What is a Ceasefire? Understanding the India-Pakistan ceasefire declaration

Srinagar, May 11: India and Pakistan have agreed to a ceasefire following a week of heightened military tensions. On Saturday, Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri said that the Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) of Pakistan contacted his Indian counterpart at 3:35 pm. Both sides agreed to halt all forms of military action — by land, air, and sea — starting 5 pm that day. However, despite the announcement, reports of drone activity and explosions were still emerging from border areas later that evening.

What is a ceasefire?

A ceasefire is an agreement between parties involved in an armed conflict to temporarily suspend hostilities. It can apply to international wars as well as internal conflicts. According to “The Practical Guide to Humanitarian Law” by Françoise Bouchet-Saulnier, a ceasefire involves the cessation of all military activities within a defined time and area. It is not a formal end to a war or conflict but rather a temporary truce — a step toward de-escalation.

There is no universally binding definition of a ceasefire. Sydney D Bailey, an expert in international affairs, described it as a “suspension of acts of violence by military and paramilitary forces,” often brokered with the help of a third party. Ceasefires can be formal (documented) or informal (verbal agreements).

Ceasefire vs Truce v Armistice vs Peace Treaty

Before the UN Charter was adopted in 1945, terms like truce, armistice, and peace treaty had distinct meanings. However, the flexible use of the term ceasefire—including by the UN—has blurred these lines over time. Today, the terms are often used interchangeably, though technically, they signify different levels of agreement:

Truce – A brief, informal pause in fighting.

Ceasefire – A temporary halt to hostilities, which may or may not lead to peace talks.

Armistice – A formal agreement to stop fighting, often preceding peace negotiations.

Peace Treaty – A legally binding agreement to end a war.

What Do Ceasefire Agreements Typically Include?

Ceasefire agreements, whether in international or non-international conflicts, usually address the following key elements:

Start Time and Date: Clearly defined commencement of the ceasefire, including the exact hour and date.

Prohibited Acts

Military: Includes a ban on use of weapons, troop movements, shelling, drone activity, and airstrikes.

Non-military: May also prohibit hostile propaganda, intimidation, or threats.

Separation of Forces

Establishment of ceasefire lines and buffer zones to physically separate rival troops and reduce the risk of renewed clashes.

Monitoring and Verification

Mechanisms may include joint monitoring commissions, UN peacekeeping forces, or third-party observers to ensure compliance.

Humanitarian Provisions

These may involve the return of prisoners of war, displaced persons, and refugees.

Agreements may also provide for restitution, compensation, and the identification of missing persons.

What Happens If a Ceasefire Is Breached?

While ceasefires are important for de-escalation, they generally do not carry direct legal consequences under international law. Instead, they serve as a confidence-building step toward negotiations.

However, violations can still trigger responses under international humanitarian law:

The Hague Regulations (1910) provide guidelines on the consequences of breach:

Article 36: If no duration is specified, hostilities can resume at any time, provided prior warning is given.

Article 40: A serious violation by one party allows the other to terminate the agreement and, in urgent cases, resume fighting immediately.

Article 41: If individuals act independently to violate the ceasefire, the affected party can demand their punishment or seek compensation.

Conclusion

A ceasefire between India and Pakistan does not signify peace but a pause in violence. It is a delicate, temporary arrangement aimed at creating space for diplomacy or broader conflict resolution. Past experiences, however, show that such agreements are often fragile — their success depends on mutual trust, verification mechanisms, and political will on both sides.