Quantcast
STM says it is nearing MILGEM sales in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia
February 22, 2018
MILGEM Ada Corvette. Photo credit: Turkish Ministry of Defence

STM says it is nearing MILGEM sales in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia

Speaking to Turkey’s state-owned news agency Anadolu Agency (AA), the Deputy General Director of Turkish defence contractor  Savunma Teknolojileri Mühendislik ve Ticaret AŞ (STM), Murat Çift, said that STM’s negotiations with prospective overseas MILGEM customers are in the advanced stages.

The AA reports that Saudi Arabia is interested in five ships while Pakistan is negotiating for four.

In November, Pakistan’s Minister of Defence Production (MoDP) Rana Tanveer Hussain told AA that “the process was complete and construction of the ship will start in near future”, adding “Technical and financial proposal will be going to … Pakistan on [November 27]. So, this project is almost complete.”

As per the MoDP, the construction of the ships will be evenly split between Turkey and Pakistan, with the Sindh-based Karachi Shipyards & Engineering Works (KSEW) handling Pakistan’s workshare.

Closing the MILGEM sale to Pakistan would raise the overall value of STM’s business activities in Pakistan to approximately $1.5 billion U.S. STM is managing the Ormara hydrographic/oceanographic and harbour design program, the mid-life-upgrade of Pakistan’s three Agosta 90B submarines and the construction of the 17,000-ton Pakistan Navy Fleet Tanker at KSEW.

Saudi Arabia had been slotted as a prospective MILGEM buyer since at least May, with Turkish print news outlets reporting that Riyadh was interested in procuring five ships. However, news reports had claimed that Saudi Arabia cancelled the deal. Turkey’s Undersecretary of Defence Industries (SSM) Dr. İsmail Demir countered the reports, stating that talks between Riyadh and Ankara were still continuing.

STM is also pitching the MILGEM-based CF3500 frigate to Colombia for the Colombian Navy’s Plataforma Estratégica de Superficie (PES) next-generation frigate requirement. Çift told AA that Bogota will disclose a shortlist of three competing bids, STM expects to be on that shortlist.

STM is a state-owned defence contractor formed by the Defence Industry Executive Committee (SSIK) in 1991 to support the activities of the Turkish Armed Forces and the SSM. The SSM Dr. İsmail Demir serves as the Chairman of STM’s Executive Board.

  • Joseph

    I thought Turkey was Qatar’s closest ally in GCC. In light of the tension between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, it is surprising to see Turkey could still sell arms to Saudis.

    • Like Pakistan, I think Turkey is basically trying to mind its own lane in the GCC. Deal with everyone, condemn no one.

      • Joseph

        But recent news indicating Turkey was supporting Qatar: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-40262713

        That is how Qatar sees it too: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/11/turkey-stood-qatar-gulf-crisis-171114135404142.html

        Of course most likely Turkey was just protecting it’s own interest in Qatar, but Saudis might see it differently.

        • tbh Turkey’s actions clearly show otherwise.

          • Sinan Cagrı Kurt

            Turkey’s relations with KSA become very problematic, most of negotiations haven’t finalised because of Qatar and Muslim Brotherhood issues. But that didn’t harm relation irreversibly yet. Can you share reasoning behind this comment?

          • It was in response to the notion that Turkey is Qatar’s ally. Based on Turkey’s actions, it doesn’t appear that Turkey is doing much to decisively upset the Saudis over Qatar. Yes, Turkey is continuing it support to Qatar, but it isn’t burning bridges with the Saudis either.

  • Fatih

    Hello Bilal Khan, a fight between GCC states will never be accepted by Turkey. We should develop a other mentality of solidarity in the muslim world like the Christian world in europe shows us. Important is to support muslim countries producing high tech products. Engines jet engines, ships, Radar , rokets, plants all this stuff Turkey and Pakistan and other countries must be able to develop. That s the point. Remember, the US sold fighter jets to Saudi and to Qatar. This is in order to safe US interests from my point of view or do you believe something different? Turkey has it´s own Agenda like all others also have. But I am sure, Turkey ´s activities in Africa and middle east show us clearly, that dealing with Turkey is also in the interest of the poor countries. I am 100% convinced of that.

    • TZK

      While they engage in internecine wars the rest of the world is building up resentment and hatred towards Muslims through out the world with the result that Muslim minority populations are at risk from violence. There is disinformation and lies put out by various groups to demonise Muslims. The rich GCC states at least could learn from the Jews and set up a media monitoring group such as CAMERA that is pro- Israel. The comments here from individuals who will not take any criticism of India are proof if any was needed how other groups work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_for_Accuracy_in_Middle_East_Reporting_in_America

      • Headstrong

        Why doesn’t Pakistan set an example for the rest of the world and put on display its stellar display of treatment of its own minorities? That would teach the world! 😉

  • Jigsaw

    A welcome addition but I must say that the only military arm in Pak armed forces to have demonstrated acceptable self sufficiency is the Pakistan Air Force. Navy is the worst with no drive behind domestic sourcing. Heck they’re even importing FACs from China whereas army should have initiated at least a decent gunship programme already.

    • Sinan Cagrı Kurt

      Some of Milgems will be produce in Pakistan, Pak shipyards will gain critical experience.

      • Jigsaw

        I’m sure and i’m sure the PN will not initiate any domestic project from the knowledge gained, be it collaboration or on its own. They have not developed the mindset for that yet like the PAF.

  • sami shahid

    Turkey should stop selling weapons to Bangladesh.

    • Steve

      Totally agree. Especially while that Indian agent Hasina is ruling. She’s too busy murdering opponents through compliant judges and courts, and sucking up to India even to the detriment of BD to be of any use to the wider Muslim world.

      • Headstrong

        Hasina will do what she has to do for the good of Bangladesh, not the ‘wider Muslim world’ (not that the two are mutually exclusive).
        It’s good that she’s bringing some closure to the wounds inflicted by the religious extremists. If you people find that irksome, too bad…

        • TZK

          It seems ‘religious extremists’ are not the only ones BD has to worry about.

          https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2011/jan/23/india-bangladesh-border-shoot-to-kill-policy

          • Steve

            Exactly my point. This BD ‘leader’ is happy with Indian soldiers killing 100’s of her countrymen at the border, and being humiliated and persecuted in India. She is all for free Indian transit through her country. She is only useful for Modi nobody else.

          • Headstrong

            Let’s not hold ourselves back on exaggeration, shall we? 😄
            Anyway, in more relevant and current news, India and Bangladesh celebrate Vijay Diwas today 16 Dec – the day Pakistan signed the Instrument of Surrender.
            That is a bond between India and Bangladesh that cannot be rent asunder.

          • Steve

            Well Modi was in Burma praising their armed forces and calling the Rohingya issue an ‘internal security’ problem while the rest of the world including your father the USA say it’s a persecution of minority issue. He’s against his friend Hasina and the world in this ongoing issue, but she is shameless enough to overlook this too, despite tension with Burma, in her supplication to Modi. Like I said-useless. I’ll take jigsaws advice and leave it.

          • MT

            Modi is right to call rohingya internal situation of myanmar. Rohingya may be of bangladeshi origin but they are settlers of Arakan province for 2centuries.
            This is what Bangladesh expected from India. India didnt apply any pressure on bangladesh unlike china.
            China has become most despised country in bangladesh after overt support to myanmar oppressive army who control the writ over govt and foreign policy. The namesake premier :Aung san suu kyi is as weak as PM of pakistan

          • Headstrong

            Agree – you should leave it. Your father, China, stands with Myanmar on the issue. China’s treatment of Muslims in its own regions needs no further elaboration.
            India, on the other hand, has helped with supplies and more to the Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh – which is more than I can say for Pakistan’s contribution. Other than platitudes, of course. Which is the case for most issues anyway. In terms of rhetoric, Pakistan stands tall 😉

          • Headstrong
          • Steve

            Nobody is killing and raping Rohingya in Pakistan unlike Burma. We have not been to Yangon and egged the military along like Modi did. All ethnic minorities have some difficulties compared to majority in countries. Your treatment of ethnic minorities and even your own Dalits is so appalling and so widespread I can find dozens of media articles. Not wasting time for you mate. Keep your glasshouse and keep misusing phrases as usual. 🙂

          • Headstrong

            So you do understand term? Good. Now try applying it in daily life. You people have this habit of casting stones at others without realizing that it is you people who’re the worst perpetrators of everything you accuse others of. Hence a reminder now and then does you good.
            Same goes for your sugar daddy, China, too 😄

          • Jigsaw

            You’ve given far too much attention to a country in league of Nepals and Bhutans.

