Next CJCSC: Time for a Chairman from Navy or Air Force

[Xestan]

As we know General Zubair Mahmood Hayat has started his farewell calls and is due to retire in a couple of weeks. Will the Prime Minister appoint the next Chairman Joint Chiefs from the Air Force or the Navy or Army will retain the position as it has for last two decades.

The rotation was stopped when former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif appointed Musharraf as the CJCSC, superseding a few seniors in other services, and it has since become a norm to appoint the highest Military officer from the Army.

Pakistan Military needs to adapt to changing times and it requires a better and upgraded JSH. That will not happen until other services are given chance to head the Military.

All members are requested to present their views regarding the subject.

I'd prefer the new Chairman from the Navy, and maybe we will have another officer like Admiral Iftikhar Ahmed Sirohey heading the Joint Services. His tenure was one of the best for a CJCSC, he initiated early work on procuring a Nuclear Submarine, worked on the Non-nuclear aggression agreement with India and was very active as the chief military adviser to the Government and helped with foreign Military relations as a lot, especially China and US.

 

[Sunny4pak]

As we know General Zubair Mahmood Hayat has started his farewell calls and is due to retire in a couple of weeks. Will the Prime Minister appoint the next Chairman Joint Chiefs from the Air Force or the Navy or Army will retain the position as it has for last two decades.

The rotation was stopped when former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif appointed Musharraf as the CJCSC, superseding a few seniors in other services, and it has since become a norm to appoint the highest Military officer from the Army.

Pakistan Military needs to adapt to changing times and it requires a better and upgraded JSH. That will not happen until other services are given chance to head the Military.

All members are requested to present their views regarding the subject.

I'd prefer the new Chairman from the Navy, and maybe we will have another officer like Admiral Iftikhar Ahmed Sirohey heading the Joint Services. His tenure was one of the best for a CJCSC, he initiated early work on procuring a Nuclear Submarine, worked on the Non-nuclear aggression agreement with India and was very active as the chief military adviser to the Government and helped with foreign Military relations as a lot, especially China and US.

Yes indeed Pak need to give powers to CJCSC (as in previous case he used to head all three services with powers) & it should be appointed from all three services as per seniority. Furthermore it is notable that India is going to appoint a CJCS in time ahead as announced modi recently. they have felt the need after 27 Feb that there is lack of coordination. Even though due to War on terror Pak armed forces have much better coordination, However CJCSC from other services may improve harmony.

 

[Xestan]

Yes indeed Pak need to give powers to CJCSC (as in previous case he used to head all three services with powers) & it should be appointed from all three services as per seniority. Furthermore it is notable that India is going to appoint a CJCS in time ahead as announced modi recently. they have felt the need after 27 Feb that there is lack of coordination. Even though due to War on terror Pak armed forces have much better coordination, However CJCSC from other services may improve harmony.

A CJCSC has never been empowered in Pakistan but we need to move towards a major overhaul of the Military, especially the Army. COAS office holds too much unnecessary power. No large Military in the world leaves so much power in one office but divides it into Commands. CJCSC on the other hand needs to replace the role Army Chief plays, in relations to being a bridge with the Government.

 

[WarKa DaNG]

PAF and PN should be given a chance

 

[Yaseen1]

Paf deserves this office after good performance on 27feb

 

[Reddington]

I agree. The post of Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee needs to be empowered while the role of COAS needs to be replaced with CJCSC.

However, war is a serious business. War is not a game that just to satisfy some egos, you start doling out higher positions to Navy and Air force. Even in NATO, the two highest posts administratively and operationally i.e. Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) and Chairman of the NATO Military Committee (CMC) is headed by a commander from land forces 90% of the time.



I shared an article here 3 months ago written by Ikram Sehgal on the same topic. Here are some excerpts from it.


For countries like Pakistan both air power and sea power have a vital role to play but geography and lack of depth constricts our space to maneuver and thus dictates that the dominant role must be that of ground troops, i.e. the Army. Lecturing regularly in the PAF Air War College in Karachi and the Navy’s Naval War College in Lahore i.e. besides the National Defence University (NDU) Islamabad, I have a lot of respect and admiration for the Air Force and Naval officers, many of whom equal excel in their grasp of strategy their Army counterparts. However preparing for war is not a game, in a theater where the major battles will that be of Land Forces, which do not have the luxury of the time and space for large scale manoeuvre, the grand strategy will be to fight decisive tactical battles (1) in AK and Northern areas (2) Punjab Plains (3) Rahimyar Khan – Bahawalpur Sector and (4) Hyderabad-Chor-Badin Sector. What will be forced on us will be (1) air battles for our superiority, particularly over Karachi (2) sea battles to restrict or naval forces buying Pakistan’s territory and (3) their amphibious/heli-borne capacities in the South. Each will be of the greatest consequence but any of the land battles will be decisive. Therefore as much as there may be heart burn among senior air force and naval hierarchy, the fact of the topmost individual in the higher command by a soldier is not a subject of debate.

War is not a game, particularly when the country’s existence comes into question. That is also the main reason for our reliance on tactical nuclear weapons to offset the conventional numerical and material advantage that the enemy enjoys, NATO has found in necessary in Europe to have a Land Forces Commander be the head, administratively and operationally.

Rotating the command among the three Services is not practical. Why not have a single person to be both the Chairman JCSC and the COAS? Being hands-on commander of the Land Forces with concurrent command of both the Chairman JCSC his presence must physically be located in GHQ (General Headquarters). A five star general, must have
(1) operational control of all the Armed Forces.
(2) the postings and promotions of Brigadiers rank (or Air Force and Naval equivalent) and above
(3) the Corps Commanders (and equivalent) Conferences of all four services.
Procedural changes within the Defense Ministry do not require any Constitutional Amendment. We must have a four star Deputy Chairman from the Air Force or the Navy in rotation presiding over the JCSC Secretariat.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/make-higher-command-effective.631427/#post-11703419

 

[New World]

New CJCSC should be from Navy..

 

[TsAr]

Post of CJCSC is an important position since he is also incharge of SPD which controls the nuclear and missile programs.
Our nuclear doctrine is mostly based on missiles which are under army control so in this context I think the next CJCSC would be from army and most likely it would be the senior most Lt Gen Sarfaraz Sattar who is DG SPD at the moment.

 

[SABRE]

Post of CJCSC is an important position since he is also incharge of SPD which controls the nuclear and missile programs.
Our nuclear doctrine is mostly based on missiles which are under army control so in this context I think the next CJCSC would be from army and most likely it would be the senior most Lt Gen Sarfaraz Sattar who is DG SPD at the moment.

DG SPD is in-charge of SPD not CJCSC and he is largely in control of the organization. He serves as the secretary of NCA, whose boss is the PM. From what I know (I am happy to be corrected) CJCSC actually has little input in our nuclear policy. He mainly participates when PM calls a NCA meeting. Otherwise all management and administrative issues are handled by DG SPD himself. However, since DG SPD is supposed to be a serving military officer of a three star rank he is outranked by CJCSC. Thus he seeks out CJCSC for liaison with the PM. In principle, the three service chiefs should also go through CJCSC to have liaison with the PM or President.

 

[truthseeker2010]

LOL, army will never give up what it has "earned", all fanboys should hold their horses, because in the end there will be disappointment, as civilians has now no say in military affairs and a spine less PM is in a tight spot for his seat. Therefore next cjc will be from army.

 

[Xestan]

Post of CJCSC is an important position since he is also incharge of SPD which controls the nuclear and missile programs.
Our nuclear doctrine is mostly based on missiles which are under army control so in this context I think the next CJCSC would be from army and most likely it would be the senior most Lt Gen Sarfaraz Sattar who is DG SPD at the moment.

PAF Strategic Force controlled Pakistan's first ever Nukes. And we are moving towards Naval second strike capability, so this argument doesn't make sense.

 

[khanasifm]

As we know General Zubair Mahmood Hayat has started his farewell calls and is due to retire in a couple of weeks. Will the Prime Minister appoint the next Chairman Joint Chiefs from the Air Force or the Navy or Army will retain the position as it has for last two decades.

The rotation was stopped when former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif appointed Musharraf as the CJCSC, superseding a few seniors in other services, and it has since become a norm to appoint the highest Military officer from the Army.

Pakistan Military needs to adapt to changing times and it requires a better and upgraded JSH. That will not happen until other services are given chance to head the Military.

All members are requested to present their views regarding the subject.

I'd prefer the new Chairman from the Navy, and maybe we will have another officer like Admiral Iftikhar Ahmed Sirohey heading the Joint Services. His tenure was one of the best for a CJCSC, he initiated early work on procuring a Nuclear Submarine, worked on the Non-nuclear aggression agreement with India and was very active as the chief military adviser to the Government and helped with foreign Military relations as a lot, especially China and US.

This was idea based on US joint chief initially zia time and little afterward there was rotation between service which army on their own made decision to take over jcs spot and stop rotation which was not liked by other sister arms but army is ....

So it’s just show piece now nothing of the sort is US

 

[TsAr]

DG SPD is in-charge of SPD not CJCSC and he is largely in control of the organization. He serves as the secretary of NCA, whose boss is the PM. From what I know (I am happy to be corrected) CJCSC actually has little input in our nuclear policy. He mainly participates when PM calls a NCA meeting. Otherwise all management and administrative issues are handled by DG SPD himself. However, since DG SPD is supposed to be a serving military officer of a three star rank he is outranked by CJCSC. Thus he seeks out CJCSC for liaison with the PM. In principle, the three service chiefs should also go through CJCSC to have liaison with the PM or President.

CJCSC is the deputy chairman of the National Command Authority. In general CJCSC is above in seniority to army chief but this would not be the case now as Bajwa was commissioned in 1980 whereas the senior most 3 star general Sarfaraz Sattar was commissioned in 1984.

 

[SABRE]

CJCSC is the deputy chairman of the National Command Authority. In general CJCSC is above in seniority to army chief but this would not be the case now as Bajwa was commissioned in 1980 whereas the senior most 3 star general Sarfaraz Sattar was commissioned in 1984.

CJCSC is not the deputy chairman of NCA. He is the deputy chairman of Development Control Committee (DCC) of the NCA. The other committee is Employment Control Committee (ECC) whose deputy chairman is the Foreign Minister. ECC is the politico-military body responsible for policy making, where as DCC is military-scientific body that implements ECC's policies. While the CJSCS has prerogative to oversees the workings of DCC its the DG SPD who is responsible for day-to-day management of both the ECC and DCC decision, policies, and their implementation.

Note: Upon inception of the NCA the President was its chairman and PM was the deputy chairman. This suited Gen. Musharraf who was holding the presidential portfolio at the time. After the rules were revised post-2008 general elections the President was removed from the body and PM became the chairman. To the best of my knowledge, the deputy chairmanship of NCA as a whole does not exist anymore.

Also, I do not think CJCSC is above COAS just in general. He is above the COAS in principle, regardless of who was commissioned first. I am open to corrections.

 

[alibaz]

Yes indeed Pak need to give powers to CJCSC (as in previous case he used to head all three services with powers) & it should be appointed from all three services as per seniority. Furthermore it is notable that India is going to appoint a CJCS in time ahead as announced modi recently. they have felt the need after 27 Feb that there is lack of coordination. Even though due to War on terror Pak armed forces have much better coordination, However CJCSC from other services may improve harmony.

Dear what powers you intend giving to chairman of a committee. Do you want him to order move some corps, some PN ships, some PAF squadrons or something even serious?