End COAS extension via constitutional amendment: Sayed

Senator cites extension as political bargaining, returning favours


Our Correspondent November 26, 2022
Senator Mushahid Hussain Sayed. PHOTO: FILE

print-news
ISLAMABAD:

Senator Mushahid Hussain Sayed on Friday stressed the need to close the chapter of giving extensions to the army chiefs once and for all through a constitutional amendment, saying that there should be no extension as it led to political bargaining.

The veteran politician, who is the chairman of the Senate Standing Committee on Defence, said that extensions were politically motivated from both sides and they caused harm to the institution, the person concerned and the country.

“I think it’s time to present a constitutional amendment stating that there will be no extension [in the tenure of] any service chief,” Senator Sayed said, adding that extension meant giving and taking, starting political bargaining and returning favours.

“The talk about extension should be over once and for all,” he opined while sharing his views in the Express News talk show, ‘The Review’, hosted by Shahbaz Rana and Kamran Yousaf.

Senator Sayed recalled that the first tenure of General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and General Qamar Javed Bajwa was fine but their time during the extension wasn’t the same.

In response to a question about the army’s decision to stay apolitical, Sayed said that no one could switch on or off the decision to take part in politics, adding that the 2023 general elections would prove to be a litmus test for the outgoing army chief Gen Qamar’s recent announcement.

Usually, the veteran politician said, the new army chief does not follow the policies and legacy of his predecessor, adding that the new chief had his own vision, world view and priorities and he went with his own choices.

“The first priority of the newly appointed army chief Gen Asim Munir will be to adopt pure professionalism,” Sayed said, adding that he would try his best to bridge the gap between the people and the armed forces, which had widened due to politicisation.

Sayed said that the issue of missing persons was also a “bleeding wound” and one of the reasons for the civil-military as well as the people-military gap.

Sayed said he believed that restoring the morale and credibility of the armed forces would be the first priority of the new military chief because the “armed forces is a national institution and Pakistan’s centre of gravity in terms of stability and defence of the motherland”.

To a question, if the army chief drove the institution or vice versa, Sayed said, “The army chief, as of now, is the pivot in the power structure and he drives the army’s personality, priorities and policies.”

Calling it a national army, which takes strength from the people, Sayed said that the army could not divorce the people but “it’s very clear that the army chief is the decider in the army”.

The senator said that China, Turkiye, Saudi Arabia and other friendly countries wanted Pakistan to bring political stability, adding that Pakistan should set the house in order, determine a way forward, avoid fluctuations and take one step forward and two steps back.

“Chinese want certainty and predictability,” he said, adding that Pak-China had otherwise a strong bonding.

On Thursday, after days of speculations and drama, the government had picked the most senior general for the top slot despite initial reservations by PTI chief Imran Khan and questions over his retirement date.

But, in the end, the government managed to appoint its man of choice with a little fuss. This is the first time that the PML-N government preferred the principle of seniority. In the past, it had ignored the most senior generals.

COMMENTS (5)

Zulfi | 2 years ago | Reply This ex senator is a turn coat highly ambitious self centered person. He should be first a man of character not with a dubious character Thanks
Sheraz | 2 years ago | Reply Absolutely agreed
VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