What's new

COAS Gen Bajwa intends to cut army strength of 5,38,000 substantially over next 5 years

Should former soldiers move into the Police forces, to raise the standard of the police? The police could form a kind of reserves for the nation, and in fact work to create a defense in depth; a second line of defense similar to Ukrainian troops in urban areas.
Maybe, but downsizing is a very slow process, it does not involve retiring your active soldiers at all or putting them out of work. It involves taking in less troops every year to slowly downsize, so the troops will be retiring at their regular ages and may not be fit for police service or will still be in the army reserve when they retire.
 
Russia has a much larger armed forces, I was not talking about what they used In Ukraine only, that was my entire point. They have much larger forces yet can only use a portion of them, so having a massive army is not helping them, but better planning and technology would have helped them (they already have better technology, but I guess nothing makes up for incompetence).

Just think if Ukraine doesnt have 500.000 professional troops and 500.000 reserves.

We should see on the defender point of view, not the invader.
 
Agree with the above but it's external environment which is very concerning, China can do so because it is an immense power.
As for military age men that's true but they and will always be a poor substitute to men who make their living from living the art of war their entire life.

Which is why it is a doctrinal issue... unless the intent is known, it would be imprudent to endlessly discuss an unknown quantity and it's purpose.
Would be a good read to see what has actually been proposed and then deliberate on it's merits.
 
I get where you’re coming from too, a very fair argument, I’ve seen the issue you’re talking about all over European armies where they downsized and relied on technology so much that they’ve run woefully short on manpower, but I think that also has to do with the fact that those are developed nations where the military does not pay much compared to what jobs people can get instead, that’s not an issue with Pakistan, the army will always have a healthy supply of volunteers. I’m of the opinion that some downsizing is definitely needed, but not to a point where the forces become too small, a balance of sorts, it’s true that we still need a massive army, just how massive is where that balance lies.

The thing is you're right, I wouldn't identify pay being a big factor in this. It's more this obsession with tech trumps troops, which can only go so far before diminishing returns set in, as it has with European states, including my own.
I agree with the general premise and we could cut down on things such as logistics and other 'man heavy' areas but frontline troops is a no, and certainly not in the current climate.

Which is why it is a doctrinal issue... unless the intent is known, it would be imprudent to endlessly discuss an unknown quantity and it's purpose.
Would be a good read to see what has actually been proposed and then deliberate on it's merits.

Of course we don't not intent and yes I agree.
 
The thing is you're right, I wouldn't identify pay being a big factor in this. It's more this obsession with tech trumps troops, which can only go so far before diminishing returns set in, as it has with European states, including my own.
I agree with the general premise and we could cut down on things such as logistics and other 'man heavy' areas but frontline troops is a no, and certainly not in the current climate.



Of course we don't not intent and yes I agree.

I'm in total disagreement with the down sizing. The solution is not to cut head count to put money into tech, better of improving the economy would be the solution. Regardless if India will do small skirmishes or not, its best to be ready for an eventual "Total War" concept. As for thousands of troops doing nothing, send them of for military exercises with other nations to absorb new information and tactics of warfare.

This approach of down sizing creates long-term headaches and strain on the regulars. As you've pointed out as well why would later on people join if there are better paying jobs or opportunities overseas? Your seeing it in UK and EU now, even with overwhelming tech advantage the lack of manpower creates issues for them and they are now trying to fill the gap.

Eventually, tech has its limitations once your run out you'll need the numbers to hold the line if not you will be stream rolled.

This strategy is being "Penny Wise, Pound Foolish", and this thinking never gets ahead.
 
This is exactly the issue, people don’t understand the modern war and think downsizing somehow means we’re going to get rid of all our manpower. That’s not how this works. If the entire worlds military experts have agreed that downsizing in the favor of modernization is the way forward, then how are you going to justify your stance against it?

Do you know how much of the Pakistani army is simply sitting idle, doing absolutely nothing? Hundreds of thousands of soldiers. All of them poorly equipped (comparatively) to handle a major conflict. If instead we downsized, and equipped the smaller army with much better equipment, we would be much better off. You keep saying the forces need to modernize, but where will we get the money for that if it just keeps growing in size?

What do you mean india is on a warpath? I mean absolutely no offense but this is such a baseless statement Pakistanis keep repeating over and over to justify needless defense spending. There has been no such indication apart from the emotional outburst Pakistanis often show.

An all out war between india and Pakistan is less likely now than it has been in decades due to the geopolitical situation of the world and how war has evolved.

An india Pakistan war, if it occurs now (but is highly unlikely to occur in the world of political, economical and guerrilla warfare), is not going to be a massive conflict this time, it will be small, concentrated skirmishes in the air, on the the land, and in the sea, that will be confined to these areas and not all over the borders. Both countries have shown this is the case time and again. We saw it on 27th Feb, we saw it in Indias fight with China. We saw it in the last two standoffs we had with india, we saw it in 1999 in Kargil.

Pakistan at the moment is woefully unprepared for such a war because india is outdoing us in technology, they have more money and can equip their troops and forces with better and more modern equipment, so in the case of a small scale war, where both sides have equal numbers, india will have the edge due to technology, because they’ll have downsized and will have spent that money in better tech, meanwhile us with our lumbering 500 thousand troops that are under equipped will lose because we can’t use them effectively.

Downsizing is the way forward, a smaller force equipped with modern rifles, optics, radios, IFVs, UCAVs, tanks, covered by modern fighters, helicopters and artillery.


I still disagree, Even with all threats Pakistan is facing, we have hundreds of thousands of troops sitting idly. Taking up money that is better spent on equipping the troops that are actually deployed with better equipment. I’m not saying we should downsize massively, but certainly enough to where we have a better balance of reserves to quality of equipment, right now we’re fairly biased towards manpower instead of quality of equipment and this needs to change as the type of threats we face change. Even for insurgencies, do we have all our forces deployed? Or just a very minor part of them? Now what if we got rid of a portion of the manpower that’s not deployed to better equip the small amount of troops that are deployed to fight insurgency? We’d get better results instantly. That’s what we need to do. Everyone keeps saying our boys need UCAVs or Modern IFVs or new rifles, but the truth is due to our economy, equipping such a massive army with modern equipment is simply impossible, it can only be done by decreasing the amount of troops we have.
According to you:
1) India is not on a war path? I mean you literally said that after their missile enter Pakistan territory. And their planes enter our airspace. Their BJP elected leaders i mean their leaders are saying we will take Azad Kashmir back. They are appointing CMs which are hardcore anti Pakistan. Yet here you are under some delusion that india is not on war path. One simply needs to look at past facts and you would know.
2) Secondly you keep saying downsizing downsizing. As it will allow us to buy better equipment. Yes downsizing will give us money to buy better equipment but read some history, in WW2 germany had better R&D than allied forces but USA had inhouse production of reliable and cheap equipment which they mass produced and was the reason for its win.
3) We cannot afford down sizing or to be left behind technologically. We need to keep our numbers and build inhouse next gen equipment. Now how can we do that? Just as we have been doing in last 5 years. We collab with friendly countries, our academia needs collaboration with industry and that is the only way forward. Our population is increasing and thus increase of our urban areas. Which would require more number of soldiers for protection.
4) Your solution of downsizing and then using the un used funds for better equipment is a short term solution which would not enable us follow a comprehensive long term solution.
What we need is better academia infrastructure without any "tanzeems" in public universities. We need to focus on Mechanical, electrical and material eng fields. Industrial academia collab is a must so that students graduating have 100% job security. Pakistan needs technology base economy now instead of agriculture base. This would foster R&D and would enable us persue technologies indegeniously. This is a whole loop where one thing depends on another.
 
I feel , improving the capabilities of the foot soldiers is important next step
  • Better equipment
  • Better Transport Vehicles (Armored)
  • Better Heavier Trucks
  • Transport Helicopters

0.02% is size of our military vs our population , so it is reasonable
Size military

Indian Soldier Count is 12 Lakh + (12 Lakh) they are also spread on Eastern/Western fronts so at least 7-10 Lakh soldiers could be position on Western front with Pakistan

Pakistan maintaining 6 Lakh Soldiers (5.6 to 6 Lakh) appears logical

However, if there is a peace agreement with India then by all means reduce the figures to 2 Million Soldiers and maintain a reserve soldiers count
 
Last edited:
I'm in total disagreement with the down sizing. The solution is not to cut head count to put money into tech, better of improving the economy would be the solution. Regardless if India will do small skirmishes or not, its best to be ready for an eventual "Total War" concept. As for thousands of troops doing nothing, send them of for military exercises with other nations to absorb new information and tactics of warfare.

This approach of down sizing creates long-term headaches and strain on the regulars. As you've pointed out as well why would later on people join if there are better paying jobs or opportunities overseas? Your seeing it in UK and EU now, even with overwhelming tech advantage the lack of manpower creates issues for them and they are now trying to fill the gap.

Eventually, tech has its limitations once your run out you'll need the numbers to hold the line if not you will be stream rolled.

This strategy is being "Penny Wise, Pound Foolish", and this thinking never gets ahead.
Wholeheartedly agree with your POV. This downsizing is a short term solution which would not allow us to persue a much harder long term solution and is flawed at its core.
I mean Pakistan is moving towards urbanization and would need more formations to defend said infrastructure.
What we need is self reliance and modern conventional weaponary, especially ADS,sat, radars, UAVS and first strike missile capabilities.
 
No comments Army/Airforce and Navy are doing great in last 20 years their planning has been impeccable

Military :
  • Induction of New Tank
  • New Missiles MIRV
  • Strategic Units
  • UAV Fleet Setup
  • SAM Network ( Multi Tier )
Airforce: JF17 Block 1 , Block 2 , Block 2B , Block 2C and now J10P

Navy: 20 Surface Ship and 10+ Submarine fleet , New Choppers, Anti Sub

If the ground Unit Vehicles are improved to Armored vehicles it would be great

Pakistan should explore
  • Active Soldier Status
  • Reserve Soldier Status

But Defense Think Tank has done exceptional in last 20 years

The foot soldier is a vital part of Military

However in Pakistan Large % of population is not active in Sports and Tough physical fitness sports , having Active Status soldiers at least gives you a fully trained fit soldier


Population to Soldier Ratio Count : 0.02 % which is quite modest

We have not even mobilized 1% of our population
Block 2C konsa hai ?
 
There is no downsizing...look at the source of this post. Can't believe people are actually wasting time discussing it. Moderators please close this thread.
 
I feel , improving the capabilities of the foot soldiers is important next step
  • Better equipment
  • Better Transport Vehicles (Armored)
  • Better Heavier Trucks
  • Transport Helicopters

0.02% is size of our military vs our population , so it is reasonable
Size military

Indian Soldier Count is 12 Lakh + (12 Million) they are also spread on western front

Pakistan maintaining 6 Million Soldiers (5.6 to 6 Million) appears logical

Sure if there is a peace agreement with India then by all means reduce the figures to 2 Million Soldiers

Where do you get the number of 6 million ?

This is data for 2022 ( Indo Pacific region )

1649011351272.png
 
From 2017

The "Lakh" VS Million confusion however it is 2:1 ratio for soldier count which is reasonable

I often use "Million" vs Lakh Unit

1649011601972.png
 
The standing army of India is 1.4 million professional men, and he wants to cut things down....

Leave aside fighting a war the army is the only organisation able to fight natural disasters, deliver aid, ensure total security etc. No amount of technology can make up for boots on the ground for this.
He hasn't got long in the job I hope this doesn't come to pass.

I don't think this is a 'one man' thing, this is representative of an innovative change in doctrine i would imagine that has been advised from war gaming, theorizing, studying etc.. You don't just do this just because you feel like it, such big changes require a thorough review.
Just think if Ukraine doesnt have 500.000 professional troops and 500.000 reserves.

We should see on the defender point of view, not the invader.
Well actually initially in the conflict Russia held the advantage in numbers as it concentrated the fastest and was the one with initiative as it was on the offensive. Bear in mind Ukrainian mobilization took place just a few days from Invasion which was barely enough time to call upon any of the reserves. Even then, Ukrainians were fairly robust and innovative in their deployments and usage of equipment with their Air Defense units being one example.
I do want to point out that it is extremely early to tell things and make sweeping statements about any side at this point as the war is ongoing and all we have are snippets from the war. Over time a true picture can be made and facts ascertained with more clarity.
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom