PM, army chief discuss security for China-Pakistan Economic Corridor

PM House says matters pertaining to internal security came under discussion during the meeting

Web Desk September 04, 2015
Chief of the armed forces assures premier of providing the required military support for the all important project. PHOTO: NNI/FILE

In a second meeting in four days, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Army Chief General Raheel Sharif discussed on Friday the necessary steps for the security of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor Project (CPEC).

"Matters pertaining to internal security came under discussion during the meeting. They also discussed steps for security of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor project," a PM House statement read.

Read: Punjab Rangers have begun covert operations against banned organisations, army chief tells PM

PM Nawaz and General Raheel also discussed the deployment of armed forces at the route of the project. The premier assured all resources to this effect will be provided.

In April, President Mamnoon Hussain informed his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping that the army has created a special 12,000-strong unit for the security of the Chinese engineers working on the 3,000-kilometre-long route.

Read: Army assigned security of Chinese engineers

Director General ISPR Maj-Gen Asim Saleem Bajwa had said the special security division would comprise nine army battalions and six wings of the civil armed forces, and the entire unit will be commanded by a major-general. The cabinet member said all security arrangements were being made by the army. “The interior ministry will assist the army in the entire process,” he added.


Punjabi | 6 years ago | Reply The Prime Minister of Pakistan is one of most experienced and sensible leaders in this region. It something big has to happen it will happen now inside the country or outside.
Babloo | 6 years ago | Reply I wish we too had so determined leaders like Sharifs, in India.
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


Most Read