          • Steve

            True.

          • TZK

            This is BD’s own making but in relation to Kashmir that is not of their making. There is strength through unity and Muslims who seek to break up unified nation sates not only weaken themselves but the whole of Muslim world. Small nation states no matter how rich cannot survive without protection. European states only exist because of strong economic and military unions backed by superpowers. Had they remained as Pak they would have been a nuclear power and vying India for a seat at the UN security council at the same time affording protection to Indian Muslims. With Muslims divided someone has to rule and it is likely to be the Hindus in the subcontinent for the foreseeable future.

          • Headstrong

            If Indian Muslims needed protection, they would have moved to Pakistan in 1947. As it turned out, Bengali Muslims needed protection against Pakistani Muslims from Indian Hindus, Indian Muslims, Indian Parsis, Indian Christians, Indian Sikhs and Indian Jews. And they got it too – not least because they themselves stood up against the atrocities inflicted upon them by their fellow Muslims from Pakistan.
            Not even the Kashmiris supported the Pakistan Army when they attempted to infiltrate in ’65.
            Try not looking at it from a religious angle and you might get your answer. The Hindus (I presume you mean Indians, even though almost a fifth of Indians are non-Hindus) have no interest in ruling the subcontinent. Indians just want to rule India.

          • TZK

            However much you deny it, religion is at the heart of the issues as it was in Gujarat, Ayodhya, Dehli in 1984, Cross border killings between Bangladesh and India, Kashmir and so on. That is the reality, people being targeted based purely on their religion and you cannot gloss over the issue and try to sweep it under the carpet.
            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2017/06/28/as-indias-muslims-are-killed-modi-keeps-silent/?utm_term=.0d70c72a1c8a
            http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/86-killed-in-cow-related-violence-since-2010-are-muslims-97-attacks-after-modi-govt-came-to-power/story-w9CYOksvgk9joGSSaXgpLO.html
            http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-41966562
            https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/08/world/asia/india-muslim-killing-video.html

          • Headstrong

            We do not live in an ideal world unfortunately. There will always be reasons for conflicts – if not religion, something else.
            But to conflate everything to religion is also wrong. As I just said above, the border killings have nothing to do with religion, but everything to do with crime. Kashmir too did not begin as a religious issue but one of pure greed by Pakistan. Now, of course, the introduction of religious extremists into the region by Pakistan, the genocide of Kashmiri Pandits, the attempt to force Shariat into a region that had its own culture has indeed made the issue religious.
            The example of Bangladesh bears repetition. Here was a region founded on religion who was hounded out of a union based on the same religion. And the biggest irony – assisted by the same country from which it sought separation! That country which rejected the idea of religion being the foundation of a country.
            Yesterday India and Bangladesh celebrated 46 years of Victory Day or Vijay Diwas, the anniversary of Pskistan signing the Instrument of Surrender.
            Let’s not also pretend that a country based on religion such as Pakistan is free of religious strife. One look at your media – any day – tells us otherwise.
            As I always say, those living in glasshouses….

          • TZK

            BD chose to separate from the union at a time of deep national trauma caused by Cyclone Bhola and the separatist politicians took advantage. BD have to live with the consequences. Pak never claims or pretends to be ideal, as Indians do (worlds largest secularist democracy etc, etc) and has its internal strife bought on by the war on terror but the bottom line is you will not be lynched for being a Muslim.

          • Steve

            Some of the links you provided are quite informative. Thanks. It’s good to see the lies about ‘largest democracy’ and ‘secularism’ are not working and india’s true face is being unmasked the world over.

          • Headstrong

            A 2009 article? Ok – like that makes sense 😄

          • TZK
          • Headstrong

            Purely a crime and smuggling issue – nothing to do with Bangladeshis being Muslims (in case that is the argument that you are trying to make). While at a much reduced scale, BSF jawans have also been killed by these miscreants.
            Meanwhile, in 2015, India and Bangladesh settled all outstanding border issues. Now all that remains to be done is complete the fencing and prevent the porousness which allowed criminals to continue their activities – smuggling, fake currency, drug smuggling, gun running – unchecked. After all, as Robert Frost said in ‘Mending Wall’, ‘Good fences make good neighbours’.
            https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2015/06/economist-explains-19
            http://indianexpress.com/article/india/95-per-cent-work-on-new-fence-along-bangladesh-border-complete-bsf-dg-4830354/
            https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/bsf-jawan-killed-by-cow-smuggler-near-india-bangladesh-border-1750494

            And yet, both countries have the maturity to not let these issues hijack the relationship. India and Bangladesh enjoy a very cordial relationship, with both countries handing over to each other wanted criminals etc. However, Bangladesh’s protests at Pakistan’s interference in its internal affairs led it to boycotting the SAARC summit.
            https://www.dawn.com/news/1286662

            Please give the religious colouring to your comments a rest. It doesn’t work in the real world.

  • mojo Bojo

    They are obviously trying to bribe Turkey to fall into line. Not even a deal for a hundred Milgems will make Erdogan a Zionist supporter like bin Salman and Zayed

  • Steve

    They are keeping the specifications secret. I hope it is not because of kickbacks. If they buy mini ships with no VLS it will just be a glorified F22P. Then we should organise hunger strike in true subcontinental fashion outside naval HQ and curse the brass for yet one more missed opportunity. Of course the masses will believe the BS about ‘impregnable’ defence and alliance with a ‘brotherly’ country, so just expect benign neglect or bewilderment from them. Of course some people will say we are poor poor poor so let’s buy dingys armed with bows and arrows instead!

    • Joseph

      VLS is important (Though the ship in the photo clearly has no VLS), these days other than carriers the total number of VLS cells of all navy ships is considered as a good indicator of total naval strength.

    • Jigsaw

      I think Pakistan is going to the VLS route primarily through the acquisition of new Chinese frigates. The Turkish acquisition as of now being corvettes is focused on anti shipping ops and so on. I wouldn’t consider them as full fledged war time assets in any case as long as they are corvettes though i don’t understand why didn’t they go for the TF-100 officially. Still trying to figure out…

      • Steve

        They are paying a lot of money for something that is quite useless considering the regional naval threat environment if they go for Ada corvettes with no VLS. The main threat to us is Oniks iterations as we all know, which Turkey, Saudi etc do not face. Who we going to fight with corvettes, pirates lol? It’s positively criminal to put sailors lives and expensive assets at risk because they are defenceless against Oniks without a layered air defence system. We also need a long range SAM on ships as the recent Su-30/Oniks combo will need to be countered at a distance and not try to stop a diving missile with CIWS. The brass know all this of course but we all fear other financial considerations may be at play. Unfortunately.

        • Lasit

          in that case pakistan should try to arm their copies of FC-1 Xiaolong with some chinese A2G missiles to possibly threaten the Indian Naval assets.

          by the the way, coastal batteries of Brahmos placed in Gujarat will have enough range to cover upto Ormara

          • Steve

            Haha don’t underplay it. We thought Oniks was better than photon torpedoes and could destroy stuff light years away travelling at Warp 20! Yup we will arm Fierce Dragon with CM-400AKG to give you a Vulcan Hello. Thanks for the suggestion. It’s in the lighter vein mods leave it be! Lol

          • Lasit

            but you may need a bigger mothership than FC-1 Xiaolong to carry the CM-400AKG aka “eagle strike 12”.

            you get that combo and Indian Navy will be on its knees begging for mercy ..

          • Violet

            Hush. How turks are superior and how turks will help Pakistan become a global superpower is what you are gonna hear next. Imagination knows no bounds. First they were blushing at a Turkish paper plane called TFX and how it will change the fortunes of Pakistan, now they will start harping about how their friend Turkey is indeed building a mothership to sink a indian navy vessel. Lasit you thew a bone, now sit back and watch all the ludicrous comments about the “mighty” Turks (aka NATO’s lackey) making Pakistan the next superpower of the world..

          • Steve

            Your use of the term ‘mothership’ is incorrect usage. Maybe a language issue.

