Pakistani forces with advanced military drones like the Bayraktar TB2, which were actively used against Indian installations during Operation Sindoor.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Reconciliation only solution to India-Pak tensions: Mehbooba Mufti
PDP president Mehbooba Mufti on Sunday called for the revival of ties between India and Pakistan, stating that "reconciliation" is the only way forward to ease tensions. Responding to questions about the current situation in Jammu and Kashmir and the recent encounter in Kulgam, Mufti said, "Encounter used to happen and will always happen, but such a huge war took place before that. The ceasefire had to be declared later. Unless reconciliation, dialogue, debate and discussions are done, such encounters will go on, and we will always stay on the verge of war. Reconciliation is the only way forward." Terrorists killed 26 civilians in Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam on April 22 in a brutal and heinous attack. India launched Operation Sindoor on May 7, targeting terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK) in response. Meanwhile, security forces continue their operation in the Akhal Devsar area of south Kashmir's Kulgam district. One terrorist has been neutralised so far in the joint operation by the Indian Army, Jammu and Kashmir police, CRPF, and the Special Operations Group (SOG). The encounter began on Saturday and continued overnight. A day earlier, ahead of the sixth anniversary of the revocation of Article 370, Mufti launched a sharp attack on the BJP-led Central government, saying the policy to strip Jammu and Kashmir of its special status has "completely failed." "Six full years have passed since August 5, 2019. At that time, Jammu and Kashmir's special status was taken away, and Article 370 was revoked with the claim that everything would be fine in Jammu and Kashmir. But we have seen that the policy has completely failed," she told reporters. Mufti alleged that the internal situation in the region has deteriorated rather than improved, pointing to ongoing security crackdowns. "Internally, the situation in Jammu and Kashmir is bad. For the past six years, arrests have been made daily. The situation in Jammu and Kashmir has become worse than before, although people are silent today. This is why our country has come into confrontation with Pakistan. What is Pakistan's stature? Their economy is not even a tenth of our economy, but today the whole world is comparing us with them," she said. The former Chief Minister also criticised what she termed the BJP's "aggressive policy" and its broader impact on regional diplomacy. "Unfortunately, the BJP has created such an atmosphere in the country that today all groups are saying, why did you agree to a ceasefire? This is the BJP's aggressive policy.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
When politics reeks of bitterness, misconduct
Eleven days from now, India will be celebrating its 78th Independence Day. Eight decades is a long enough time to take stock of our democracy and polity. Are we moving in the right direction? Are today's politicians working towards strengthening our democracy as envisioned by the founding fathers of the Republic? What better way to celebrate the approaching Independence Day than to seek answers to these probing queries? We, as citizens, have some basic expectations from our Parliament. It should not be reduced to an arena of vote politics. (Hindustan Times) Let's address the first question. Have a look at the debate over Operation Sindoor. Indians were hoping for the ruling party to put all the facts in the public domain while the Opposition would articulate its criticism and chip in with constructive suggestions. However, what unfolded was completely different. The Opposition got a fair chance to put their views forward in both houses. The ruling dispensation showcased all their facts, but the entire exercise fell far short of clearing the doubts assailing the minds of the citizens. We, as citizens, have some basic expectations from our Parliament. It should not be reduced to an arena of vote politics. Unfortunately, that's become the norm now. I have been a student of parliamentary debates. Our politics has been steadily degenerating. Bitterness has seeped into it, and politicians speak irresponsibly. Political parties of every hue are equally responsible for it. Even before the debate started, the first week of the monsoon session was a wash-out due to vice-president Jagdeep Dhankhar's surprise resignation. The media corridors were rattled by Dhankhar's resignation bomb at the end of the first day of the monsoon session. Political developments that day unfolded like a suspense thriller. No one could figure out the climax till the very end. In the morning, he came as usual to the Rajya Sabha, conducted its proceedings, and met leaders from the treasury benches and the Opposition. In the afternoon, he met BJP president JP Nadda and parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju. It seems the talks couldn't be concluded, so another meeting was convened in the evening. Nadda and Rijiju didn't attend, but the minister of State for parliamentary affairs, L Murugan, was present. What transpired in the afternoon meeting? Why didn't the senior ministers attend the evening meeting? Was there any difference of opinion between them and Dhankhar? Did the vice-president resign on his own? Or was he forced to quit? What will Dhankhar's next move be? Will he follow in the footsteps of former Jammu and Kashmir governor Satya Pal Malik? Or will he quietly bow out? Queries, conjectures, and concerns remain. It seems we are turning into a democracy that's bogged down in a maze of uncertain, dubious, and unnecessary debates. Dhankhar came into the limelight when he was made the governor of West Bengal. From the moment he entered the Raj Bhawan, he trained his guns on the chief minister, Mamata Banerjee. His words and deeds didn't go down well with those who preferred political propriety. This was the reason when he was made the vice-president, his detractors thought he had been rewarded for what he did in West Bengal, as Banerjee is considered the BJP's prime foe. As vice-president, it was his responsibility to conduct Rajya Sabha proceedings fairly and impartially. The way he conducted the proceedings in his early days raised many eyebrows. Accusations were levelled against him, but he was unfazed. Those opposed to the BJP said he was doing all this as he had an eye on the President's post. Initially, people were surprised by his sudden exit, but there's very little sympathy for him now. Unfortunately, such unpleasant incidents are growing. Look at the recently concluded session of the Bihar Assembly. It was the last session of the current term, a time to say polite goodbyes and warm wishes for the journey ahead. But it too degenerated into a mudslinging fest peppered with debased language, creating situations where it felt as if the leaders would come to blows. Bihar will go to the polls later this year, and the elections may turn into an ugly battle of bitterness and allegations. The Election Commission of India (ECI) undertook a special intensive revision of the electoral roll. The Opposition alleges it's a conspiracy to delete their voters from the list. The ECI didn't budge. Chief election commissioner Gyanesh Kumar curtly retorted: Should the ECI list the dead and foreigners in the roll? The Supreme Court also questioned the timing of the revision. The Opposition had alleged something completely different during the Maharashtra assembly elections. It's not clear who's right or wrong, but it's clear that those gracing constitutional posts are more interested in confrontation than building consensus. Let's address the second question. Are we heading in the right direction? At a time of ever-expanding hate and the normalisation of debased language and political misconduct, it would be tough to suggest that our journey ahead will be smooth. Political parties have devoted decades to creating linguistic, regional and social divides instead of bridging them. They have conveniently forgotten that the growing divides can drown them as well. Dhankhar is only its latest victim. Let's address the third question. The future is shaped by the present; the actions of today build the foundations of a new order. That's the law of nature. If so, can anyone bet confidently on the future when the present is roiled by discontent, inconsistency, incongruity and apprehension? Shashi Shekhar is the editor-in-chief, Hindustan. The views expressed are personal.
India.com
2 hours ago
- India.com
No Consensus, Just Conflict: Operation Sindoor Debate Sinks Into Bitter Blame Game Between Govt And Opposition
New Delhi: The brief political unity witnessed in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack and the subsequent military conflict with Pakistan seems to have unravelled following the surprise ceasefire announcement on May 10. This week's marathon three-day debate in Parliament on Operation Sindoor laid bare the widening gulf between the government and the Opposition. It reinforces the notion that in today's India, consensus is the exception, not the norm. The debate gave an opportunity to the leaders of both the government and the Opposition to show unity against terrorism coming from Pakistan. While many speakers across party lines called for a common stance, their speeches exposed deep divisions. The Opposition left no stone unturned to corner the lawmakers and pressed for answers on critical issues such as security and intelligence lapses preceding the Pahalgam attack, accountability for those failures, losses suffered by the Indian Air Force, and the true nature of US involvement. Notably, Prime Minister Narendra Modi chose not to respond in the Rajya Sabha, delegating the reply to Union Home Minister Amit Shah, which triggered an Opposition walkout. From the government's perspective, the needle moved favourably, for instance, Union Home Minister Amit Shah confirmed the elimination of the Pahalgam terrorists, and Prime Minister Modi asserted that "no global leader" had urged India to halt its military operation. Meanwhile, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar put a full stop to speculations regarding New Delhi's differences with Washington, including issues of deportations, visas, and student concerns, aimed at closing talks around Trump's role in India-Pakistan ceasefire. However, the Opposition remained unsatisfied. Congress MP and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi challenged the Prime Minister to publicly refute US President Donald Trump's claims of brokering the ceasefire, labeling the challenge 'political rhetoric.' While the PM skipped any mention of Trump and his repeated assertions of having brokered the ceasefire, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh sidestepped questions regarding the fighter jets lost on the first day of conflict, instead urging a results-focused perspective, saying, 'In any exam, the result matters. We should see whether a student is getting good marks and not focus on whether his pencil was broken or his pen was lost.' Congress's Nationalist Strategy In an uncharacteristic move, the Congress party adopted a nationalist stance to continue putting pressure on the government. This approach aimed to score political points by portraying the government as weak on defense. However, the tables turned with former Home Minister P. Chidambaram's suggestion that the Pahalgam attackers might have been "homegrown terrorists", rather than Pakistan-backed. This offered the government an opportunity to criticise the grand old party's inconsistent position. Rahul Gandhi's speech was notably combative, alongside his sister, Wayanad MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra recalled the resignations of Vilasrao Deshmukh as Maharashtra Chief Minister and Shivraj Patil as Union Home Minister after the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, to emphasise government accountability. Gandhi accused the Prime Minister of prioritising his image over the armed forces' freedom to operate, warning that 'the forces should be used with freedom and for the national interest' and urged a decisive military effort to 'defeat terrorism once and for all.' 'It is dangerous at this time for the Prime Minister to use the forces to protect his image. It is dangerous for the country. The forces should only be used in the national interest, and the forces should be used with freedom. If you want them to be used … then go all the way, fight properly and defeat them once and for all," he said. Historical Echoes In Debate The discussion frequently revisited historical parallels. The Congress party members highlighted Indira Gandhi's role in the creation of Bangladesh despite US pressure, contrasting it with the current ceasefire announcement influenced by the US. Meanwhile, the government drew attention to the Congress's perceived failings during critical moments, such as Partition, the wars of 1947–48 and 1965, the Indus Waters Treaty, and the 1962 war with China, to question the Opposition's credibility on national security. While the Congress remains burdened by its political legacy, this debate underscored the broader polarisation within Indian politics. Despite shared concerns over terrorism, the parties remain entrenched in mutual recriminations. With other INDIA bloc parties siding with the Congress in criticism of the government, the opposition front remains fragmented under intense BJP scrutiny.
