Ceasefire: diplomatic relief or temporary pause?

The ceasefire declared suddenly after the unprecedented military tension between India and Pakistan may have surprised the world, but this ceasefire is not only a moment of relief for peace in South Asia, but it is also proof that both nuclear-armed countries were forced to retreat from the brink of destruction. The four days of military clashes between May 6 and May 10, attacks on airports, missile attacks and shelling on the LoC were the signs of a full-fledged war. But the ceasefire declared by US President Donald Trump on May 11 temporarily doused the flames of this war. This development should be understood not only from a military point of view, but also from a diplomatic and strategic point of view.

After the horrific terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir on April 22, India's response was swift and clear. India carried out targeted attacks on terrorist hideouts inside Pakistan on the night of May 6-7. India described it as a focused and measured action, while Pakistan considered it aggressive and in response launched an operation called Bunyan al Marsoos, targeting Indian military installations. Both countries claimed to have shot down each other's drones and missiles. There was also heavy firing on the LoC. This situation brought South Asia close to nuclear war for the first time since the Kargil war of 1999.

The US played a decisive role in resolving this tension. President Donald Trump publicly declared that this ceasefire was possible due to US mediation. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio held talks not only with Pakistan's army chief General Asim Munir but also with India's Foreign Minister S Jaishankar. This mediation was not just normal diplomacy, but also reestablished a strategic balancing role for the US.

While the US is involved in growing defense and trade relations with India, it has also been a traditional source of military and economic assistance to Pakistan. This two-way engagement of the US has made it the only country that has considerable influence on both sides. Analysts believe that the combined combination of pressure and assurances from the US on both countries became the foundation of this ceasefire, but the biggest question now is how long will this ceasefire last? But at present it is believed that the US is important for both countries and it is not in their interest to increase this tension. At the same time, defense experts believe that both countries are in a position to tell their people that they have achieved their goals. India attacked Pakistan's terrorist infrastructure, while Pakistan claimed retaliatory attacks and targeting Indian fighter planes. Both countries needed a respectable exit and this ceasefire is the result of that.

India's Foreign Minister S Jaishankar made it clear that India's policy towards all forms of terrorism is tough and unwavering. India also gave clear indications that any terrorist attack in the future will be considered a reason for war. This message gives a glimpse of India's new military doctrine, in which direct and quick military response is being given priority over traditional diplomatic responses. The Indian Army made it clear that India is on full operational alert, but it does not want to escalate tensions, provided Pakistan also follows the same path. This stance makes it clear that India has now adopted the policy of 'Preventive Deterrence', in which there is no policy of first strike, but the counter-attacks will be intense and decisive.

On the other hand, for Pakistan, this crisis was not limited to the borders. Public sentiment within the army and within the country was constantly demanding a response to India. Pakistan's Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif issued a statement saying that India has been given a befitting reply, from this it appears that Pakistan also tried to show its citizens that it has maintained self-respect, but the real challenge of Pakistan is its economic and political instability. Loans from the IMF, rising inflation, and the economic dependence of the army forced it to lean towards diplomacy instead of war. At the same time, it is also clear that the Pakistan Army is now trying to secure its role not only with military power, but also with its diplomatic acumen.

This ceasefire has proved that lasting peace between neighbouring countries like India and Pakistan is not possible through bilateral talks alone. Mediation, whether by the US or other countries, has now become an essential part of this regional balance. The involvement of countries like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Britain showed that South Asia is now at the centre of the global diplomatic network. It is also becoming clear that Indo-Pak tensions are no longer just a bilateral issue but a question of global peace and security. The possibility of talks on Monday, May 12, is an indication that both countries now want to look back and review their options. India's stand is still clear that terrorism and talks cannot go together. Pakistan will have to decide whether it changes its geopolitical outlook or not.

Experts believe that this ceasefire is only a temporary respite. Its sustainability will depend on the terms agreed upon. Has Pakistan given any commitment? Has India indicated a plan of action going forward? This ceasefire is an opportunity for both countries and the global community. If this opportunity is used with strategic patience, diplomatic dialogue and practical wisdom, it can be the beginning of a new era, but if old rivalries, the shadow of terrorism and competition for regional supremacy return, this ceasefire will remain a comma to another war. India and Pakistan will now have to decide not only on military fronts but also on ideological level whether they want to move towards lasting peace in the 21st century or will keep returning to the same destructive cycle again and again.