Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

I do not think that in established successful democratic countries Prime Minister or President interfere with army promotions. Promotions, transfers, and delegation of responsibilities happen according to system within the institution, and that is institutional own affair. Government should only give tasks to institutions.

Actually, such interference only happens in corrupt failed democratic countries (like Pakistan), where corrupt person in power are scared of institutional heads, and wants to keep hold of their political offices regardless of corruption, nepotism, incompetency, misconduct and mismanagement.

In Pakistan interference was same in every institutional heads. But judiciary became strong and politicians scared of judiciary, so now senior most Judge is getting elevated to the post of Chief Justice after retirement of current CJ on 12 December. Same should have happened in army … but no, corrupt PM like to interfere with promotion of Army Chief so that he can feel safe in office along with his corruption.

Politicians have introduced such wrongs in constitution, not for benefit of country, but because of self-interest. Such promotions create grudges within institutions’ top hierarchy (including army) and that to happen is obvious. People working in any institution would not like that outside person (like Prime Minister) interferes in their promotion to top post due to his partiality, insecurity, self-interest, nepotism, or any other reasons. Most efficient and hardworking people working in any institution would like to see that merit, seniority, and hard work is observed.

Corrupt politicians in power love such interference to make sure that person of their liking gets appointed at top posts of strong institutions, who becomes obliged to them for the post, and thus do not act or interfere against their corruption, nepotism, incompetence, misconduct and wrong doings.

Anyhow, such interference always backfires at one time or another, as it creates grudges, disrespect, and hate in institutions, especially in people at top hierarchy of the institutions but at lower level too, towards politicians.

Even one who gets promoted to top post feels he got promoted in violation of merit and seniority, but his promotion is due to partiality, insecurity, self-interest, corruption, and nepotism of PM.

Only incompetent and low character Army general (or head of any institution) who may have used connections throughout for his promotions, could feel good getting promoted to Army Chief in this way. PM also do that considering that the one he promoted must be of low character and would feel obliged to him and would overlook Pakistan interest if he (PM) do anything for self-interest harming Pakistan’s interest.

Most in Pakistan armed forces throughout their career get promoted on merit and seniority, so seeing such bias promotion to the post of Army Chief, most in army must be feeling bad (even Army Chief who benefitted).

For instance … after promotion to Army Chief, in any private meeting, it would be difficult for ‘Gen Raheel Sharif’ to face ‘Lt Gen Haroon Aslam’ or ‘any army officer’ knowing that in fair circumstances where merit and seniority is respected, he (Gen Raheel Sharif) would not have been Army Chief but it would have been Lt Gen Haroon Aslam. If meeting happens, than it is also possible that (in joke or seriously), Haroon Aslam (or any army officer) may ask Raheel Sharif that how much he paid (or what he gave) to corrupt PM for getting elevated to Army Chief surpassing him (Haroon Aslam). [Obviously, serving officers may not ask such question, for obvious reason]

In return army (and Army Chief) lose any respect for such PM, and do not hesitate to kick him out if he does anything wrong.

Re: Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

The first line in above post is a joke. Army chief in almost all countries is appointed by the head of executive branch of state, which is Prime Minister in Pakistan. Promotions within army are not interfered with by politicians.

The chief of army is supposed to serve under Ministry of Defense. It is only in dysfunctional set-ups like Pakistan where generals think of themselves above and beyond the reach of bloody civilians.

It is not ‘interference’. It is the RIGHT of sitting government to appoint such servants.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/3033

Re: Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

^^^Please ... Leave your jokes and talk sense. :)

Obviously, army chief would get appointed by head of state on recommendation … where person recommending (army chief, PM, or anyone) would forward the names of few candidates entirely on merit … without surpassing senior with junior in list … and unless there is concrete reason for overlooking merit and seniority, merit and seniority holds.

My post is not even talking about who appoints. What I mentioned in my post is ‘interference’ where Army chief gets appointed overlooking seniority and merit, and that means, PM personal likes and dislikes in appointment matters.

Now tell me: Since Gen Raheel Sharif got appointed Army Chief out of merit or seniority … what is the cause?

Should there be an enquiry that Gen Raheel Sharif bribed PM or not … and if there should be no enquiry, then why?

Obviously, I think that it is flaw of the system in Pakistan that such happened … and I put down the reasons too, that it is political government wanting to make sure that army chief feel obliged to them … so that he does not act on their corruption, nepotism, incompetency and mismanagement.