          • Rolexer

            FC-1 Xiaolong Block II, a third generation low end fighter is being called as “Fierce Dragon”? Hilarious!! Calling it a “dragon” a mythical creature which probably only existed in children’s story books, shows your desperation that when you can’t argue based on facts, you tend to deviate in the realm of fantasy and folklore to further a point. I wonder what’s next?!?! Next we might hear something of the sort–FC-1 Xiaolong (aka JF-17) can sit atop a tree, cure cancer and prevent famine.
            BTW it is so satisfying to see someone here talking about the BrahMos, with so much anxiety and apprehension that they are even afraid of calling it by its name. Instead they prefer calling it “oniks” in the hope it might reduce its lethality and effectiveness when it is hurled at them at supersonic speeds. Inferiority complex galore!!!

          • Steve

            Your comment is facetious rhetorical and jingoistic. Not requiring a serious reply.

          • Rolexer

            Unfortunately you still chose to reply. Accuses others of rhetoric and jingoism but himself continues to enchant the readers of a defense forum with the tales of folklore and fantasy. Nice logic Steve!!

          • U

            Steve you’ve got to learn to ignore these useless c**p commenters. Like I’ve mentioned earlier in some other post, they can’t help but spread BS, it’s instinctive. Every other day you will find some new citizen of the self proclaimed super power bragging and bullying or may be same people post with different names.

            You see it always drags to a point where it spoils any meaningful knowledge being shared and drives away some serious neutral readers and observers.

          • Steve

            I agree of course. No point in killing brain cells and wasting time with trolls. However there a separate point about internet presence. Indians are prolific on the net and they build a anti-Pakistan narrative which is could eventually and to some extent has found its way into mainstream media and decision makers thought processes. Though mostly untrue it needs to be countered as we are also 200 million with a lot of internet penetration. We also need influence in think tanks to counter turncoats like HH and write our own narrative too. Need higher media profile. Learn from the Jews and to a lesser extent from the Hindus about this. It’s information warfare and we should be willing to do battle.

    • TZK

      ‘Of course some people will say we are poor poor poor so let’s buy dingys armed with bows and arrows instead!’ In relation being able to afford weapons I think that a nation needs to use an arms race to its advantage by motivating itself to manufacture its own weapons otherwise it will go bankrupt. Short of developing its own weapons Pak is reliant on ‘friendly’ nations and subject to arm twisting by regional and global powers which compromises its sovereignty. In relation to the Corvettes I am in agreement with you, I personally do not see why a country with a short coastline is buying corvettes with limited offensive and air defence ability when it may not be able to guarantee air superiority over its coastline in a war.

    • TZK

      ‘Of course some people will say we are poor poor poor so let’s buy dingys armed with bows and arrows instead!’ In relation being able to afford weapons I think that a nation needs to use an arms race to its advantage by motivating itself to manufacture its own weapons otherwise it will go bankrupt. Short of developing its own weapons Pak is reliant on ‘friendly’ nations and subject to arm twisting by regional and global powers which compromises its sovereignty. In relation to the Corvettes I am in agreement with you, I personally do not see why a country with a short coastline is buying corvettes with limited offensive and air defence ability when it may not be able to guarantee air superiority over its coastline in a war.

    • TZK

      ‘Of course some people will say we are poor poor poor so let’s buy dingys armed with bows and arrows instead!’ In relation being able to afford weapons I think that a nation needs to use an arms race to its advantage by motivating itself to manufacture its own weapons otherwise it will go bankrupt. Short of developing its own weapons Pak is reliant on ‘friendly’ nations and subject to arm twisting by regional and global powers which compromises its sovereignty. In relation to the Corvettes I am in agreement with you, I personally do not see why a country with a short coastline is buying corvettes with limited offensive and air defence ability when it may not be able to guarantee air superiority over its coastline in a war.

    • TZK

      ‘Of course some people will say we are poor poor poor so let’s buy dingys armed with bows and arrows instead!’ In relation being able to afford weapons I think that a nation needs to use an arms race to its advantage by motivating itself to manufacture its own weapons otherwise it will go bankrupt. Short of developing its own weapons Pak is reliant on ‘friendly’ nations and subject to arm twisting by regional and global powers which compromises its sovereignty. In relation to the Corvettes I am in agreement with you, I personally do not see why a country with a short coastline is buying corvettes with limited offensive and air defence ability when it may not be able to guarantee air superiority over its coastline in a war.

    • TZK

      ‘Of course some people will say we are poor poor poor so let’s buy dingys armed with bows and arrows instead!’ In relation being able to afford weapons I think that a nation needs to use an arms race to its advantage by motivating itself to manufacture its own weapons otherwise it will go bankrupt. Short of developing its own weapons Pak is reliant on ‘friendly’ nations and subject to arm twisting by regional and global powers which compromises its sovereignty. In relation to the Corvettes I am in agreement with you, I personally do not see why a country with a short coastline is buying corvettes with limited offensive and air defence ability when it may not be able to guarantee air superiority over its coastline in a war.

    • TZK

      ‘Of course some people will say we are poor poor poor so let’s buy dingys armed with bows and arrows instead!’ In relation being able to afford weapons I think that a nation needs to use an arms race to its advantage by motivating itself to manufacture its own weapons otherwise it will go bankrupt. Short of developing its own weapons Pak is reliant on ‘friendly’ nations and subject to arm twisting by regional and global powers which compromises its sovereignty. In relation to the Corvettes I am in agreement with you, I personally do not see why a country with a short coastline is buying corvettes with limited offensive and air defence ability when it may not be able to guarantee air superiority over its coastline in a war.

    • TZK

      ‘Of course some people will say we are poor poor poor so let’s buy dingys armed with bows and arrows instead!’ In relation being able to afford weapons I think that a nation needs to use an arms race to its advantage by motivating itself to manufacture its own weapons otherwise it will go bankrupt. Short of developing its own weapons Pak is reliant on ‘friendly’ nations and subject to arm twisting by regional and global powers which compromises its sovereignty. In relation to the Corvettes I am in agreement with you, I personally do not see why a country with a short coastline is buying corvettes with limited offensive and air defence ability when it may not be able to guarantee air superiority over its coastline in a war.

    • TZK

      ‘Of course some people will say we are poor poor poor so let’s buy dingys armed with bows and arrows instead!’ In relation being able to afford weapons I think that a nation needs to use an arms race to its advantage by motivating itself to manufacture its own weapons otherwise it will go bankrupt. Short of developing its own weapons Pak is reliant on ‘friendly’ nations and subject to arm twisting by regional and global powers which compromises its sovereignty. In relation to the Corvettes I am in agreement with you, I personally do not see why a country with a short coastline is buying corvettes with limited offensive and air defence ability when it may not be able to guarantee air superiority over its coastline in a war.

    • TZK

      ‘Of course some people will say we are poor poor poor so let’s buy dingys armed with bows and arrows instead!’ In relation being able to afford weapons I think that a nation needs to use an arms race to its advantage by motivating itself to manufacture its own weapons otherwise it will go bankrupt. Short of developing its own weapons Pak is reliant on ‘friendly’ nations and subject to arm twisting by regional and global powers which compromises its sovereignty. In relation to the Corvettes I am in agreement with you, I personally do not see why a country with a short coastline is buying corvettes with limited offensive and air defence ability when it may not be able to guarantee air superiority over its coastline in a war.

    • TZK

      ‘Of course some people will say we are poor poor poor so let’s buy dingys armed with bows and arrows instead!’ In relation being able to afford weapons I think that a nation needs to use an arms race to its advantage by motivating itself to manufacture its own weapons otherwise it will go bankrupt. Short of developing its own weapons Pak is reliant on ‘friendly’ nations and subject to arm twisting by regional and global powers which compromises its sovereignty. In relation to the Corvettes I am in agreement with you, I personally do not see why a country with a short coastline is buying corvettes with limited offensive and air defence ability when it may not be able to guarantee air superiority over its coastline in a war.

    • TZK

      ‘Of course some people will say we are poor poor poor so let’s buy dingys armed with bows and arrows instead!’ In relation being able to afford weapons I think that a nation needs to use an arms race to its advantage by motivating itself to manufacture its own weapons otherwise it will go bankrupt. Short of developing its own weapons Pak is reliant on ‘friendly’ nations and subject to arm twisting by regional and global powers which compromises its sovereignty. In relation to the Corvettes I am in agreement with you, I personally do not see why a country with a short coastline is buying corvettes with limited offensive and air defence ability when it may not be able to guarantee air superiority over its coastline.

Social Media

Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter

Quwa Daily

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement