Internal security, situation along Eastern Border, LOC and IOJ&K discussed - CCC at GHQ.

[The Eagle]

CCC at GHQ. Geo strat & national security environment reviewed. Internal security, situation along Eastern Border, LOC and IOJ&K discussed.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1191332153038004224

https://twitter.com/x/status/1191332176593375232

https://twitter.com/x/status/1191332195287412736

 

[R Wing]

Can they also discuss a timely retirement and a new chief who can breathe some life and more aggressive/creative solutions to various challenges?

 

[Khurram2349]

Can they also discuss a timely retirement and a new chief who can breathe some life and more aggressive/creative solutions to various challenges?

Yes ! I agree 100 % ! The decision to continue with Qamar Javed Bajwa as Army Chief is a blunder . It has given anti Establishment political forces a reason to create unrest as we have seen in Islamabad protest and also disrupted a routine system of promotions among top Army brass which is sure going to effect the institution . Although its futile to hope that Imran Khan will reverse his decision but just in case any sense prevail in his brain then he should change his decision and make the senior most in line General Sarfraz Sattar as next Army Chief !

No one is invincible in our military and our Army is blessed with good able officers . Change will always bring new fresh approach and continuity and dynamism in the institution !

 

[truthseeker2010]

Mr. COAS, you have got more than a plate full for you, and with your age coming, it would have been better had you called it a day, instead of enjoying another full term on the pretext of a conflict (read kashmir) that is a becoming a lost cause by the day.

Pak army has been losing its institutional stature since 2000's where personality has taken a greater importance than norms and values. Raheel sharif did some damage control of APK and PM, but Bajwa has taken it beyond even musharaf at its peak.

I hope state of pak wakes up before its too late......................

 

[Pakstallion]

Can they also discuss a timely retirement and a new chief who can breathe some life and more aggressive/creative solutions to various challenges?

Wish he did not accept the extension. Really wish Imran didn’t offer it to him.

 

[Signalian]

Pakistan's stature in security and defence has improved since past many years. Excellent move to have COAS tenure extended.

 

[War Thunder]

Can they also discuss a timely retirement and a new chief who can breathe some life and more aggressive/creative solutions to various challenges?

You mean a suicidal army chief?
And you wouldn't be asking for that if you knew the politics of the time and area, but you don't...

Wish he did not accept the extension. Really wish Imran didn’t offer it to him.

Really wish you had a clue on what you are saying but you don't.
Really wish you were not just a keyboard warrior thinking he knows things while he doesn't.

 

[R Wing]

You mean a suicidal army chief?
And you wouldn't be asking for that if you knew the politics of the time and area, but you don't...

But I do.

If you believe that an Army chief should be given a 3 year extension just because of precarious geopolitical concerns in the region (which are almost ALWAYS there in our region), you are entitled to that opinion --- just like I am entitled to think that this is a disastrous approach given that a lot of the staff running day-to-day (CGS, DG ISI, DG MI, DG MO, CLS, Commander ASFC and so on...) would remain the same under any transition till a new Chief would appoint his own picks.

Since I don't think we're going to be convincing each other, let's drop it

Wish he did not accept the extension. Really wish Imran didn’t offer it to him.

Exactly.

But be careful --- fanboys will try and tell you how unpatriotic and not "in the know" you are, which I find hilarious.

 

[Signalian]

Change will always bring new fresh approach and continuity and dynamism in the institution !

There is no alternative for experience.

 

[War Thunder]

But I do.

If you believe that an Army chief should be given a 3 year extension just because of precarious geopolitical concerns in the region (which are almost ALWAYS there in our region), you are entitled to that opinion --- just like I am entitled to think that this is a disastrous approach given that a lot of the staff running day-to-day (CGS, DG ISI, DG MI, DG MO, CLS, Commander ASFC and so on...) would remain the same under any transition till a new Chief would appoint his own picks.

Since I don't think we're going to be convincing each other, let's drop it

It's not just about the rank, having same staff and all. It's about what a particular person brings to the table.
We had Kiyani before, what did he do apart from bowing to political pressure and paving the way for all corruption? Letting the Americans get away with orchestrating the Osama drama?
If it was not about inividuals and personalities, then why didn't we have the same kind of resurgence which Raheel Shareef brought to the table, and which Bajwa was able to carry forward?

A person is never a machine, he won;t function the same way as another. He brings new ideas, and some times you want to keep things the way they are for a while before transitioning to some one new and trying them out and seeing how it plays.
Why was Khalid Bin Waleed the leader of Muslim expeditions for years? Were there no other able men who had participated in more battles? Who knew the art of war better than him?

Some times when some people are doing something right, you want to keep them and let them do it, instead of opening the doors to a random person and seeing how he performs. And let's be very clear, not all men and not all generals are the same. There are some who win wars, and others who lose them. There are some who stand and fight till the end, and there are some who who give up in the slightest of storms.
And no training, no experience, and no education can take away a person's inherent individuality from him. He/she will remain their own type of a persona.

 

[R Wing]

It's not just about the rank, having same staff and all. It's about what a particular person brings to the table.
We had Kiyani before, what did he do apart from bowing to political pressure and paving the way for all corruption? Letting the Americans get away with orchestrating the Osama drama?
If it was not about inividuals and personalities, then why didn't we have the same kind of resurgence which Raheel Shareef brought to the table, and which Bajwa was able to carry forward?

A person is never a machine, he won;t function the same way as another. He brings new ideas, and some times you want to keep things the way they are for a while before transitioning to some one new and trying them out and seeing how it plays.
Why was Khalid Bin Waleed the leader of Muslim expeditions for years? Were their no other able men who had participated in more battles? Who knew the art of war better than him?

Some times when some people are doing something right, you want to keep them and let them do it, instead of opening the doors to a random person and seeing how he performs. And let's be very clear, not all men and not all generals are the same. There are some who win wars, and others who lose them. There are some who stand and fight till the end, and there are some who who give up in the slightest of storms.
And no training, no experience, and no education can take away a person's inherent individuality from him. He/she will remain their own type of a persona.

Thank you for elaborating your position; I really do appreciate it. The problem is that you spent time typing a lot of obvious facts (like good and bad leaders, etc.) that nobody is denying. But your premise that he is the ONLY good one around and therefore we must keep him indefinitely is something I can't agree with. Nobody is saying that we pick some "random" guy.

I think there is no doubt that Gen Bajwa is better than Gen Kayani. But under your personality-worship approach, we should just declare Gen Bajwa COAS-for-life. Why can't the next person (and there were a number of very capable Generals, many of whom share Gen Bajwa's general approach, in line who will be unfairly retired now) be even better than Gen Bajwa if selected using the right criteria given the country's challenges?

Our point of contention is in our definition of a good COAS. I do not think he is doing enough on a number of fronts and issues, nor do I agree with the current posture of our national security institutions.

He's not a bad person but I think he has brought whatever he had to the table and it's absolutely time for somebody else to take the reins. Again, there is no right answer --- just opinions and we both have now shared ours.

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

Agreed there were several good candidates now retired forcibly.

Thank you for elaborating your position; I really do appreciate it. The problem is that you spent time typing a lot of obvious facts (like good and bad leaders, etc.) that nobody is denying. But your premise that he is the ONLY good one around and therefore we must keep him indefinitely is something I can't agree with. Nobody is saying that we pick some "random" guy.

I think there is no doubt that Gen Bajwa is better than Gen Kayani. But under your personality-worship approach, we should just declare Gen Bajwa COAS-for-life. Why can't the next person (and there were a number of very capable Generals, many of whom share Gen Bajwa's general approach, in line who will be unfairly retired now) be even better than Gen Bajwa if selected using the right criteria given the country's challenges?

Our point of contention is in our definition of a good COAS. I do not think he is doing enough on a number of fronts and issues, nor do I agree with the current posture of our national security institutions.

He's not a bad person but I think he has brought whatever he had to the table and it's absolutely time for somebody else to take the reins. Again, there is no right answer --- just opinions and we both have now shared ours.

 

[araz]

Pakistan's stature in security and defence has improved since past many years. Excellent move to have COAS tenure extended.