But in successful democracy where no one is above law or allowed to do corruption, country make sure that every decision is on merit … and thus if something what happens in Pakistan happens, such question would be asked.

Re: Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

Kakaballi: You gave legal requirements for promotion as chief of army in USA. Actually, in theory, anyone who gets promoted above colonel level in USA is considered as political appointment. All such promotions are recommended by President and confirmed by Senate.

Same is true in Pakistan. Everyone who gets promoted to Brigadier and above, get approved by PM, who acts according to recommendation of Army Chief.

But, in non-corrupt democracy, there is no place for personal likes, dislikes, or connections with PM (or politicians) in army or any important public institutions, rather merit and seniority matters, it does not matter how things are done.

Re: Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

^ Military people in Pakistan do not descend from skies. They are as human and as corrupt as rest of our society. You, yourself are suggesting that the general bribed PM or used his connections to get the post. So, both of them are equally corrupt.

It is right of the head of executive branch of a country to choose head of military. You can disagree with NS's choice, but don't call it interference. It is his RIGHT to choose a person he can work with and not feel threatened.

If I am going to choose a security guard for my house, I'll choose someone who might be less experienced but is less likely to rob me not someone who has a few more years of experience but is likely to rob my house some day.

And in successful democracies, generals do not dream of kicking out elected representatives and having lucrative post-retirement jobs. They do their job, retire and go back to farming or whatever they are capable of doing.

Re: Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

Of course personal tastes play a factor in the appointment, but most importantly, especially in Pakistan, the PM has to feel comfortable that the Army is not going to screw them over at the first available opportunity.

Re: Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

Military people or Politicians, no one in Pakistan has descended from sky. All are human and could be corrupt. Only difference is that, in Pakistan:

It is very hard for corrupt and incompetent person to keep getting promoted and reach top notch of military hierarchy (where even connections do not work, and Gohar Ayub retiring as Major speaks a lot).

Whereas, it is very hard for an upright and incorruptible person to reach assemblies and corridor of political power, rather criteria in Pakistan is that most corrupt, blatant liar, characterless, inhuman and people who deserve to be called ‘kuttay ka pilla’ reach assemblies and corridor of political power (Nawaz Shareef is perfect example in this respect).

[quote]
It is right of the head of executive branch of a country to choose head of military. You can disagree with NS's choice, but don't call it interference. It is his RIGHT to choose a person he can work with and not feel threatened.
[/quote]

Obviously, whatever happens in Pakistan, it is interference in army affairs. Anyhow, no problem but when politician in power like to interfere in military affairs, then they should not complain when military interfere in politics.

[quote]
If I am going to choose a security guard for my house, I'll choose someone who might be less experienced but is less likely to rob me not someone who has a few more years of experience but is likely to rob my house some day.
[/quote]

Pakistan is not house of Prime Minister and army Chaudkidar of his house. Pakistan is house of 180 million Pakistanis. Prime Minister is one of those Pakistani elected to serve Pakistanis for certain terms, and army is paid chosen Pakistanis on job to save Pakistanis from whoever wants to harm Pakistan. No one is owner of Pakistan and no one is security guard.

You are writing as if Pakistan ‘Ganja Shareef’ yea kise ‘politician’ kay baap ka ghar hai. People vote politicians to serve them and sort out their day to day problems ... serve them as servant (khadim)... not to start considering themselves as King and Pakistan as their personal property. Any politician who starts treating Pakistan as their personal property should get hanged.

Pakistan is independent country and belongs to all who live in Pakistan, and that includes army men, politicians, bureaucracy, and common person on street equally. Most of the time, it is politicians who rob our house (Pakistan) than anyone else, and deserve to get their hands chopped off … sorry, I mean head chopped off (no KSA but Qabristan).

*Army is public servant not personal servant of politicians in power. Army is not chaukidar of anyone's house, rather they are caretaker of their own house as Pakistan is their house as much as anyone else. *

Army get paid from public purse on behalf of Pakistanis, represents Pakistanis, should serve Pakistanis, should act and use their muscles, whatever they have, for Pakistanis, and should punish anyone (be they politician in power, bureaucracy in Islamabad or Kharjees in valleys) they see harming or hurting Pakistan and citizens of Pakistan (you and me), by robbing, corruption, nepotism, incompetency, lies, misconduct, misbehaviour, killing, etc.

