What's new

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

Current situation between Russia and Ukraine speak the importance of having large professional troops. Ukraine also has large reserve around 500.000 people and I believe all of them have been used in the war. Ukraine professional soldiers are also around 500.000 men/women.

Not to mention men cannot leave the country and many have been used to defend the country.

Indonesia will add around 30.000-50.000 professional soldiers, currently we have 395.000 military personnel.
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.

You keep ignoring the fact that Ukraine is only dealing a lot of damage to Russia b/c of MOBILE weapons. It's TECHNOLOGY that has saved Ukraine so far NOT numbers. What good is a million soldiers if they're getting run over by tanks & being obliterated by artillery? In fact considering that as you claim the Russians are outmanned by the Ukrainians it's clear that once again it's TECHNOLOGY that has saved Russia from defeat. Now imagine if either one of them had reduced their numbers & focused more on technology & training.

Our realities are completely different to yours. We already have more than a 100K soldiers than u already so your point concerning ur own forces is moot. It may be that your military might decide it doesn't need more than 500K either. You simply haven't reached that point.
 
Last edited:
.
An army size of 600k is enough only if there is a second line of defence for a country like Pakistan. The WOT taught us valuable indoctrination lessons for the soldiers and the local security forces. But we ended up making anti-terrorist forces every 2 days without thinking of long term sustenance.

1) The best bet would be to Merge The Frontier Corps And rangers into a National Guard. A good but simple command linked with the army.

2) Make a National Anti Terrorist group from the police and civil recruitment with setups across the Nation from top to bottom.

3) Create an SSG equivalent from and for the National Guard but they should be trained in all domains Sea, Land, Air.

4) Create a Joint Special forces command from SSG, SSGN, SSW and the National guard SSG equivalent.

5) The Pakistan Coast Guard should Come under the Navy.

6) Marines should be removed from base protection and should be a true Air, Land, Sea and mountain force with personnel to be deployed for a period in hot zones across the country be it from Balochistan to Siachen.

7) Increase the Frontier Constabulary (not to be confused with the Frontier corp) making them a national 2nd Policing force in case of emergency and national disasters. Also to work in tandem with National Guard and 1122.
 
Last edited:
.
You're forgetting age you can't mobilise a geriatric population to fight....Pakistan has a far younger population and is better able to do this.
Our paramilitary numbers are large but they are the final line.
The Soviets had a failed political and economics system. Pakistan just need to get its act together and the economy will boom.
Of course I agree investing in tech is the way forward.
I would argue that even if India's young population is smaller percentage wise, they still outnumber Pakistan's ENTIRE population, and that's the problem. India is simply too big.

Pakistan's political and economic system may be better than the Soviets, but only by a hair. I bet the Soviets also thought they just needed to "get their act together". India won't give Pakistan a chance to get it's act together, so Pakistan has to make it. PMIK's economic policies were one way to make that chance, now its uncertain what will happen with elections coming.

No doubt India smells blood.
 
.
I would argue that even if India's young population is smaller percentage wise, they still outnumber Pakistan's ENTIRE population, and that's the problem. India is simply too big.
True. But proportionally it is becoming ore favorable for Pakistan.
 
.
This is always US demand to cut down the size of Pak military. Musharaf also tried to do the same.
 
.
Good move if true. Army needs to downsize substantially to manage its funds and equipment better. A smaller, better trained, better armed force is much more useful in today’s conflict scenarios where an all out war is much less likely than a smaller, contained conflict in a selected area. We don’t need the forces to be as big anymore as we need them to be technologically and tactically prepared.
Bad move, look at the state of the region. We have a hostile Nazi India neighbor threatening to attack Pakistan conventionally and non conventionally, scheming Iranians and a highly volatile Afghanistan creating an Indian sponsored insurgency in Baluchistan, then there is Israel continuously interfering in the region threatening Iran and Pakistan and committing atrocities in Palestine. We should be doubling our forces not halving them.
 
.
I would argue that even if India's young population is smaller percentage wise, they still outnumber Pakistan's ENTIRE population, and that's the problem. India is simply too big.

Pakistan's political and economic system may be better than the Soviets, but only by a hair. I bet the Soviets also thought they just needed to "get their act together". India won't give Pakistan a chance to get it's act together, so Pakistan has to make it. PMIK's economic policies were one way to make that chance, now its uncertain what will happen with elections coming.

No doubt India smells blood.

Their younger population is shrinking bro, that's the issue. They have the worst sex ratio in the world as well, which magnifies things.
Agree with all the rest, remember eliminate the limiting factors impeding growth the rest will come.
 