I wanted to discuss this with someone who could maintain objectivity. Why does the govtt think that QJB is such a assett that if he were to retire there maybe no one who can replace him. Even if the border situation is difficult could he not have been given a 1 year extension. Why 3 years and what happens to all the people who were going to come up.
Please let me know what your thoughts are.
A

 

[Signalian]

I wanted to discuss this with someone who could maintain objectivity. Why does the govtt think that QJB is such a assett that if he were to retire there maybe no one who can replace him. Even if the border situation is difficult could he not have been given a 1 year extension. Why 3 years and what happens to all the people who were going to come up.
Please let me know what your thoughts are.
A

In Military Operations, starting with strategic planning to deployment of forces in the area, its usually better to have one commander from the word go to the very end. Such a pathway usually yields results. The most experienced officer is the COAS, and his retirement means that his career has now finished and his services are no longer required. Even if he may sit on a decision making panel or as a think tank or as an adviser - he has already lost that power of making any decision. He can just give suggestions and throw around ideas. The next COAS now holds all the power and now he has to enact his decision making powers and give orders. In Military planning, a new commander will always have new plans to enact action. He could go enact those decisions on: planning from his MO Dte, changing circumstances (Govt + country + Regional + Military) as time passes, his own experience and his cadre of advisers or merely his gut feeling. In infantry, if a commander says attack from a left, the whole battalion will attack from that direction. In Artillery, calculations (such as trajectory etc) rule the decision/direction for attack. Decisions taken by the COAS can be circumstantial or based on calculations.

I once asked a close associate who worked in his Dte in GHQ, that Bajwa lacks that luster that RS held or other prominent COAS had held in the past. The reply i got was that Bajwa sometimes moves with snail's pace but consolidates every step ensuring that the last decision/action was the building block for the next. Some other officers regard him as the brain behind many military achievements on which he doesn't agree to take credit. Some say that in Feb 2019 incident, he let the CAS take the lead for retaliation against IAF, which a COAS normally doesn't do. He certainly isn't flamboyant as Musharraf or a heart winner like RS.

The statement issued by the government for his extension is "regional security environment". The team (COAS + PM) can remain the same if there is a long term plan that envisions and implements the statement given by the government. It may not be a 1 year plan, it could be a 3 year plan. Some people/members may look at it this way that PM IK is new to the political arena and has arrived to take reins at a time when the country had just started to stabilize mostly due to RS efforts while NS was in power - so IK needs support from the Military, solidly from the current COAS. A different cadre feels that ousting NS and bringing in IK has been achieved due to country's intel agencies, such as ISI. They think it was felt that while RS was throwing in effort to develop the image of Army after it was ruined by both Pervaiz's (Musharraf and kiyani), the civilian leadership was not doing its part in progression of Pakistan and its image. NS and his party was not concerned with Pakistan other than an opportunity to sit in power and make money just like before (90's) - however times had changed and Pakistan was standing in turmoil with enemies from with-in slowly bleeding it, while external enemies had surrounded it like never before. So a new junction of military-civilian leadership was required, both working sincerely for Pakistan. A pair leading both blocks without friction between them. Others may also look at it from Kashmir point of view - that Bajwa has mostly been posted as commander in AJK and CFL/LOC regions and is the best candidate to lead the Army at this point in time if a war erupts over Kashmir which may somehow give an edge and Indian media has also been screaming about this point concerning Bajwa.

This extension seems to be more of IK's plan than Bajwa's. Time will tell if IK has achieved the vision and implemented the plans that he holds by extending tenure of COAS. If there is certainly a plan in place on which IK wants to work together with Bajwa as COAS and hopes that the Duran line issue, internal security matters, Taliban-US issues in Afghanistan, kashmir issue, CPEC generally, foreign relations and other threats faced by Pakistan will get solved, probably three years could be enough to solve one or two if not all. On the contrary- unbiased - yes IK could use this extension as means to fortify his own Government for next 3 years. But in past such reliance on Military commanders have been taken by Bhutto and NS - both ending in disasters.

An uncomfortable development is seen after this decision - the disgruntled marching from KPK and now seen in streets of islamabad. Its very difficult to oust a COAS from his seat, its considered easier to oust a PM. There are many factions inside and abroad who want IK to go and dislike the extension of COAS. Those who say that Extension is a gamble, then a new COAS is a gamble too - either way decision has to be made and a decision has been made.

The Lt Gens who are going to come up will probably get superseded and retire. One might make it to CJSC. Promotions in military is another unique topic. Promotions of brigadier and above become awry at some stage of career. A brigadier destined to be become a sure-shot general, while in the excercise area gets a cardiac arrest, he will never reach general rank. A Major General's staff car goes missing, he is superseded and retired. A promotion criteria like number of staff/war courses comes in, a Major General doesn't reach Lt.Gen rank based on counting in competition with other Major Generals. Nothing is for sure above Brigadier Rank.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

In Military Operations, starting with strategic planning to deployment of forces in the area, its usually better to have one commander from the word go to the very end. Such a pathway usually yields results. The most experienced officer is the COAS, and his retirement means that his career has now finished and his services are no longer required. Even if he may sit on a decision making panel or as a think tank or as an adviser - he has already lost that power of making any decision. He can just give suggestions and throw around ideas. The next COAS now holds all the power and now he has to enact his decision making powers and give orders. In Military planning, a new commander will always have new plans to enact action. He could go enact those decisions on: planning from his MO Dte, changing circumstances (Govt + country + Regional + Military) as time passes, his own experience and his cadre of advisers or merely his gut feeling. In infantry, if a commander says attack from a left, the whole battalion will attack from that direction. In Artillery, calculations (such as trajectory etc) rule the decision/direction for attack. Decisions taken by the COAS can be circumstantial or based on calculations.

I once asked a close associate who worked in his Dte in GHQ, that Bajwa lacks that luster that RS held or other prominent COAS had held in the past. The reply i got was that Bajwa sometimes moves with snail's pace but consolidates every step ensuring that the last decision/action was the building block for the next. Some other officers regard him as the brain behind many military achievements on which he doesn't agree to take credit. Some say that in Feb 2019 incident, he let the CAS take the lead for retaliation against IAF, which a COAS normally doesn't do. He certainly isn't flamboyant as Musharraf or a heart winner like RS.

The statement issued by the government for his extension is "regional security environment". The team (COAS + PM) can remain the same if there is a long term plan that envisions and implements the statement given by the government. It may not be a 1 year plan, it could be a 3 year plan. Some people/members may look at it this way that PM IK is new to the political arena and has arrived to take reins at a time when the country had just started to stabilize mostly due to RS efforts while NS was in power - so IK needs support from the Military, solidly from the current COAS. A different cadre feels that ousting NS and bringing in IK has been achieved due to country's intel agencies, such as ISI. They think it was felt that while RS was throwing in effort to develop the image of Army after it was ruined by both Pervaiz's (Musharraf and kiyani), the civilian leadership was not doing its part in progression of Pakistan and its image. NS and his party was not concerned with Pakistan other than an opportunity to sit in power and make money just like before (90's) - however times had changed and Pakistan was standing in turmoil with enemies from with-in slowly bleeding it, while external enemies had surrounded it like never before. So a new junction of military-civilian leadership was required, both working sincerely for Pakistan. A pair leading both blocks without friction between them. Others may look at it from Kashmir point of view - that Bajwa has mostly been posted as commander in AJK and CFL/LOC regions and is the best candidate to lead the Army at this point in time if a war erupts over Kashmir which may somehow give an edge and Indian media has also been screaming about this point concerning Bajwa.

This extension seems to be more of IK's plan that Bajwa's. Time will tell if IK has achieved the vision and implemented the plans that he holds by extending tenure of COAS. If there is certainly a plan in place on which IK wants to work together with Bajwa as COAS and hopes that the Duran line issue, internal security matters, Taliban-US issues in Afghanistan, kashmir issue, CPEC generally, foreign relations and other threats faced by Pakistan will get solved, probably three years could be enough to solve one or two if not all. On the contrary- unbiased - yes IK could use this extension as means to fortify his own Government for next 3 years. But in past such reliance on Military commanders have been taken by Bhutto and NS - both ending in disasters.

There is development after this decision - the disgruntled marching from KPK and now seen in streets of islamabad. Its very difficult to oust a COAS from his seat, its considered easier to oust a PM. There are many factions inside and abroad who want IK to go and dislike the extension of COAS. Those who say that Extension is a gamble, then a new COAS is a gamble too - either way decision has to be made and a decision has been made.

The Lt Gens who are going to come up will probably get superseded and retire. One might make it to CJSC. Promotions in military is another unique topic. Promotions of brigadier and above become awry at some stage of career. A brigadier destined to be become a sure-shot general, while in the excercise area gets a cardiac arrest, he will never reach general rank. A Major General's staff car goes missing, he is superseded and retired. A promotion criteria like number of staff/war courses comes in, a Major General doesn't reach Lt.Gen rank based on counting in competition with other Major Generals. Nothing is for sure above Brigadier Rank.

A well articulated reply which gives answers...