&w=3840&q=100)
Bangladesh explores advanced air defence options at London summit
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he would increase annual defence spending to 2.5 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2027. File image/AFP
Bangladesh is broadening its defence partnerships as part of an ambitious effort to modernise its air defence capabilities, shifting focus from traditional allies like China to Western nations such as the United Kingdom.
Military intelligence sources in Dhaka confirmed that a senior Bangladeshi military delegation arrived in London on Monday to participate in a prominent international defence summit.
The delegation is being led by Major General Mohammad Kamrul Hassan, who serves as the Area Commander of Rangpur and General Officer Commanding (GOC) of the 66 Infantry Division. He is joined by six senior officers from both the Bangladesh Army and Air Force. The team is attending the 19th edition of the Full Spectrum Air Defence Summit, being held in London from June 23 to 26.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
The summit focuses on enhancing international collaboration in integrated air and missile defence, with an emphasis on interoperability and rapid threat elimination through advanced, cost-effective technologies. Bangladesh's presence at the event underscores its strategic shift toward acquiring more sophisticated defence systems and diversifying its sources of military procurement.
This evolving approach comes amid growing regional instability, particularly in Myanmar's Rakhine State, which continues to experience conflict and could potentially lead to cross-border security concerns for Bangladesh. The government is therefore aiming to future-proof its military and reduce dependency on any single foreign supplier.
One of the advanced air defence platforms that has reportedly caught Bangladesh's interest is the UK's Sky Sabre system. Commissioned in 2021, Sky Sabre is a mobile, medium-range air defence solution valued at approximately USD 900 million. It is designed to neutralise threats from enemy aircraft, drones, attack helicopters, and precision-guided weapons. The system has already been deployed in locations such as the Falkland Islands and Poland to support NATO operations.
Bangladesh's engagement with the UK and participation in the summit mark a significant step toward greater technological self-reliance, reflecting its commitment to adapting to a rapidly changing regional security landscape.
With the inputs from agencies
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
32 minutes ago
- Time of India
DMK, Cong back TMC, slam Del cops for calling Bengali ‘B'deshi'
Kolkata: DMK, Congress, CPIML Liberation and even BJP's Tripura ally Tipra Motha joined TMC on Monday to protest against the Delhi Police notice that called Bengali a "Bangladeshi language", and criticised BJP's Amit Malviya for saying "Bengali is not a language". Tamil Nadu CM and DMK chief MK Stalin, in a post on X, said, "The Delhi Police, under the Union Home Ministry, described Bengali as a 'Bangladeshi language.' This is a direct insult to the very language in which our National Anthem was written. Such statements are not inadvertent errors or slips. They expose the dark mindset of a regime that consistently undermines diversity and weaponises identity." "In the face of this assault on non-Hindi languages, CM Mamata Banerjee Didi stands as a shield for the language and the people of West Bengal. She will not let this attack pass without a fitting response," Stalin added. You Can Also Check: Kolkata AQI | Weather in Kolkata | Bank Holidays in Kolkata | Public Holidays in Kolkata Congress's Gaurav Gogoi, in a sharply-worded statement directed at Malviya said, "The arrogance of BJP blinds them to the dehumanisation of Bengali people of West Bengal and Northeast India. Today, the BJP IT cell insults the Bengali language spoken by lakhs of people in Tripura, Meghalaya, and the Barak Valley of Assam." "First, the BJP asks the Bengali people to declare themselves as Bangladeshis through the CAA, and now the party insults their language as being foreign. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like No annual fees for life UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo The BJP does not want a united India. They are only interested in reopening old scars," he added. CPIML Liberation general secretary Dipankar Bhattacharya took a dig at Delhi Police on X."So, for Delhi Police, Bangla or Bengali has now become 'Bangladeshi national language'! The persecution of Bengali-speaking migrant workers as 'suspected Bangladeshi nationals' has now become an outright negation of India's second most spoken language as 'Bangladeshi language'," he said. Tipra chief Pradyot Debbarma, in an X post, said, "Referring to Bengali as a 'Bangladeshi language' by Delhi Police is deeply concerning. Today it is Bengali, tomorrow it can be any other language. There is no such thing as Bangladeshi language." Meanwhile, Trinamool on Monday launched a sharp attack on Malviya, BJP's Bengal minder. TMC spokesperson Kunal Ghosh said, "The historic movement of 21 February in Bangladesh, what was it for? It was for the Bengali language. There is no such thing as a 'Bangladeshi language'. Yet Amit Malviya posts that 'There is no language called Bengali that neatly covers all these variants.'" "Then let me ask: when two lines are written in Bengali on a teleprompter for the Prime Minister to recite, what language is that? Bengali or Bangladeshi? It is Bengali. Let's be clear: there is no language called Bangladeshi," he added. Trinamool, in a statement, said, "Denying the existence of a constitutionally recognised language is nothing short of linguistic apartheid. BJP is systematically promoting xenophobia and othering, with Bengalis being deliberately targeted across states. Such dangerous narratives must be condemned and resisted at every level."
Deccan Herald
an hour ago
- Deccan Herald
Behind NATO's open door lies exclusion
In the folk tale of Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves, a poor man overhears the magical phrase 'Open Sesame,' which grants access to a hidden treasure cave. But when the thieves mark his house for revenge, a clever maid marks every home in the neighbourhood. Faced with universal ambiguity, the thieves are disoriented. No one stands out, so no one is attacked, and aggression loses its if global security worked the same way?.What if the principle of collective defense—'an attack on one is an attack on 'all'—wasn't confined to NATO and its carefully curated allies? Imagine a world where this promise extended beyond the transatlantic sphere to India, South Africa, Brazil, and Iran. A world where no State stood alone, and no country could be singled out for aggression. As in the tale, if everyone is protected, no one is targeted. Of course, we don't live in that claims to uphold an 'open-door policy,' but that door is closed mainly in practice. Strategic alignment, historical ties, and economic interests remain the unspoken prerequisites for entry. Despite their demographic and geopolitical weight, nations like India, Indonesia, and Brazil are barely part of the Ukraine's pursuit of NATO membership is less about democratic values and more about Western strategic risk management. Georgia's application has languished. Meanwhile, countries from the Global South are kept at arm's length. This raises a hard truth: NATO does not merely defend liberal values. It defends a specific geopolitical hierarchy born in the Cold War and sustained through exclusive club membership. Those who are not inside the cave are not only locked out of the treasure—they are left India–China India and China ever form a truly universal security alliance? It sounds ideal for two major powers to stabilise the region through cooperation. But geography and history stand in the way. As far back as the 4th century BCE, Indian strategist Chanakya observed that neighbouring states are natural rivals. That remains true today. India and China remain locked in long-standing border disputes. China's sustained support for Pakistan diplomatically, militarily, and economically keeps India off balance. In this climate, the idea of shared defence seems implausible. Still, the issue is not whether universal security would be easy. It is that exclusion makes conflict more likely. When security is treated as an exclusive club, it generates suspicion, rivalry, and competition. That is the world we inhabit logic of exclusion extends beyond military alliances. It shapes how history is written, how voices are remembered, and which regions are seen as India's historical narratives. Much English-language scholarship on modern India continues to prioritise the north. Dalit movements in Bihar or Maharashtra are often highlighted, while equally significant struggles in the Madras Presidency, Telangana, or Tamil Nadu receive little towering national figures like B R Ambedkar are often framed primarily through their engagements in the north. His speeches and political activity in Chennai (then Madras) or Mysuru are routinely overlooked. Similarly, post-independence leaders like C N Annadurai, who shaped Tamil politics and identity, receive cursory treatment in standard texts. It reflects how knowledge systems often mirror power structures, privileging certain regions, figures, and ideologies while marginalising Ali Baba, the maid disrupts the thieves' power by confusing their targeting mechanism. She doesn't confront them directly; she scrambles the logic of attack. That's the kind of strategy the world needs today. We must move toward a global order in which solidarity is not restricted to select allies, safety is not transactional, and strategic protection is not reserved for countries that fit a particular ideological or economic a vision would require new institutions, deeper South-South cooperation, and a fundamental shift in how security is imagined. But without it, global peace will remain fragile, subject to alliances that exclude and structures that privilege a few. Until then, NATO's open-door policy remains a convenient half-truth. The treasure cave of collective security still responds to a particular accent, speaking the correct password: Open Sesame..(The author writes about politics, material culture, and economic history).The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Rwanda reached deal with US to take in up to 250 migrants, government says
By Daphne Psaledakis Rwanda reached deal with US to take in up to 250 migrants, government says WASHINGTON -The United States and Rwanda have agreed for the African country to accept up to 250 migrants deported from the U.S., the spokesperson for the Rwandan government and an official told Reuters, as President Donald Trump's administration takes a hardline approach toward immigration. The agreement, first reported by Reuters, was signed by U.S. and Rwandan officials in Kigali in June, said the Rwandan official, speaking on condition of anonymity, adding that Washington had already sent an initial list of 10 people to be vetted. "Rwanda has agreed with the United States to accept up to 250 migrants, in part because nearly every Rwandan family has experienced the hardships of displacement, and our societal values are founded on reintegration and rehabilitation," said the spokesperson for the Rwandan government, Yolande Makolo. "Under the agreement, Rwanda has the ability to approve each individual proposed for resettlement. Those approved will be provided with workforce training, healthcare, and accommodation support to jumpstart their lives in Rwanda, giving them the opportunity to contribute to one of the fastest-growing economies in the world over the last decade." The White House and State Department had no immediate comment. The Department of Homeland Security referred questions to the State Department. President Donald Trump aims to deport millions of immigrants in the U.S. illegally and his administration has sought to ramp up removals to third countries, including sending convicted criminals to South Sudan and Eswatini, formerly known as Swaziland. Rwanda has in recent years positioned itself as a destination country for migrants that Western countries would like to remove, despite concerns by rights groups that Kigali does not respect basic human rights. In May, the foreign minister said Rwanda was in the early stages of talks to receive immigrants deported from the United States. The Trump administration argues that third-country deportations help swiftly remove some migrants, including those with criminal convictions. Immigration hardliners see third-country removals as a way to deal with offenders who cannot easily be deported and could pose a threat to the public. Opponents have criticized the deportations as dangerous and cruel, since people could be sent to countries where they could face violence, have no ties and do not speak the language. US TO PROVIDE GRANT TO RWANDA Rwanda will be paid by the United States in the form of a grant, the official said, adding that the grant letter was finalized in July. The official declined to say how much the grant was for. The U.S. and Rwanda could extend the agreement beyond 250 people by mutual consent, the official said, adding that those deported to Rwanda do not have to stay in the country and can leave anytime they choose. Kigali will only accept those whose prison terms are complete or who have no criminal case against them, as there is no agreement with Washington that would allow people to serve out their U.S. sentence in Rwanda, the official said. No child sex offenders will be accepted. The Trump administration has pressed other countries to take migrants. It deported more than 200 Venezuelans accused of being gang members to El Salvador in March, where they were jailed until they were released in a prisoner swap last month. The Supreme Court in June allowed the Trump administration to deport migrants to third countries without giving them a chance to show they could be harmed. But the legality of the removals is being contested in a federal lawsuit in Boston, a case that could potentially wind its way back to the conservative-leaning high court. Western and regional leaders have praised President Paul Kagame for transforming Rwanda from the ruins of the 1994 genocide that killed more than 1 million people into a thriving economy. Rights groups have accused him of abuses and of supporting rebels in neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo, accusations that he denies. Rwanda has also engaged in peace talks led by the Trump administration to bring an end to fighting in eastern Congo. The two African nations signed a U.S.-brokered peace agreement in Washington in June, raising hopes for an end to fighting that has killed thousands and displaced hundreds of thousands more this year. The agreement to accept migrants deported from the U.S. is not the first such agreement Rwanda has reached. Kigali signed an agreement with Britain in 2022 to take in thousands of asylum seekers, a deal that was scrapped last year by then newly-elected Prime Minister Keir Starmer. No one was sent to Rwanda under the plan because of years of legal challenges. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
