Army Chief's Extension & why it was necessary for Pakistan

[Beskar]

 

[jericho]

Wouldn't it be better to change the length of each chief term to be made like 4 or 5 years? since it seems like people who support this, are arguing that he understands the situation and the new chief would take time, if that is the case then a solution for this would be to make the length longer. Otherwise there would be many question raised (valid ones) on this, now and in the future when people look back.

 

[war&peace]

Continuation of policies is important but strengthening the institution is also important. However, this is an extraordinary situation.

@PakSword @Meengla @MastanKhan @Dubious guys please subscribe to this channel.

Wouldn't it be better to change the length of each chief term to be made like 4 or 5 years? since it seems like people who support this, are arguing that he understands the situation and the new chief would take time, if that is the case then a solution for this would be to make the length longer. Otherwise there would be many question raised (valid ones) on this, now and in the future when people look back.

I agree, it should be 5 years. 3 yrs is too short and then govt ends up giving extensions. Rather increase it to 5 years and remove extension clause unless and until the country is in direct war on international borders.

 

[Dual Wielder]

Well I do hope its in Pakistans best interests...

@jericho
I do agree with you, 3 years is ridiculously low, it also take at least 6-12 months for a new COAS to get used his post.

 

[Beskar]

Wouldn't it be better to change the length of each chief term to be made like 4 or 5 years? since it seems like people who support this, are arguing that he understands the situation and the new chief would take time, if that is the case then a solution for this would be to make the length longer. Otherwise there would be many question raised (valid ones) on this, now and in the future when people look back.

When Kayani was given an extension there was no outcry, because Pakistan was going through one of the worst phases of terrorism in its history. Now we're seeing that an extra-ordinary situation with Kashmir has emerged so it was only fair that an exception was made.

Previously I kept hearing that they were planning on opening a new position "Vice Chief of Army Staff" but not really sure if it'll happen now.

 

[jericho]

When Kayani was given an extension there was no outcry, because Pakistan was going through one of the worst phases of terrorism in its history. Now we're seeing that an extra-ordinary situation with Kashmir has emerged so it was only fair that an exception was made.

I cannot comment on people's reaction when Kayani was given extension because I am not aware, but I remember when people were posting posters on streets of Islamabad of requesting extension of Raheel Sharif, there was a huge discussion on how no army chief in recent time have left office when its his time to leave so Raheel Sharif leaving on time would be setting a standard for the next ones in line. Also, dont forget that in end 2016 (around the time Bajwa took over), Uri happened which India falsely blamed on Pak and made the whole drama of sar ji kal strike, tensions remained then too (Militarily and politically), at least now political scene seems stable compared to when Raheel was leaving

 

[Beskar]

I cannot comment on people's reaction when Kayani was given extension because I am not aware, but I remember when people were posting posters on streets of Islamabad of requesting extension of Raheel Sharif, there was a huge discussion on how no army chief in recent time have left office when its his time to leave so Raheel Sharif leaving on time would be setting a standard for the next ones in line. Also, dont forget that in end 2016 (around the time Bajwa took over), Uri happened which India falsely blamed on Pak and made the whole drama of sar ji kal strike, tensions remained then too (Militarily and politically), at least now political scene seems stable compared to when Raheel was leaving

After all's said and done we have to appreciate the fact that the decision for extension was in the hands of our Prime Minister. He chose to continue with the partnership in the best interest of our Nation so ultimately it was his decision and that itself is a victory for us.

 

[BATMAN]

When Kayani was given an extension there was no outcry

Are you sure about that?

I cannot comment on people's reaction when Kayani was given extension

Do you remember the noise of Imran Khan and party, when there were talks of giving Rahil Sharif extension. Later they again made noise, when Rahil Sharif was going to under take a job in GCC after his retirement.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Are you sure about that?


Do you remember the noise of Imran Khan and party, when there were talks of giving Rahil Sharif extension. Later they again made noise, when Rahil Sharif was going to under take a job in GCC after his retirement.

Folks in Opposition, by definition, generate noise while opposing...

Folks in Position, by definition, generate decisions while solidifying their positions....

 

[Meengla]

Continuation of policies is important but strengthening the institution is also important. However, this is an extraordinary situation.


I agree, it should be 5 years. 3 yrs is too short and then govt ends up giving extensions. Rather increase it to 5 years and remove extension clause unless and until the country is in direct war on international borders.

Good post. I am in agreement on all points.
In past some next-in-line Generals perhaps rightfully resigned when someone junior to them were given the COAS job. Might happen again with the extension.

But the building situation--in both Afghanistan and IoK is truly very different. Perhaps never since 1971 Pakistan faces such a situation. Add in the economy to the mix. So utilize every morsel of support, every advantage, every bit of knowledge and experience right now.

From what I gather now... the war clouds are very thick in Pakistan. There is a strong will to strike now while India's grip in Kashmir is like the situation in E. Pakistan in 1971.

 

[Beskar]

From what I gather now... the war clouds are very thick in Pakistan. There is a strong will to strike now while India's grip in Kashmir is like the situation in E. Pakistan in 1971.

Which would have gotten thicker with a rookie in command only this time around Pakistan's in a position to call the shots.

 

[Tameem]

I agree with this extension, it's indeed necessary for the circumstances.

I believes, PAF chief's tenure as well as PN chiefs tenures too should be extended for another 3 Years for the same reasons. That's way people who criticizing COAS extension only would be silenced as everyone understands the true sicerity of IK and PTI Govt taking out this decision in the best interest of Pakistan.

 

[Ghazwa-e-Hind]

The only reason I am supporting this extension is that I hope current chief will make aggressive move against India this time.

If this time we don't take aggressive stance, they will come for AJK next.

 

[R Wing]

The only reason I am supporting this extension is that I hope current chief will make aggressive move against India this time.

If this time we don't take aggressive stance, they will come for AJK next.

He will magically change overnight due to the extension?

Gotta love the fanboys here. Everyone I know in the military and intel isn't happy. Fresh thinking is important. Aggressive yet clever stance is important.

How are we raising the cost for India for supporting Baloch terror and becoming increasingly brutal in IOK? Yup, nothing except crying to mommy (UN/OIC, etc., which have no history of solving such disputes) and tweeting.

Keep in mind that his core staff --- many of the Lt Gens serving in key posts like CGS (with important directorates like MO and MI under them) + the DG ISI can stay the same for a year or more allowing the new COAS to settle in and take the reins quite easily. All the people actually manning the day to day military and intel war would still remain, so I don't buy this continuity bullshit.

If anything, we DON'T need continuity of this docile stance. We need fresh thinking, clever and creative approaches and a push back from every "new normal" that India, endorsed by the West, keeps creating.

I almost choked when I read "nightmare for India."
IOK = do whatever you want; we will cry to daddy and tweet + watch the occupied population be massacred/raped/detained/disappeared/cleansed

Sikh insurgency = all we have are a few videos of a few Sikhs chanting stuff.

Other insurgencies = no real support/momentum

Baloch terror = we will hunt the Baloch mercenaries but not touch RAW personnel/offices or do any tit-for-tat attacks

HOW WILL WE RAISE THE COST FOR INDIA? WHAT FEAR OF CONSEQUENCES ARE THERE FOR INDIA TO CONTINUE TO BLEED US IN THE SUB-CONVENTIONAL DOMAIN?

If this pathetic policy is a nightmare, then we truly have fallen to standards that our forefathers would weep over.

 

[Beskar]

He will magically change overnight due to the extension?

Gotta love the fanboys here. Everyone I know in the military and intel isn't happy. Fresh thinking is important. Aggressive yet clever stance is important.

How are we raising the cost for India for supporting Baloch terror and becoming increasingly brutal in IOK? Yup, nothing except crying to mommy (UN/OIC, etc., which have no history of solving such disputes) and tweeting.

Keep in mind that his core staff --- many of the Lt Gens serving in key posts like CGS (with important directorates like MO and MI under them) + the DG ISI can stay the same for a year or more allowing the new COAS to settle in and take the reins quite easily. All the people actually manning the day to day military and intel war would still remain, so I don't buy this continuity bullshit.

If anything, we DON'T need continuity of this docile stance. We need fresh thinking, clever and creative approaches and a push back from every "new normal" that India, endorsed by the West, keeps creating.

I almost choked when I read "nightmare for India."
IOK = do whatever you want; we will cry to daddy and tweet + watch the occupied population be massacred/raped/detained/disappeared/cleansed

Sikh insurgency = all we have are a few videos of a few Sikhs chanting stuff.

Other insurgencies = no real support/momentum

Baloch terror = we will hunt the Baloch mercenaries but not touch RAW personnel/offices or do any tit-for-tat attacks

HOW WILL WE RAISE THE COST FOR INDIA? WHAT FEAR OF CONSEQUENCES ARE THERE FOR INDIA TO CONTINUE TO BLEED US IN THE SUB-CONVENTIONAL DOMAIN?

If this pathetic policy is a nightmare, then we truly have fallen to standards that our forefathers would weep over.

Good thing the Prime Minister of Pakistan doesn't care about your opinion then. From your post it seems like you want an all out War and Pakistan Military to charge right across the LOC. Are we prepared for the Indian forces to open up a front in our southern eastern border? IMO The best course of action is through diplomacy, which is what the state institutions are pursuing since that option wasn't put to any use for the last 30 years or so.