Showing posts with label armed forces/cdf. Show all posts
Showing posts with label armed forces/cdf. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Amendment to last posting
Please amend date at the start of the sentence to read 'December 23, 2010' and not 'December 23, 2011' Error is very much regreted.
WILL THE SSM BE BESTOWED TO ANOTHER MILITARY OFFICER?
On December 23, 2011, the Malaysian Armed Forces (MAF) saw the passing of a great Malaysian warrior and former Chief of Defence Forces Gen Tun Ibrahim Ismail, who at the age of 88 was the only surviving military officer to have served the second World War, the first Malayan Emergency, the communist resurgence and the racial of May 13, 1969, and the Malaysian/Indonesian Confrontation. Gen Tun Ibrahim’s charismatic and colourful military career ended with his retirement in 1977, to be replaced by Gen Tan Sri Sany Abdul Ghafar.
The late Gen Tun Ibrahim was not known for his tantrum that is usually associated with some military officers. I have never served under Gen Tun Ibrahim as a staff officer, but have met him on several occasions i.e. on his visits to units and formation headquarters. I did post an article about him titled “Gen Tun Ibrahim – The Malay Warrior” dated July 10, 2008, and among others, described my personal experience as a subaltern with him, while I was on operations in the lone military outpost at Bakalalan, Sarawak in 1967.
Many have noticed that Gen Tun Ibrahim is the first and only military officer to have been bestowed the Seri Setia Mahkota Malaysia (SSM) that carries the honorific title of Tun. Likewise, for the Royal Malaysia Police, the title was bestowed to former Inspector General of Police, Tun Hanif. And many may not have noticed that Gen Tun Ibrahim was awarded the title many years after he had retired from the military, unlike Tun Hanif who was awarded the title while he was still in service.
I am told that there is a restricted quota to the number of SSM’s that can be awarded by the government to deserving living recipients’ i.e to only 25. Now, with the passing of Gen Tun Ibrahim, the question that needs to be asked is whether the SSM be bestowed to another living and deserving senior military officer? I suppose there are several to elect from, and I believe many serving military officers and all those that have retired would want the SSM be awarded to another senior military officer. I do not know the criteria for the nomination for the award, but I do believe that the recipient has to be a person that had served the nation with distinction, and certainly not a figure that is likely to be mired in controversies.
If I were given the opportunity to name the most deserving senior military officer to be awarded the lofty SSM, I would certainly name Gen Tan Sri Sany bin Abdul Ghafar. For all who had known him and had served him would say this i.e. that he was the person who had a heart for the soldiers well being, and he stood firmly by it. Gen Tan Sri Sany too had a colourful and charismatic military career, and was distinguished as being the first serving military to be assigned as an Ambassador while in the rank of Major General.
CRUSADE AGAINST CORRUPTION
The late Gen Tun Ibrahim was not known for his tantrum that is usually associated with some military officers. I have never served under Gen Tun Ibrahim as a staff officer, but have met him on several occasions i.e. on his visits to units and formation headquarters. I did post an article about him titled “Gen Tun Ibrahim – The Malay Warrior” dated July 10, 2008, and among others, described my personal experience as a subaltern with him, while I was on operations in the lone military outpost at Bakalalan, Sarawak in 1967.
Many have noticed that Gen Tun Ibrahim is the first and only military officer to have been bestowed the Seri Setia Mahkota Malaysia (SSM) that carries the honorific title of Tun. Likewise, for the Royal Malaysia Police, the title was bestowed to former Inspector General of Police, Tun Hanif. And many may not have noticed that Gen Tun Ibrahim was awarded the title many years after he had retired from the military, unlike Tun Hanif who was awarded the title while he was still in service.
I am told that there is a restricted quota to the number of SSM’s that can be awarded by the government to deserving living recipients’ i.e to only 25. Now, with the passing of Gen Tun Ibrahim, the question that needs to be asked is whether the SSM be bestowed to another living and deserving senior military officer? I suppose there are several to elect from, and I believe many serving military officers and all those that have retired would want the SSM be awarded to another senior military officer. I do not know the criteria for the nomination for the award, but I do believe that the recipient has to be a person that had served the nation with distinction, and certainly not a figure that is likely to be mired in controversies.
If I were given the opportunity to name the most deserving senior military officer to be awarded the lofty SSM, I would certainly name Gen Tan Sri Sany bin Abdul Ghafar. For all who had known him and had served him would say this i.e. that he was the person who had a heart for the soldiers well being, and he stood firmly by it. Gen Tan Sri Sany too had a colourful and charismatic military career, and was distinguished as being the first serving military to be assigned as an Ambassador while in the rank of Major General.
CRUSADE AGAINST CORRUPTION
Friday, March 12, 2010
EXTENSION OF SERVICE
It was reported that the Chief Secretary to the government Tan Sri Mohd Sidek Hassan’s who is due to retire on 23rd June 2010, has had his service extended for a year until 23rd June 2011. It would appear that extending the service of senior government officers is now a norm rather than a case-by-case basis.
If one looks back at past holders of the appointment of the Chief Secretary, each and every one of them has had their service extended pass their compulsory retirement age. Even now, when the retirement age of civil servants have been extended from 55 years to 58 years, a further extension is still needed for some. Why is this so, is baffling. If this be the case, why not just extend the service of all government servants to 60 years, like in most developed countries. I retired at the age of 55 years, and I am now 66 years old and am not yet senile. In other words, I am still productive, with the mental capacity to think ably.
I believe this issue has been debated many a times, and I remembered, even Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah (Ku LI) has given his opinion that does not favour the extension of service of selected senior government servants. It is quite absurd to say the least, that the extension is needed to maintain continuity. And what is so important that others cannot continue or perform the job of the incumbent. If this be the reason, than there is something seriously wrong with the succession plans within the top echelon of the civil service.
The same can also be said of the Armed Forces. How many times has the holder of the post of the Chief of Defence Forces (CDF) been extended? It is a norm that the holder of the post gets an extension; sometime up to a third extension. Why has this to be so for the Armed Forces, where it practices a high level of deputation for almost every appointment?
Taking the case of the CDF, anytime when the CDF is away or invalid, either one of the service chief will deputized the appointment. There is absolutely no problem with this arrangement, because at the level of the service chiefs, there is already a common understanding among all the three service chiefs, as to the nature of work that the CDF does, and whatever he does is to the knowledge of the service chiefs. In very simple terms, every action of the CDF is known to the service chiefs, and that the CDF does not decide or do things unilaterally.
The same can also be said of the position of the three service chiefs, where each has a deputy. And it is for the aforesaid reasons that I do not see any justifiable reason for the post of the CDF and the three service chiefs be extended pass their compulsory retirement age.
I am informed that the Chief of Army is due to retire in a few months from now, and there is already a talk that he is seeking an extension, or is awaiting for the government to offer him an extension, as reported in the media. I am also aware that the CDF has not many more months left, and let us hope that there is already a clear succession plan as to who should be the next CDF, and also the new Chief of Army.
CRUSADE AGAINST CORRUPTION
If one looks back at past holders of the appointment of the Chief Secretary, each and every one of them has had their service extended pass their compulsory retirement age. Even now, when the retirement age of civil servants have been extended from 55 years to 58 years, a further extension is still needed for some. Why is this so, is baffling. If this be the case, why not just extend the service of all government servants to 60 years, like in most developed countries. I retired at the age of 55 years, and I am now 66 years old and am not yet senile. In other words, I am still productive, with the mental capacity to think ably.
I believe this issue has been debated many a times, and I remembered, even Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah (Ku LI) has given his opinion that does not favour the extension of service of selected senior government servants. It is quite absurd to say the least, that the extension is needed to maintain continuity. And what is so important that others cannot continue or perform the job of the incumbent. If this be the reason, than there is something seriously wrong with the succession plans within the top echelon of the civil service.
The same can also be said of the Armed Forces. How many times has the holder of the post of the Chief of Defence Forces (CDF) been extended? It is a norm that the holder of the post gets an extension; sometime up to a third extension. Why has this to be so for the Armed Forces, where it practices a high level of deputation for almost every appointment?
