Featured Requirement For A Special Service / Operations Command For Pakistan

[Zulfiqar]

A Pakistani origin friend of mine with the military here works closely with the Beret’s and Delta - but will find composite detachments of Rangers or Marine Recons as well.

This flexibility within units to detach or attach, and practice workups with SF is what is the reflection of the new command you suggest. A Pakistani SOCOM needs to have its own elite aviation assets at the least dedicated from other operational units.

We may not have the budget but it is my limited opinion that a lot is squandered (much like other countries) in misplaced operational inefficiency than anything else.

Sometimes looking at the efficiency models of successful business enterprises may benefit our armed forces

IIRC their is an aviation squadron (21st in tarbela?) dedicated for special operations (Post WOT start).

However, additional assets are needed for war time use.

BTW just found this on internet. Haven't gone through it yet.

http://aviatorz.net/wp-content/uploads/PDFs/Army_Avn_History_Full.pdf

 

[Cuirassier]

IIRC their is an aviation squadron (21st in tarbela?) dedicated for special operations (Post WOT start).

However, additional assets are needed for war time use.

BTW just found this on internet. Haven't gone through it yet.

http://aviatorz.net/wp-content/uploads/PDFs/Army_Avn_History_Full.pdf

21 QRS - Night Stalkers

 

[PDF]

NACTA is more or less a joke. Pls do share your thoughts on the following:

1.) We should have a SOF command at the 3-star level that overseas the "regular" SSG and the paramilitary SOF. Separately, we should have a much smaller tier 1/special mission unit focused command (ala JSOC.)

2.) Our intel apparatus is a mess. We need a separate external-focused agency with mil and civ representation (essentially, the relevant ISI wings can be spun off and drastically improved), a separate internal agency (that operates like the FSB, FBI, Shinbet, etc.) that tackles counter-intel, CT and large-scale organized crime that threatens national security. The best from the ISI's internal wings, the IB and the FIA could staff it. The aforementioned existing agencies would then be dissolved and we would be left with ONE main external and ONE main internal agency.

The external agency, like the Mossad, would have a very serious special operations focus and therefore could coordinate (as the CIA's Special Activities Center does with JSOC) with our future Tier 1/SMU command within the overall SOF command that your post envisions.

1.When we have DGMO only 2 star general, SFs can also be headed by same rank. A command is nice but I think JSHQ can provide a suitable platform for coordination.
2. We already have 1 main external agency. For internal, one can't help but have multiple agencies for different tasks, areas, scope. Rather than disolving them, better coordination should be achieved. NACTA needs to be worked upon.

 

[jaibi]

A valid point and I thought this too but there are some structural hurdles which make such a realization much more problematic than they need to be. I'll perhaps share that in the article I'm making.

I totally agree but will like to add few things. Not only we need Joint Special Operations Forces command but we also need Directorate for National Intelliegence where sub offices of every major intelligence agency are present there. They should share intelligence and jointly deal with threats related to National Security. Plus every province should have two kind of Special Forces within its Police. One similar to LCB of Army or like Elite Police Force which Punjab and KPK has and the other one should be even way bigger monster exactly like GIGN of France.

@jaibi @PanzerKiel

 

[jaibi]

One of our issues is that the paper doesn't reflect the field properly in areas where it should. Appt changes a lot of that but we certainly need a revamp of our legal and org structure. However, here in lies the catch 22 - this system, however flawed, works.

1.When we have DGMO only 2 star general, SFs can also be headed by same rank. A command is nice but I think JSHQ can provide a suitable platform for coordination.
2. We already have 1 main external agency. For internal, one can't help but have multiple agencies for different tasks, areas, scope. Rather than disolving them, better coordination should be achieved. NACTA needs to be worked upon.

 

[R Wing]

1.When we have DGMO only 2 star general, SFs can also be headed by same rank. A command is nice but I think JSHQ can provide a suitable platform for coordination.
2. We already have 1 main external agency. For internal, one can't help but have multiple agencies for different tasks, areas, scope. Rather than disolving them, better coordination should be achieved. NACTA needs to be worked upon.

1. I see your point.

2. We don't have a dedicated external agency.

 

[PDF]

We don't have a dedicated external agency.

ISI is a dedicated external agency along with some minute share of MI,AI,NI in limited capacity.
ISI along with foreign missions also works domestically.

 

[R Wing]

ISI is a dedicated external agency along with some minute share of MI,AI,NI in limited capacity.
ISI along with foreign missions also works domestically.

ISI is not a dedicated external agency. Most of its wings are dedicated to internal tasks --- or, at best, there's a balance.

I believe we should follow the FBI/CIA, FSB/SVR, MI5/MI6 and Shinbet/Mossad model where the external agencies are dedicated to external tasks (with very limited domestic activity) and the domestic agencies take care of all counter-intel, CT and serious/organized crime that threatens national security.

In our case, this would mean spinning off the external-focused wings of the ISI into a new foreign-focused org without any internal headaches while keeping its current mix of civilians and military men and creating a single internal intel org (like the FBI, Shinbet, FSB, MI5) that keeps the best from the IB, ISI internal wings and FIA's relevant wings.

Both the internal and external orgs should then have lots of career officers, recruit the best kids from our campuses and have dedicated career streams for analysts vs. ops vs. tech people like the best orgs internationally do. Our current intake, training/"academy"/intel "school" and career path system is archaic, inefficient and costs us dearly when we try to operate internationally.

NACTA is just a CT umbrella org (and a dysfunctional one at that) --- there is a lot more that internal intel orgs need to do even if NACTA was operationalized properly.

 

[Great Janjua]

Has any leeway been made to absorb such a command? Or at least any brainstorming sessions. A joint SF command is a need of the hour it will produce a legion capable in all dimensions of warfare, a synergy of capable forces is a force multiplier. Not just in conventional terms but tactics, training, operations, logistics. Common platform for future Ops.


A must need!!!.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Should be headed by a 3-star general....

 

[R2D2]

Sometimes looking at the efficiency models of successful business enterprises may benefit our armed forces

It is called a Lean Business Model. It was started at Toyota (That is how they outperformed American Car Manufacturers) and is now applied to services as well. It basically increases the speed of delivery/efficiency while minimizing the inputs or costs. Then they added Six Sigma which is reducing the no of defects using Statistics at Motorola. So now its called Lean Six Sigma.

 

[PanzerKiel]

Should be headed by a 3-star general....

A one star might be good enough as well. Provided he is clear headed and dedicated. Rank is not a guarantee of these things.

 

[NeverTry4Me]

No information about Salary or Pay. Sigh.