Reduction in Pakistan army and its effects.

[Truth Seeker]

Pakistan’s President Pervez Musharraf highlighted the importance of the Pakistan army by stating that the "defence of the motherland is the foremost responsibility of the armed forces". Having said this one would also assume that the President would support the army with the relevant resources to enable this to be a reality. However recent actions have far from achieved this but rather have weakened the army, these include:

Reduction of the overall army by 50,000 soldiers, this is a nine-percent reduction and the first one ever undertaken in the history of Pakistan. These cuts will take place in vital aspects of the army such as logistics, which are imperative for a modern day army to be effective.

Officials have been quoted as stating that "the projections for the defence budget in the forthcoming federal budget would not introduce an increase in real terms". Further more we know that the key proponents of reducing army expenditure are the World Bank, this highlights how once again policy decisions are made by the Western institutions.

The insistence of America to provide troops for the Iraqi occupation will further weaken defences and will also reduce the morale of the army that is already suffering from the recent Waziristan operations where many personnel were killed. Clearly the army sees this as a clear contradiction in its role as it seen as a vanguard of Muslim interests not the Western colonialist nations and they’re anti Muslim agenda.

The sacking of Abdul Qadeer Khan the Chief Nuclear scientist has created a Vacuum in terms of experience and knowledge in this vital Nuclear deterrent and defence field and is in agreement with American objectives of removing the nuclear strength of Pakistan.

The constant removal and redeployment of Army command has weakened the leadership ability of the army, this has been done with the objective of securing the position of President Musharraf to any possible threat to his authority regardless of the negative consequences it has had on the military structure.

In contrast we see that the Indian military also making clear the importance of its army with the Indian Finance Minister stating that modernising the Indian armed forces and equipping them with latest equipment was non-negotiable and "any additional requirement that may emerge on account of modernisation needs of the three defence services will be fully met."

These are not like the empty slogans given by President Musharraf but are supported with the necessary resources and policy decisions, which are clearly seen with the Indian budget for FY 2003-2004 of Rs.653 billion being earmarked for expenditure on defence. It represents an increase of 16.6% over the last year’s budget estimates of Rs.560 billion.

In terms of long term trends, the Indian defence spending jumped from $7.53 billion in 1991 to $12.87 billion in 2001. During the same period Pakistan's allocation for defence showed a negligible increase from $3.07 billion to $3.15 billion.

While India has been sharply increasing its defence expenditure, Pakistan's defence budget during the last three years has remained almost static with considerable decrease in real terms, highlighting the failure of this and previous governments of providing the Military with the resources it requires.

Its clear that Pakistan is becoming an insignificant nation in the eyes of its enemies with India continuing to increase its strength and we also see the rise of the enemy in Afghanistan, Its clear that the army has a clear role but a role that President Musharraf is failing to support with the necessary resources and policy decisions.

The only hope for the Muslims is a sincere leadership that is not run as a satellite state of the American government. It is only a sincere leadership that has the will to strengthen the army to safeguard and bring dignity to this Ummah.

[suleman]

TOPIC MOVED FROM SOCIAL AND POLITICAL ISSUES: GARRY PLEASE MERGE THIS TOPIC WITH OLDER ONE.

[gf0012-aust]

The only hope for the Muslims is a sincere leadership that is not run as a satellite state of the American government. It is only a sincere leadership that has the will to strengthen the army to safeguard and bring dignity to this Ummah.

At what point has Pakistan been run as a satellite of US interests? More to the point - how could it?

The talk about comparing defence expenditure to India ignores the reality that India is a far larger economy. If Pakistan sees that it has to maintain parity with the likes of India, then the economy will be fractured and any hope of lifting the general population to a higher standard of living will diminish.

An attempt to try and promote divisiveness and adopt a siege mentaility will do more damage than appear to promote "strength and diversity"

Pakistan is a critical link in moving forward in the current troubles, wanting it to resort to the notion of a beleagured country will undermine itself - let alone its capacity to interact at a far greater level that is clearly emerging.

[Aussie Digger]

Trimming some fat from an organisation is often quite productive. A force of 500,000 men in real terms is not going to provide much less combat capability than a force of 550,000. Provided the savings involved from culling 50,000 are poured back into the force, cutting some numbers from such a huge army can even have a positive effect and make it a more mobile and lethal armed force.

[adsH]

Trimming some fat from an organisation is often quite productive. A force of 500,000 men in real terms is not going to provide much less combat capability than a force of 550,000. Provided the savings involved from culling 50,000 are poured back into the force, cutting some numbers from such a huge army can even have a positive effect and make it a more mobile and lethal armed force.


I gues Modernization of all equipments and Real quality training would make them alot better at what they do, plus the 50,000 Soldier that are being made redundant aren't going to only come from the main fighting force they come from all sort of other devision!! i think small competent professional well trained and well equiped army can do a job better than a large over sized slow lagging poorly trained poorly equiped army. 500 000 soldiers for a country that is as small as pakistan is not atoo bad plus they have a total of 2.5 million internal defence force coupled with rebels from the NWFP that mount to about 250 000. So if we look at pakistan with its new goals that is self defence what they are doing to there main force is not so bad!!


What Truth seeker is suggesting in his piece of news, that Pakistan is becomeing insignificant in the eyes of india i doubt that, Pakistan still packs alot of punch interms of its conventional force(thats the reason why india doesn't launch a preemptive attack on pakistan) lets leave out the unconventional deterrents!! afghanistan can not launch an attack even if they want to there economy is poor there army is rebellious fractured not loyal (there army is so small that the NWFP rebels would be enough for them onn). there combat abilities are minimal there AF is non exsistant and they need pakistan for food they don't grow anything but drugs they are land locked. so i gues INdians do think this Reduction of force would play out in there favour!! but i doubt that would happen !!

[Indianguy]

Well , I think Logistic is the more important part in any army and no battle is won without proper logistic ..


What happen to Indian para militery forces;)
:?: :D2

[adsH]

Well , I think Logistic is the more important part in any army and no battle is won without proper logistic ..


What happen to Indian para militery forces;)
:?: :D2

INdia guy your too obsessed with the indian military i never mentioned Indian Military in my previous message, its not on this topic i think !! what the main focuss is, is to make Pak Army a fully defensive and upto date comprehensively well trained-fighting force so indian paramilitary would not be used incase india tries incursions into pak teritory!!

in india and pakistan case the paramilitary is a poor source of foot soldiers that are not trained and equipped well and would only be used in incursion when there shortages and when all reserves are fully tapped into. i don't think india would ever suffer form any depleations of that sort!! and paramilitary are also needed for internal security so it not a good idea to use them for external incursions into other teritories :)

[mysterious]

What our friend Truth Seeker does not realize is, that the 50,000 cut in armed forces is basically focused on the reduction of "batmen" (those low level soldiers who work more or less as servants at high ranking official's houses - doing house chores)!! I dont see how this is going to negatively effect the fighting capability of the Pakistan Army or its logistics segment. :smokingc:

[Soldier]

<Pakistan still packs alot of punch interms of its conventional force(thats the reason why india doesn't launch a preemptive attack on pakistan) lets leave out the unconventional deterrents!! >

Still packs a lot of Punch conventionally, but not enough to deter. Conventional comparison between two countries is totally in India's favor as everyone knows. It was not conventional scenario why India did not go to war with Pakistan ADSH, but it was nuclear scenario and its results, which reined in India. Perhaps that also was not sufficient and India could have gone but then diplomatic pressure of US.
There was nothing in conventional terms which Pakistan had to deter India other then Nuclear.

Conventional punch of N.Korea is nothing compared to US......but only the talk of N Korea having nuclear missiles keep the super power reined in.

[adsH]

<Pakistan still packs alot of punch interms of its conventional force(thats the reason why india doesn't launch a preemptive attack on pakistan) lets leave out the unconventional deterrents!! >

Still packs a lot of Punch conventionally, but not enough to deter. Conventional comparison between two countries is totally in India's favor as everyone knows. It was not conventional scenario why India did not go to war with Pakistan ADSH, but it was nuclear scenario and its results, which reined in India. Perhaps that also was not sufficient and India could have gone but then diplomatic pressure of US.
There was nothing in conventional terms which Pakistan had to deter India other then Nuclear.

Conventional punch of N.Korea is nothing compared to US......but only the talk of N Korea having nuclear missiles keep the super power reined in.

you have to be insane to say that. pakistans internal Defenses are huge your a fool not to recognize them the population is the highest armed population in the world there are a total of 3 million Military(1 million Military) paramilitary(2 million) if india did go in to pakistnan there are enough rebels in Kashmir and NWFP to match the indian forces with Gurella tactics and your forces by being the aggressors would not be able to defend against well defended territories.

See your just a patriotic Mind numbed individual who does not see your enemy as a threat just becasue it appears to be smaller look agian it has some attributes that may be the eye opener.

[Soldier]

<Pakistan still packs alot of punch interms of its conventional force(thats the reason why india doesn't launch a preemptive attack on pakistan) lets leave out the unconventional deterrents!! >

Still packs a lot of Punch conventionally, but not enough to deter. Conventional comparison between two countries is totally in India's favor as everyone knows. It was not conventional scenario why India did not go to war with Pakistan ADSH, but it was nuclear scenario and its results, which reined in India. Perhaps that also was not sufficient and India could have gone but then diplomatic pressure of US.
There was nothing in conventional terms which Pakistan had to deter India other then Nuclear.

Conventional punch of N.Korea is nothing compared to US......but only the talk of N Korea having nuclear missiles keep the super power reined in.

you have to be insane to say that. pakistans internal Defenses are huge your a fool not to recognize them the population is the highest armed population in the world there are a total of 3 million Military(1 million Military) paramilitary(2 million) if india did go in to pakistnan there are enough rebels in Kashmir and NWFP to match the indian forces with Gurella tactics and your forces by being the aggressors would not be able to defend against well defended territories.

See your just a patriotic Mind numbed individual who does not see your enemy as a threat just becasue it appears to be smaller look agian it has some attributes that may be the eye opener.


Huge, How huge? Care to compare? As to rebels in Kashmir there were enough in wars before, still if you will not agree, you can compare the numbers and come to the conclusion. I will suggest you to read some defence analyst opinion instead of using your own expert advice.

Guerilla tactics can be a severe pain in the butt, but it does not win an open declared war. Everyone knows about it. Attackers are always at a disadvantage but technical superiority can get the things in your favor and as of today, India is technologicaly superior to Pakistan in all three arms of Military, and numerically too. Not having any doubts about the bravery of a Pakistani Soldier but bravery to an extent plays a limited role in today's world. If bravery was everything, some countries will not be going to war at all specially when they are afraid of getting body-bags.

I am not patriotic and many people here will clearly say that in my favor. Indian military books are full of Pakistani's soldiers bravery even when all the odds were against them.

Perhaps you shall try to prove your point by pasting some comparitive links and news sources as to why India did not attack Pakistan few months ago. All the smoke should be clear if you read what other people are writing instead of collaborating your stories.

[gf0012-aust]

Before anyone starts to respond, lets all remember that these things are discussions that should not deteriorate into personal or national attacks.

[adsH]

<Pakistan still packs alot of punch interms of its conventional force(thats the reason why india doesn't launch a preemptive attack on pakistan) lets leave out the unconventional deterrents!! >

Still packs a lot of Punch conventionally, but not enough to deter. Conventional comparison between two countries is totally in India's favor as everyone knows. It was not conventional scenario why India did not go to war with Pakistan ADSH, but it was nuclear scenario and its results, which reined in India. Perhaps that also was not sufficient and India could have gone but then diplomatic pressure of US.
There was nothing in conventional terms which Pakistan had to deter India other then Nuclear.

Conventional punch of N.Korea is nothing compared to US......but only the talk of N Korea having nuclear missiles keep the super power reined in.

you have to be insane to say that. pakistans internal Defenses are huge your a fool not to recognize them the population is the highest armed population in the world there are a total of 3 million Military(1 million Military) paramilitary(2 million) if india did go in to pakistnan there are enough rebels in Kashmir and NWFP to match the indian forces with Gurella tactics and your forces by being the aggressors would not be able to defend against well defended territories.

See your just a patriotic Mind numbed individual who does not see your enemy as a threat just becasue it appears to be smaller look agian it has some attributes that may be the eye opener.


Huge, How huge? Care to compare? As to rebels in Kashmir there were enough in wars before, still if you will not agree, you can compare the numbers and come to the conclusion. I will suggest you to read some defence analyst opinion instead of using your own expert advice.

Guerilla tactics can be a severe pain in the butt, but it does not win an open declared war. Everyone knows about it. Attackers are always at a disadvantage but technical superiority can get the things in your favor and as of today, India is technologicaly superior to Pakistan in all three arms of Military, and numerically too. Not having any doubts about the bravery of a Pakistani Soldier but bravery to an extent plays a limited role in today's world. If bravery was everything, some countries will not be going to war at all specially when they are afraid of getting body-bags.

I am not patriotic and many people here will clearly say that in my favor. Indian military books are full of Pakistani's soldiers bravery even when all the odds were against them.

Perhaps you shall try to prove your point by pasting some comparitive links and news sources as to why India did not attack Pakistan few months ago. All the smoke should be clear if you read what other people are writing instead of collaborating your stories.

Mate its like 4 in the morning I ma tired i have been working on this project i will reply soon but not rite now!!! do note this point tech Suport does not mean the aggressor would win if that was the case Vietnam would of been example for you to use !! If you attack a persons home and try and humiliate and remove the basis of his pride, you shouldn't just expect Bravery on his part!! and never underestimate your Enemy that is an adivise passed down to generations of warriors!!

[Soldier]

I understand adSH. Have a great night sleep Bud. I am not in favor of attack on Pakistan and am not a cheerleader also if it happens. For me there can be nothing better the both countries living in harmony. Attacker is always at dis-advantage without doubts...I have never denied that. Pakistan has great soldiers, No doubts about that too. I totally agree with you on all what you said but not at on this: That India did not attack due to Pakistan's conventional Punch. That cracked me up as I have read 100's of very respectable analyst's comments why, and what went behind the doors for India to not get in to the war with Pakistan.
Have a great night sleep..

[joker]

Gf, AD you guys are right on the money. The force reduction will be from the support roles and the $110 million that is expected to be saved will be reinvested in personnel field equipment - kevlar helmets, flack jackets, NVGs, comms equipment and a new field rifle.

The author of the above article doesnt have a clue. In regards to the removal of AQK no such deep vacuum exists in the further development of our nuclear programme and its associated delivery systems. The link below is to an article outlining the development of Pakistans nuclear programme and its key actors. One can clearly note that AQK was NOT the "Father of the Bomb" but was more of a decoy than anything else.

http://www.pakdef.info/forum/showthread.php?p=46219#post46219

[WebMaster]

What I am interested in is what is the source of this rubbish? Also, this belongs in LAND FORCES!!! :mad

[adsH]

Gf, AD you guys are right on the money. The force reduction will be from the support roles and the $110 million that is expected to be saved will be reinvested in personnel field equipment - kevlar helmets, flack jackets, NVGs, comms equipment and a new field rifle.

The author of the above article doesnt have a clue. In regards to the removal of AQK no such deep vacuum exists in the further development of our nuclear programme and its associated delivery systems. The link below is to an article outlining the development of Pakistans nuclear programme and its key actors. One can clearly note that AQK was NOT the "Father of the Bomb" but was more of a decoy than anything else.

http://www.pakdef.info/forum/showthread.php?p=46219#post46219

It's like this u can take Bill out of Microsoft but Microsoft will still stand where it is Bill is not the CEO(anymore) i think he has taken up the role of Concept design more of engineering side, handling boring business needs is so not meant for him, any way there is a barrage of nuclear scientist in a well developed insititute just replacing a figure head does not affect the over all ability to conduct research and i think mr.AQK was retired and i think his only affiliation remaining, with the institution was more at the management level!!! I bet the Research institute AQK will be shut down and a newer more differently handled institute will take over an institute that won't have sanctions on it form the US!!

[Indianguy]

[Admin edit: What in the damn world does your reply have to do with the TOPIC being discussed?

One more stupid reply like this from you and you will be banned. Do not try to flame threads on this board, do not try to pass sneaky little insulting notes about other countries and their militaries! Grow the hell up if you wish to remain a respectable member of this defence site. ]

[mysterious]

[Mod edit: EDITED.]

[amit21mech]

Reduction in numbers of non-combatants doest not effect the efficiency of Pakistan to wage a conventional war. When Indian Army planned her pruning by 50,000 in late 90's following service arms under gone reduction (Very macro view):-

1. AEC(Army Education Core) - Every regiment used to have on an average 1 JCO and 2 ORs of AEC. That was reduced to only one OR per regiment whereas JCO was posted out to the Brigade or higher formation HQ. Other OR will be transfered to Intelligence.
Status - Done

2. MI(Military Intelligence) - Intake in this arm was reduced as AEC provided them men.
Status - Done

3. CMP - No reduction in CMP was sought but a plan was there to merge AEC and MI in CMP. They even earmarked Amravati(Maharashtra) as the new Training centre fot this merged arm but execution could not be done becasue of one or another reason.
Status - Finaly this idea was dropped after Kargil.


4. ASC & Remount & Veterinary Corps - With more helicopters, better roads and other modern means of tranport available IA assured herself by reducing the men in ASC manning mules and personnels of RVC taking care of the mules and other transport animals.
Status - Done

5. Military Farms Service - Simply by out sourcing the job of milk and vegetables in peace locations IA reduced her strength.
Status - Under going

6. EME - Contract of Maintenance and servicing of general duty vechiles like trucks, jeeps, two wheelers etc will awarded to the private sector so as to reduce EME men. But this idea was shot down in infancy.
Status - Not approved

Though reduction in 50,000 men was sought in the master plan and reduction is going on. (Now after the Kargil and its investigation it has been suggested to increase the strength of combatants by 38,000.)

Here I would like to see you how we can reduce our armies as organisation structure of both Indian and Pakistani army are more or less same. I do not think this will effect the combatant capacity in any way.

[adsH]

See, there you go again. Out of the blue, you suddenly start comparing Pakistan and India while trying to degrade Pakistan as much as you can. Grow up!

MYST i am sure Indian guy never meant any thing bad for Pak army all he was saying was that the Militia present in Pak Kashmir territory might not have that much of a bite!! :roll

[amit21mech]

Hey ADSH...I want ur comments on my last post. I would like to know that the steps IA took for pruning are applicable to PA or not And if yes to what extent?

[Truth Seeker]

Some interesting points have been raised, yes Pakistan is a smaller economy (and getting smaller (and we know why that is)) but my point was real term increase and % increase.

Are we saying that Pakistan has suddenly realised that it can be more efficient by having less troops, why hasnt India thought this!!!! or is this some new genius strategy that has come about and nobody has realised in the previous 50 years.

AQ Khan was removed but he was not on his own and therefore the people that were his associates are hardly still gonna be in place, they are hardly insignificant.

What people have to ask themselves the points i made would india do the same:

- have its military agenda be dictated to by foreign institutions
- rid its self of its top scientists
- want to deploy troops in iraq
- constantly reshuffle its military command

[mysterious]

Pakistan's economy is shrinking? Thats why it grew by 6% in real terms in the last quarter!?!?!? WOW!! You make me want to do my economics courses again if you are right. Its a good thing that Pakistan is reducing its 'batmen' and not active combatant troops by 50,000 souls and its a good thing that it has realized that its time to move on from old traditions of adhering to out-dated British military ways! Why would India take instructions from other? Its not a frontline state in the war on terrorism and stiffled by problems dating back the days of independance [Mod edit: No need to get personal] Only a two more scientists are under investigation and close watch along with Dr. Khan that doesnt make it appropriate to say, that Pakistan is riding itself of its top nuclear scientists! Hell, Mubarakmand is more of a nuclear scientist than Dr. Khan!! Pakistan to this day has remaind neutral on Iraq and it only releases such statements as 'thinking of sending troops to Iraq because of excessive US insistance' to make the Americans feel better a bit. You really think it will send its forces with them being under the UN flag & charter? Where is military command being reshuffled in Pakistan's armed forces? India is going through major doctrinal changes and stuff like that which is also a form of reshuffling. Such things are done keeping in mind changing circumstances and demands of varying time periods so its useless to pre-assume stuff over here. :cop

[amit21mech]

Well Mysti Pak economy is in really mess up , it is constaintly bailed out by US , if you see US is providing loans every year in one pretex to another in billions , espical teratmet given to Pak in imports by EU , all this is to bail out Pak eco. All this make the Pak economy to grow and if US and EU back off then PAk economy goes back to black hole.

Pak don;t have middile class tax payer people which is the strength of any economy .

World Bank put a condition on Pak , that Pak can;t increase it Militry budget if they wanted a billion doller loan .

The real reason is that for reducing the Army , While Pak army can't increase its budge and due to inflation they need more money and so to adjust themself in tight squeez of budget they have to cut cost.

They also cut cost by mordenizing inventory system etc, by cutting lavasing life living by high rank offers etc and also by not having dual on LOC .

Becasue somewhere i heard that one shell of 155mm artiliry come around 1 lac Rs. so saving 10 shells might build homes and schools to people.

If thier is peace on LOC then PAk army save mony in real terms.

And Indian Army is staging fake encounters on LoC. This is not the appropriate place but I can not resist remembering a old joke in which Indian and Pakistani soldiers were exchanging tanks at the border in order to satisfy their seniors to get leave.

On serious note Pakistan is doing the right thing but bit late. But again better late than never. Modernization is the main cause along with economical implications which is causing this reduction.

[adsH]

Well Mysti Pak economy is in really mess up , it is constaintly bailed out by US , if you see US is providing loans every year in one pretex to another in billions , espical teratmet given to Pak in imports by EU , all this is to bail out Pak eco. All this make the Pak economy to grow and if US and EU back off then PAk economy goes back to black hole.

Pak don;t have middile class tax payer people which is the strength of any economy .

World Bank put a condition on Pak , that Pak can;t increase it Militry budget if they wanted a billion doller loan .

The real reason is that for reducing the Army , While Pak army can't increase its budge and due to inflation they need more money and so to adjust themself in tight squeez of budget they have to cut cost.

They also cut cost by mordenizing inventory system etc, by cutting lavasing life living by high rank offers etc and also by not having dual on LOC .

Becasue somewhere i heard that one shell of 155mm artiliry come around 1 lac Rs. so saving 10 shells might build homes and schools to people.

If thier is peace on LOC then PAk army save mony in real terms.

Look mate I am British Granted i have Family from INdia and Pakistan!! But i do sometimes perfer Pakistan ALot!! But trust me when i say this rite now I am not Favoring either, Pak Economy which is Growing at around 6 percent with its 12+ % industrial sector growths shows its reforms!! and Any markect access assistance it is geting is becasue it has worked hard for its market no one will pay for Pakistani product if they were substandard think before you speak. IF the US shuts down Trade with INdia Tomorrow INdia's economy will take a bash too and would certainly come to a relative halt(being realistic and very not Offending). every country needs Buyers and sellers this is INternational cooperative market. About those loans !! Pak is securing cheap loans and large assistance grants from the US not the World bank Or IMF. they are paying back alot of there old loans. GDp is still higher i think then INdia mainly becasue of the size of the poulation but still Pakistan is a poverty stricken nation well so is iNdia apparently according to UN the stats were like this 200 million Impoverished people in india!! but this is a problem every nation has to deal!!. Now about Pakistan economy Crawling bank into a Dark "Black hole" (interesting choice of words that you chose to use) well i can only say only time can tell what happens next. but i have a good feeling that Pakistan will be the centre stage of the majority of all trade from the highly ritch Central ASian states who want to sell there oil to the US and US is eager for that source of Fuel. so its works out for all nations in that reagion.
Pak army is reduceing its size mainly to Reduce cost they are still a developing nation with socio economic hurdles and they agree to that, they say First stept to recovering from a problem is admitting you have a problem. The ARmy size has to come down. and i think 500 million active with 450 million reserves is a good size and they should focus on training an Better equiping soldiers with better armour and Litle Gadets that an all-rounded Modern soldiers has or should have. and now about middle class people paying taxes, well they are reforming the Identity and adressing system Allocating Computerized biometric ID cards which would i hope soon be hooked upto criminal and Health and Taxation's systems and them be hooked on to NAB systems the reforms should filter inn specially becasue pakistan knows what it is. its a small nation with a relatively mid sized population which need to be realitic it can't be a captilistic nation like China US and inidia it needs to be more like the UK Netherlands ETC more of a Wellfare state. :)


At the End All i want to say, thinking Logically is key to any civilized debate you need to calm down i display a tone that sets me apprt from you i may be inaccurate or incorrect in my posts but thats why all of us are here to correct misconceptions about other peoples point of view, while on the ohter had your attitude of not agreeing with anyone who does not play your tone of Music seems to be Immature and very disrespectful and disruptive!!


Being courteous to others feelings emotions and understanding cutural sensitivities and then approaching with a softer and more or less aggravating and les aggressive tone is the only way Cultural harmony can be achieved, with this in place pece can be achieved. i don't know how it is Back in INdia and Pakistan but here in the Uk we all live in harmony INdian and pakistani ethnic with all others here. infact my best friend is An indian and a Hindu but that never gets in the way of our friendship. sure we have tense times during cricket Matches but after a short lived cultural competitiveness we all go back to our normal selves. mainly because there is usually and England match which we need to support.

[lamdacore]

I agree with many points that ADSH has stated and i think most of the guys are just trying to find a flaw as to why pakistan decreased its numbers. It is logical to understand that these military personell reduced are non-combatants. The reason is that pakistan has a huge force of 500,000 soldiers because of India itself, so it wouldn't be intelligent to say that there is a reduction in soldiers. The money saved will probably go into training the soldiers since better equipment is needed for the pakistani soldiers if we just stick to the military domain. otherwise this money can contribute something to nation itself.

By the way the reduction in non-combatant staff should be done and never bought into practice. the soldier is to be fit for rough times. Giving comfort to a soldier is equivalent to spoiling him/her.