Taking the case of the CDF, anytime when the CDF is away or invalid, either one of the service chief will deputized the appointment. There is absolutely no problem with this arrangement, because at the level of the service chiefs, there is already a common understanding among all the three service chiefs, as to the nature of work that the CDF does, and whatever he does is to the knowledge of the service chiefs. In very simple terms, every action of the CDF is known to the service chiefs, and that the CDF does not decide or do things unilaterally.
The same can also be said of the position of the three service chiefs, where each has a deputy. And it is for the aforesaid reasons that I do not see any justifiable reason for the post of the CDF and the three service chiefs be extended pass their compulsory retirement age.
I am informed that the Chief of Army is due to retire in a few months from now, and there is already a talk that he is seeking an extension, or is awaiting for the government to offer him an extension, as reported in the media. I am also aware that the CDF has not many more months left, and let us hope that there is already a clear succession plan as to who should be the next CDF, and also the new Chief of Army.
CRUSADE AGAINST CORRUPTION
Saturday, October 17, 2009
AN OPEN LETTER TO THE MALAYSIAN CHIEF OF DEFENCE FORCE
Though late, I however wish to congratulate you for having rose to the exulted post of the new Chief of Defence Force (CDF) of the Malaysian Armed Forces. I certainly do not know you well enough to personally call you and to congratulate you. But I did post a congratulatory note in my blog on August 29, 2009.
Your rise to the number one slot in the Armed Forces must be in recognition for your outstanding performance and contribution to the nation, while you were the Air Force Chief. And being at the pinnacle of your career now, you can no longer be yourself and to savour the freedom that you once enjoyed when you were a junior officer.
I was told by my superior once that being at the top can be very lonely. Your subordinates no longer feel the freedom, nor will they be at leisure to meet you unless it is for some official purpose. Even if you are at the golf course with them, do not think that your subordinates are at ease playing with you. They enjoy losing the game, not because they are not good at the game, but they lose out of respect for you. This is the privilege that you enjoy and you ought not to blame yourself for this. It is the military culture I suppose i.e respect to a superior is utmost, even at a game of golf.
Now, let me get to the more serious aspect of this letter, the reason for which I do not want you to fall into the things being said of your predecessor that had brought himself and the good name of the Armed Forces to odium, disrepute and be the talk of the town. I know many in the Armed Forces, in particular the Army knows what all he has done, and the reasons why he had to leave in such haste. I am puzzled as to why was there no action taken against him, should he do anything wrong that had brought him and dragged the service to odium.. Was there a fear of retaliation? Or has the rot creeped into the entire system, that it is now beyond redemption?
The burden to raise the good name of the Armed Forces back to its former 'glory' now lies with you. You have to shoulder that responsibility and to do that, you have to have the unequivocal support of all the three service chiefs. You should demand support and loyalty from them, and should they weaver to the detriment of the service, sack them. And for goodness sake, keep a tight watch on the activities of the the three services, because to claim ignorance of any failures found in the three services, is not an acceptable answer to come from the CDF.
You should set the tone by setting good personal examples; exemplary leadership; make firm and fair decisions; discard cronyism; disengage yourself from ever being involved in business or being seen among contractors and business associates; do not allow family members to use you in their business with Mindef; never request favours from any businessmen; be extremely weary of the people around you, and last but not the least, do not ever feel beholden to politicians. Be a professional soldier, and you will gain gratification and respect from your men and the nation.
I seem to be teaching you to suck eggs, but it is better to be sucking eggs than to lose honour and pride of being a member of the Armed Forces by your unsavoury acts.
You may not have access to the talks that lingers outside the corridors of Mindef, but I do. And it is the love that I still have for the Armed Forces that I am force to tell you what ails the Armed Forces under the leadership of your predecessor. Call me a busybody if you want, but I would rather be called that, then to see the Armed Forces slip into decadence.
CRUSADE AGAINST CORRUPTION
Your rise to the number one slot in the Armed Forces must be in recognition for your outstanding performance and contribution to the nation, while you were the Air Force Chief. And being at the pinnacle of your career now, you can no longer be yourself and to savour the freedom that you once enjoyed when you were a junior officer.
I was told by my superior once that being at the top can be very lonely. Your subordinates no longer feel the freedom, nor will they be at leisure to meet you unless it is for some official purpose. Even if you are at the golf course with them, do not think that your subordinates are at ease playing with you. They enjoy losing the game, not because they are not good at the game, but they lose out of respect for you. This is the privilege that you enjoy and you ought not to blame yourself for this. It is the military culture I suppose i.e respect to a superior is utmost, even at a game of golf.
Now, let me get to the more serious aspect of this letter, the reason for which I do not want you to fall into the things being said of your predecessor that had brought himself and the good name of the Armed Forces to odium, disrepute and be the talk of the town. I know many in the Armed Forces, in particular the Army knows what all he has done, and the reasons why he had to leave in such haste. I am puzzled as to why was there no action taken against him, should he do anything wrong that had brought him and dragged the service to odium.. Was there a fear of retaliation? Or has the rot creeped into the entire system, that it is now beyond redemption?
The burden to raise the good name of the Armed Forces back to its former 'glory' now lies with you. You have to shoulder that responsibility and to do that, you have to have the unequivocal support of all the three service chiefs. You should demand support and loyalty from them, and should they weaver to the detriment of the service, sack them. And for goodness sake, keep a tight watch on the activities of the the three services, because to claim ignorance of any failures found in the three services, is not an acceptable answer to come from the CDF.
You should set the tone by setting good personal examples; exemplary leadership; make firm and fair decisions; discard cronyism; disengage yourself from ever being involved in business or being seen among contractors and business associates; do not allow family members to use you in their business with Mindef; never request favours from any businessmen; be extremely weary of the people around you, and last but not the least, do not ever feel beholden to politicians. Be a professional soldier, and you will gain gratification and respect from your men and the nation.
I seem to be teaching you to suck eggs, but it is better to be sucking eggs than to lose honour and pride of being a member of the Armed Forces by your unsavoury acts.
You may not have access to the talks that lingers outside the corridors of Mindef, but I do. And it is the love that I still have for the Armed Forces that I am force to tell you what ails the Armed Forces under the leadership of your predecessor. Call me a busybody if you want, but I would rather be called that, then to see the Armed Forces slip into decadence.
CRUSADE AGAINST CORRUPTION
Friday, April 10, 2009
WHO WILL BE THE NEXT CHIEF OF DEFENCE FORCE?
Newly appointed Prime Minister Dato Seri Mohd Najib Tun Razak had just named its new cabinet that is expected to play a crucial role in shaping the future of the nation. Dubbed as ‘Team Malaysia’, Najib said, “the new cabinet is not only a new team with a new face, but also a new approach to administering the country better in a more responsible and transparent manner that focuses in the people”.
The concern of most Malaysians has been the prevalence of corruption, and the role of cronies and family members in business and the affairs of government, that pervades the Abdullah administration; a repeat of which Najib has to avoid in his new administration. Tun Dr. Mahathir, a severe critic of former PM Tun Abdullah, had remarked that the new cabinet seems to be clean, with some notable ministers that are known to be corrupt have not been listed.
To all Malaysians, let us give the new Prime Minister and his cabinet a chance to make good their pledges. And in this trying period of the global economic downturn, it is incumbent upon us to support any course that the government takes, that is deemed beneficial to the nation and its people. To criticized the government now will not be just and fair, and Najib will need the unequivocal support of the people to realize his pledge of a one Malaysia.
The Armed Forces too in the coming months will also see a change in its leadership; though not through an election of any kind. I am told that the Chief of Defence Force (CDF) is due for retirement, and the post is likely to be taken up by either one of the present serving service chiefs. Since the post was created, the CDF has been dominated by the army, and only once held by the navy.
The British, and similarly the Australian Armed Forces, I believe appoints the CDF on a rotational basis. The MAF recognizes that the post of CDF is a tri- service post; meaning that it can be held by either one of the service chief i.e. army, navy of air force chief, and supposedly on a rotational basis. However, in practice, this does not seem to be so, and I am also made to believe that the final selection to the post will eventually be decided by the political masters.
There has been some argument from among the three services in the past, with regards to the rightful appointment of the CDF. The army would claim that the post is rightfully theirs since the army constitutes the largest of the three services. The other two services i.e. navy and air force will likewise say that numerical strength alone are no longer the criterion. The high value assets and technological sophistication of the equipments held by a modern air force and navy that requires precise management, raises greater importance against just the numerical strength of the army.
The other argument that the war of today will not be fought by just one particular service, but will be joint in nature i.e. the combined forces of the army, navy and air force. And this gives greater justification that the CDF can be from either one of the three service chief, and certainly not predominantly from the army.
I am told that there is no clear succession to the post of the CDF today, because the current Army and Air Force chiefs are also expected to retire, at about the same time as the CDF. That leaves the Navy chief, but they say that he lacks the seniority as the chief.
And assuming that either the Army or Air Force chief is appointed, their service will have to be extended pass their official retirement age i.e. 58 years. And if this is the choice of the government, who then will be chosen from among the two……army or air force chief? Or will it be the Navy chief despite his lack of seniority? We will have to leave the final choice of the new CDF to the new Defence Minister, YB Dato Seri Dr. Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.
CRUSADE AGAINST CORRUPTION
Posted at 7 pm on April 10, 2009
The concern of most Malaysians has been the prevalence of corruption, and the role of cronies and family members in business and the affairs of government, that pervades the Abdullah administration; a repeat of which Najib has to avoid in his new administration. Tun Dr. Mahathir, a severe critic of former PM Tun Abdullah, had remarked that the new cabinet seems to be clean, with some notable ministers that are known to be corrupt have not been listed.
To all Malaysians, let us give the new Prime Minister and his cabinet a chance to make good their pledges. And in this trying period of the global economic downturn, it is incumbent upon us to support any course that the government takes, that is deemed beneficial to the nation and its people. To criticized the government now will not be just and fair, and Najib will need the unequivocal support of the people to realize his pledge of a one Malaysia.
The Armed Forces too in the coming months will also see a change in its leadership; though not through an election of any kind. I am told that the Chief of Defence Force (CDF) is due for retirement, and the post is likely to be taken up by either one of the present serving service chiefs. Since the post was created, the CDF has been dominated by the army, and only once held by the navy.
The British, and similarly the Australian Armed Forces, I believe appoints the CDF on a rotational basis. The MAF recognizes that the post of CDF is a tri- service post; meaning that it can be held by either one of the service chief i.e. army, navy of air force chief, and supposedly on a rotational basis. However, in practice, this does not seem to be so, and I am also made to believe that the final selection to the post will eventually be decided by the political masters.
There has been some argument from among the three services in the past, with regards to the rightful appointment of the CDF. The army would claim that the post is rightfully theirs since the army constitutes the largest of the three services. The other two services i.e. navy and air force will likewise say that numerical strength alone are no longer the criterion. The high value assets and technological sophistication of the equipments held by a modern air force and navy that requires precise management, raises greater importance against just the numerical strength of the army.
The other argument that the war of today will not be fought by just one particular service, but will be joint in nature i.e. the combined forces of the army, navy and air force. And this gives greater justification that the CDF can be from either one of the three service chief, and certainly not predominantly from the army.
I am told that there is no clear succession to the post of the CDF today, because the current Army and Air Force chiefs are also expected to retire, at about the same time as the CDF. That leaves the Navy chief, but they say that he lacks the seniority as the chief.
And assuming that either the Army or Air Force chief is appointed, their service will have to be extended pass their official retirement age i.e. 58 years. And if this is the choice of the government, who then will be chosen from among the two……army or air force chief? Or will it be the Navy chief despite his lack of seniority? We will have to leave the final choice of the new CDF to the new Defence Minister, YB Dato Seri Dr. Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.
CRUSADE AGAINST CORRUPTION
Posted at 7 pm on April 10, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)