[quote]
And in successful democracies, generals do not dream of kicking out elected representatives and having lucrative post-retirement jobs. They do their job, retire and go back to farming or whatever they are capable of doing.
[/quote]

In successful democracies elected representatives do not interfere in military affairs, but in Pakistan they do, so Pakistan is not successful democracy. You should not compare successful democracies with one of the most corrupt and unsuccessful democracy.

In UK, an army chief (Field Marshal) never retires, they go home after certain age, still keep getting their salary (half of active salary) until death. In America, most military general after retirement are given lucrative jobs if they want to. So, what?

Re: Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

Kakaballi, He will drag you to his level and beat you with experience.

Re: Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

Why do we need another thread after one made by KKF?

Attention whoring much?

Re: Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

Kakaballi: Brother, you could listen to the advise of most experienced people who drag others to their level and try to beat them up with their experience ... with only difference that, even after dragging others to their level, always get beaten in discussions due to their own ignorance, and then become personal :) ... These type of people do not know that in discussions, no one beats other but try to learn from each other and convince others with valid reasoning and examples.

Anyhow, I am amazed that on one hand some people feel fine if PM interfere with army promotions, and then same people feel bad when politicians want person of their choice in all important national posts. Appoint police officers so that these officers stay obliged to politicians in power, work for them as personal servant (not state servant but personal servant of politicians), fear them, get used by them, make fake cases against their opponents, intimidate and punish their opponents, hide corruptions and wrong doing of politicians in power, and they do that just to make politician in power stay happy as their appointment and promotion depend on these politician.

Well, in Pakistan, thugs in power try to put their lackeys in charge of every institution, so that they can make Pakistanis their slaves, loot and plunder the country, do all sorts of (intentional) mismanagement, and consider themselves King. So, if one accepts PM right to appoint someone as army chief and overlook merit, than why complain when PM or other politicians appoint their relatives and friends on top government posts? Why complain about police and judges politicised? Why complain when Zardari and Nawaz do favours on people they know and distribute public assets and public posts to to their known people, as if these politicians in power are Kings and Pakistan is their kingdom or Personal property?

Re: Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

KKF thread is on Haroon Aslam resignation. Not on practice of Pakistani PM interfering with army promotion.

As for whoring for attention, I bet that me starting thread on this forum per year is lower then most. I think in 7.5 years, I started no more than 1 thread a month or one thread per 46 posts (I do not know if one can call that whoring for attention).

Re: Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

^ Again, what you call 'interfering' by the bloody civilian prime minister is called a 'right' in all civilized countries.

Interfering is what Pakistani military does in civilian affairs instead of concentrating on their own job.

And yes, military is chaukidaar, and should behave so. They are not moral police, thank you. They do not 'represent' people as you claim, the Prime Minister does. They should keep themselves busy with defense, not defense housing authority, thanks again.

Take a read and see how the military has broken their own oath of office so many times (and I'm out):

Members Of The Armed Forces
[Article 244]

(In the name of Allah, the most Beneficent, the most Merciful.)

I, ____________, do solemnly swear that I will bear true faith and allegiance to Pakistan and uphold the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan which embodies the will of the people, that I will not engage myself in any political activities whatsoever and that I will honestly and faithfully serve Pakistan in the Pakistan Army (or Navy or Air Force) as required by and under the law.

May Allah Almighty help and guide me (A'meen).

Re: Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

Thanks for sharing. Perhaps Salim will now give his theory of 100 pages with technicolor words which will say this is injustice to army in the constitution and army has full right to treat this article as a toilet paper. Because sub se pehlay Pakistan I mean dollar eh!

Re: Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

To Benazir Bhutto’s credit, she appointed General Jehangir Karamat (and he looked like a general), the senior-most, as the army chief in 1996. He served well professionally until resigning over a disagreement with NS about setting up of a National Security Council, an idea he floated at a Naval War College lecture

Jehangir Karamat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Re: Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

saleem bhai aap samjh gaye haiN, yehi kafi hai

Re: Promotion to Army Chief and Interference of PM … Right or Wrong.

America has a national security council so why is it such a bad idea? It is the same BS where even PTI won't support local govt when any new system would resemble Musharraf's LG system in order for it to be effective. Tanqeed barai tanqeed bs barai bs !!!