.
If true, then the reason may be (?) :


Bajwa said [he probably had a little slip of tongue in one sentence, but you'll get the point]:


"finally one quick and important lesson, as a military man, that emerges from Russia-Ukraine conflict which must be highlighted over here and that is that it is the preeminence or dominance of fire power over mobility [I think he wanted to say mobility over fire power ? ] as was the case during first war this has given a heart to smaller country that they can still defend their territory with smaller but agile forces against an aggression but a bigger country by carrying out selective modernization in equipment and adopting novel ideas and this is the course we intend following for our future developmental studies"



i.e. Redirect some spending on quality from quantity (?)



Full txt of his speech here:
Great stuff Pakistan army doing its home work.
 
.
@TNT he's right on this one if he truly intends to increase the mobility and fire power wrt to rockets, air , naval and cyber domain ------ As for the boots on ground issue , Pakistani nation is armed to the teeth and they just need a military guy among them to channelize their full potential

Oh yes i never objected to this decision. Smart modernization is the way forward.
 
.
This is always US demand to cut down the size of Pak military. Musharaf also tried to do the same.
Makes it easier to control Pakistan and the equivalent of making Pakistan toothless.
 
.
That's fine it is a discussion after all. Yes we have tends of thousands sitting idly but we also have thousands engaged in anti insurgency on the western borders which I'm afraid are worse in one region better in another.
I hear your argument regarding more funding rather than forces eating up money but the answer to this is a better economy. I'm a citizen of a nation (UK) that went down the 'troop/cost cutting' route and now faces severe inefficiencies regarding deployment and fighting capabilities. So much so now they're begging people to join the reserves to make up the shortfall which is a terrible joke. Pakistan can ill afford that with a principle adversary which is stronger.
With economic growth we will see more funding and investment to the forces, there's only so much downsizing can do regarding freeing up funds. In actual fact we would probably lose economies of scale we do have with numbers.
I'd ordinarily been in favour of this but with the sanghis next door making regular statements regarding taking AJK and other Pakistani territory, and they've shown with the Balakot strikes they're wiling to up the ante I just don't think this is wise.

Let's be honest. It's not just the lack of money that ppl don't wanna join. It's also b/c they frankly don't have the desire to protect their nation mainly b/c their nations don't have any real threats to them. If it's b/c of money that they're not joining then that's going to happen to Pakistan regardless once economy gets better.We're going to have those issues as well then.
 
.
Bad move, look at the state of the region. We have a hostile Nazi India neighbor threatening to attack Pakistan conventionally and non conventionally, scheming Iranians and a highly volatile Afghanistan creating an Indian sponsored insurgency in Baluchistan, then there is Israel continuously interfering in the region threatening Iran and Pakistan and committing atrocities in Palestine. We should be doubling our forces not halving them.
Oh come on, don’t give me this india nazi nation going to attack Pakistan stuff. Pakistanis love to either overstate their Importance in the world or are just war-mongering all the time, there’s really never a realistic way of thinking involved, always a ton of conspiracy theories of “everyone is against us”. We’re simply not that important. The world has its own issues to deal with.

All that aside, we’re not just going to cut like 90% of our forces and call it a day, we’re trying to get to a better balance of manpower versus technology that will make the forces stronger, this is already happening and will and should continue to happen. I’ll repeat it again, every single nation in the world including China and india are moving to downsizing in order to support modernization, because it’s literally the way forward, having millions of troops you cannot use is useless, and having a million averagely equipped troops is going to be far less effective than having half a million well equipped troops. We have more than enough manpower and not enough modern technology. All of us keep saying, rather crying, for better weaponry, new rifles, new MRAPs, new UCAVs, new artillery, new tanks, the list goes on, but nobody wants to give a solution to the question of “where’s the money going to come from?”
I would much rather every soldier going into combat have the necessary modern equipment and support than one more soldier to go with him. Two poorly armed soldiers will not take down a tank, one soldier armed with a modern ATGM will do it just fine.
 
.
Seriously bad move. We need much bigger Army. Yes we need huge focus on cyber and space but Army size cannot be cut down. Manpower and size still matters

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.

Exactly my point
 
.
Numbers don't matter Ukraine Russia war proven it we need better trained best equiped armed forces even in small numbers will do the job

Big question is do bajwa remain as COAS for next year may be yes I hope u all understand how

Big question is do bajwa remain as COAS for next year may be yes I hope u all understand how
 
.
I am all up for modernization but yaar koi Bajwa ko retire ker do, Bajwa sahab needs to resign and go on ummrah, bas Allah Allah kerne ka time hai.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom