Pakistan Army Central Command

[Xeric]

It is measure of articulation of command. Take this example; we want to employ 2 x corps 'together', that is to say in the same sector. Now previously it would mean that the corps commander of the A Corps and B Corps would have to coordinate this together with no one senior to both of them to actually coordinate the move and employment of the corps. There are two options now. 1) The COAS takes over and control both the corps 2) The corps commanders of A and B corps do it themselves. In forst case, whereas the COAS can do it, but then what if two more corps are also being employed 'together' elsewhere? This would imply that the COAS would be coordinating A and B corps at one place and B and C corps in another place. Add to them two more corps and he would also be commanding D and E corps in another sector. Matlab, shamozal.

Now in case he leave this to the two corps commander, there are certain issues. Like, whereas the corps commanders are in picture of the assets of their own corps, their strength and weakness, but they would not be similarly savvy about the second corps.

But now with a Command Commander sitting on top, he would be not only be commanding the two or three crops which makes up a command during peace time as a 'single' entity (just like a corps commander commands two or three divisions as one piece), but he would also be in knowledge of the 'properties' of both the corps. This way, the coordination would be easy. Moreover, having a command commander would mean, that he could attach, detach and group and re-group the assets of either of the corps as if they were companies of a battalion. This way, if a corps has to be given an additional brigades from the second corps, he can just order the re-grouping and it would done seamlessly just as a CO can move a platoon of his battalion to another company of his battalion.

Moreover, these commands would also be in coordination/command of the FC / Rangers, SSG, to an extent Police and other CAFs that falls under the area of the command. Thus making it simpler and smoother for the command commander to employ ALL the assets of the country whether it is the FC, Rangers of Army as if it were the same units. This is more also helpful in view of the internal security situation of the country

i hope that clear up the issue.

As for the number of commands; as of now we have the Northern, Central and Southern Commands only.

 

[Thorough Pro]

We are talking about military here not politics, and your grossly generalized comments hint at your lack of depth about Pakistan military professionalism and culture.

Agree with you, it is the delegation of power. In the present circumstances in Pakistan, where higher authorities like to play one man show and like the status quo, I don't think this is going to happen.



This is all hypothetical, on the ground there is no such delegation of commands. The top brass likes the status quo.

 

[Rahi812]

We are talking about military here not politics, and your grossly generalized comments hint at your lack of depth about Pakistan military professionalism and culture.

Maybe my lack of knowledge could be the hindrance in my answering the question. What I have seen in the last three decades in the military history, military top brass is not ready for the delegation of powers. One man shows suits them.
Even now, the post of CJCSC couldn't get its full powers. Though initially this post was created to give all the administrative powers to this position and all the chief's would be the operational commanders of their forces. We haven't seen that to be happening and the position of CJCSC is just ceremonial position, though lots of budget is spent to maintain this position.
Keeping in mind this whole scenario, now tell me how much is the possibility any acting COAS would be agree to delegate these powers to any commands.

 

[Rahi812]

It is measure of articulation of command. Take this example; we want to employ 2 x corps 'together', that is to say in the same sector. Now previously it would mean that the corps commander of the A Corps and B Corps would have to coordinate this together with no one senior to both of them to actually coordinate the move and employment of the corps. There are two options now. 1) The COAS takes over and control both the corps 2) The corps commanders of A and B corps do it themselves. In forst case, whereas the COAS can do it, but then what if two more corps are also being employed 'together' elsewhere? This would imply that the COAS would be coordinating A and B corps at one place and B and C corps in another place. Add to them two more corps and he would also be commanding D and E corps in another sector. Matlab, shamozal.

Now in case he leave this to the two corps commander, there are certain issues. Like, whereas the corps commanders are in picture of the assets of their own corps, their strength and weakness, but they would not be similarly savvy about the second corps.

But now with a Command Commander sitting on top, he would be not only be commanding the two or three crops which makes up a command during peace time as a 'single' entity (just like a corps commander commands two or three divisions as one piece), but he would also be in knowledge of the 'properties' of both the corps. This way, the coordination would be easy. Moreover, having a command commander would mean, that he could attach, detach and group and re-group the assets of either of the corps as if they were companies of a battalion. This way, if a corps has to be given an additional brigades from the second corps, he can just order the re-grouping and it would done seamlessly just as a CO can move a platoon of his battalion to another company of his battalion.

Moreover, these commands would also be in coordination/command of the FC / Rangers, SSG, to an extent Police and other CAFs that falls under the area of the command. Thus making it simpler and smoother for the command commander to employ ALL the assets of the country whether it is the FC, Rangers of Army as if it were the same units. This is more also helpful in view of the internal security situation of the country

i hope that clear up the issue.

As for the number of commands; as of now we have the Northern, Central and Southern Commands only.

I completely understand this command structure, though very expensive and I think not suitable for Pakistan.
Instead of commands there should only be core's e.g. eastern core, western core, northern core and southern cores. As usual core commanders should be commanding those core's.
There won't be any operational effect of commands instead of core's.

In case of Pakistan, command system would be very expensive. Reduce the core's to four and that's it.

No brigade of General's. Just four Cores-commanders, one Chief of General Staff and one Quartermaster General, that's it.

 

[fatman17]

one cannot have a Lt.G subordinate to another Lt.G - it dosnt make sense.

in the pure sense the order of command under such a system like southern, central and northern command calls for 4-star generals commanding these commands. this elimanates the position of CoAS and upgrades the stature of the Joints Chief as the overall commander or elimate the Joints Chief position (ceremonial anyway) and appoint CoAS as the 5-star general in command of the army.

hence under this system means that there is less power in the hands of one general. the real day-to-day matters are then the purview of the 4-star generals. the CoAS job then becomes to co-ordinate these commands in peace-time and war-time. this would also require the airforce to adopt a similar command structure to ensure interoperatability and co-ordination of air force assets.
the navy structure would ofcourse remain as is.
however this requires approval of the civilian govt. and as we stand today, it is next to impossible to implement.

Changing The Command System - I

 

[fatman17]

PA Structure

 

[niaz]

I have read Gen Schwarzkopf account of first war against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. He writes that even though he was officially reporting to the Supreme Commander; that is the President; orders were actually transmitted thru the CJSC implying that he was reporting to the Gen Colin Powel, another 4-star General. This is not different to the situation in the Second World War when despite being independent, all C in C’s of the US theatres of war were in all but name reporting to Gen Marshall. In December 1944; Gen MacArthur, Gem Eisenhower, Gen Marshal & Gen Henry Arthur (Chief of US Air Force) held equal 5 Star rank.

My point is that a 3 star general can in theory report to another 3-star general.

When a country is sufficiently large, such as India, one can justify combined arms Eastern, Western & Southern commands and create regional command HQs. However, I don’t really see a justification in case of Pakistan where movement of troops from one front to another within one day is theoretically possible.

 

[Rahi812]

one cannot have a Lt.G subordinate to another Lt.G - it dosnt make sense.

in the pure sense the order of command under such a system like southern, central and northern command calls for 4-star generals commanding these commands. this elimanates the position of CoAS and upgrades the stature of the Joints Chief as the overall commander or elimate the Joints Chief position (ceremonial anyway) and appoint CoAS as the 5-star general in command of the army.

hence under this system means that there is less power in the hands of one general. the real day-to-day matters are then the purview of the 4-star generals. the CoAS job then becomes to co-ordinate these commands in peace-time and war-time. this would also require the airforce to adopt a similar command structure to ensure interoperatability and co-ordination of air force assets.
the navy structure would ofcourse remain as is.
however this requires approval of the civilian govt. and as we stand today, it is next to impossible to implement.

Changing The Command System - I

This is a regional command structure implemented in the U.S. This is a very expensive command structure. This structure suits the U.S. due to their bigger structure and large area of operation. In Pakistan, this means lots of extra budget for the military.
Then, under every command commander there would be core command led by Lt. Generals, just imagine this will increase, so many generals in the army. Indeed, this would be very expensive.

Only the position of COAS would be just a coordinating position or just non-operating position.

You are right in saying that CJCSC would be than the commanding position, he would be basically commanding all the three forces.

As far as the Air Force and Navvy are concerned they would be also a command in this structure. Same as it is in the U.S.

Now the question arises, why we need such an expensive command structure.

In my view Pakistan needs four cores, Eastern Core, Western Core, Southern Core and Northern Core, one Chief of General staff and one Quartermaster General, and even eliminates the position of CJCSC. This will count six Lt. Generals and one full General,that's it.

One last thing the appointment of COAS should be made on seniority basis rather than by political appointment. If some COAS thinks his immediate successor is not competent to be next COAS, he has to stop his promotional rights by declaring him unfit for promotion for which army has a complete format and it happens to various posts in the army. Then next in line would be the next Chief, no political involvement.

 

[Thorough Pro]

CJCSC was created as a result of post 71 war internal review that highlighted poor co-ordination between the three arms and thus sits on top of PA, PN, and PAF, and agreed that it is mostly a ceremonial position and probably still not as effective as it should have been.

What we are taking about now is delegation of authority on lower level within the same arm, in fact that authority is already there in the form of Corps Commanders, the only difference is that now these Corps Commanders will be reporting/coordinating with the regional commands 9each responsible for 2/3 Corps) deployed in a particular 'Region".

Maybe my lack of knowledge could be the hindrance in my answering the question. What I have seen in the last three decades in the military history, military top brass is not ready for the delegation of powers. One man shows suits them.
Even now, the post of CJCSC couldn't get its full powers. Though initially this post was created to give all the administrative powers to this position and all the chief's would be the operational commanders of their forces. We haven't seen that to be happening and the position of CJCSC is just ceremonial position, though lots of budget is spent to maintain this position.
Keeping in mind this whole scenario, now tell me how much is the possibility any acting COAS would be agree to delegate these powers to any commands.

 

[Rahi812]

CJCSC was created as a result of post 71 war internal review that highlighted poor co-ordination between the three arms and thus sits on top of PA, PN, and PAF, and agreed that it is mostly a ceremonial position and probably still not as effective as it should have been.

What we are taking about now is delegation of authority on lower level within the same arm, in fact that authority is already there in the form of Corps Commanders, the only difference is that now these Corps Commanders will be reporting/coordinating with the regional commands 9each responsible for 2/3 Corps) deployed in a particular 'Region".

I think now PA is moving towards a regional command system to improve its effectiveness and operational quality. And senior most Lt. General in that region, who is also the core commander of one of the core in that region become the regional commanders.

Already we have heard of two commands, central command and southern command.

I think, without changing any existing structure and without creating any more posts, the army has just delegated some powers to one of senior core commanders in the region and this make completely sense. The army has been already very disciplined about the seniority system, so this doesn't make any problem in the ranks.

 

[Pakistanisage]

There is a Tragic History of Pakistan Armed Forces not trusting each other.

 

[Rahi812]

There is a Tragic History of Pakistan Armed Forces not trusting each other.

This is not the question of trusting, this is the power dynamics of ranks everywhere in the world. The ground rules are established for the balancing of the power in the ranks.

 

[Armstrong]

It is measure of articulation of command. Take this example; we want to employ 2 x corps 'together', that is to say in the same sector. Now previously it would mean that the corps commander of the A Corps and B Corps would have to coordinate this together with no one senior to both of them to actually coordinate the move and employment of the corps. There are two options now. 1) The COAS takes over and control both the corps 2) The corps commanders of A and B corps do it themselves. In forst case, whereas the COAS can do it, but then what if two more corps are also being employed 'together' elsewhere? This would imply that the COAS would be coordinating A and B corps at one place and B and C corps in another place. Add to them two more corps and he would also be commanding D and E corps in another sector. Matlab, shamozal.

Now in case he leave this to the two corps commander, there are certain issues. Like, whereas the corps commanders are in picture of the assets of their own corps, their strength and weakness, but they would not be similarly savvy about the second corps.

But now with a Command Commander sitting on top, he would be not only be commanding the two or three crops which makes up a command during peace time as a 'single' entity (just like a corps commander commands two or three divisions as one piece), but he would also be in knowledge of the 'properties' of both the corps. This way, the coordination would be easy. Moreover, having a command commander would mean, that he could attach, detach and group and re-group the assets of either of the corps as if they were companies of a battalion. This way, if a corps has to be given an additional brigades from the second corps, he can just order the re-grouping and it would done seamlessly just as a CO can move a platoon of his battalion to another company of his battalion.

Moreover, these commands would also be in coordination/command of the FC / Rangers, SSG, to an extent Police and other CAFs that falls under the area of the command. Thus making it simpler and smoother for the command commander to employ ALL the assets of the country whether it is the FC, Rangers of Army as if it were the same units. This is more also helpful in view of the internal security situation of the country

i hope that clear up the issue.

As for the number of commands; as of now we have the Northern, Central and Southern Commands only.

Mujhee isss post key Alif, Bay nahin samajhe aaiii !

Please can you explain this to a lay-man like myself !

 

[AUz]

Mujhee isss post key Alif, Bay nahin samajhe aaiii !

Please can you explain this to a lay-man like myself !

Bhai kya samajh nahi aya? itni assaan to post hai

 

[Armstrong]

Bhai kya samajh nahi aya? itni assaan to post hai

Confuse ho giyaaa mein !