[Answered] The India-Pakistan ceasefire understanding of 2021, while seemingly a step towards peace, has faced periodic challenges. Discuss the nature of this understanding, the factors that led to it, and the challenges that threaten its sustainability. How can both nations work towards a more robust and enduring peace along the Line of Control and beyond?

Introduction

The India-Pakistan ceasefire understanding of February 2021, announced jointly by the Directorates General of Military Operations (DGMOs), was heralded as a breakthrough in the otherwise volatile bilateral relationship. Though it marked a significant reduction in hostilities along the Line of Control (LoC), the arrangement remains informal and has recently come under stress—particularly following the April 2025 Pahalgam terror attack, which reignited cross-border firing.

Nature of the 2021 Ceasefire Understanding

Unlike formal treaties, the 2021 ceasefire is a reiteration of the 2003 understanding, not a legal agreement. It is based on mutual military discretion rather than binding obligations. The LoC, a military control line redefined by the 1972 Simla Agreement, has served as a de facto border, but not a recognized international one. The ceasefire understanding thus exists in a grey zone—respected more as a strategic convenience than a legal contract.

Factors Leading to the Ceasefire

1. Geopolitical Realignment: Pakistan in 2021 was grappling with internal militancy and an unstable western frontier after the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. India, post-Galwan clash (2020), needed to focus on the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China.
2. Excessive Violations: In 2020 alone, over 5,100 ceasefire violations were reported (Ministry of Defence), inflicting heavy costs on border populations and military morale.
3. Backchannel Diplomacy: Reports indicated involvement of third-party actors like the UAE in facilitating dialogue, reflecting mutual fatigue from conflict.
4. Economic and Humanitarian Impact: Civilians in border districts like Poonch and Rajouri suffered immensely; post-ceasefire, there were bumper agricultural yields and reduced casualties.

Challenges to Sustainability

1. Lack of Formal Framework: Absence of a treaty or formal dispute resolution mechanism makes the understanding vulnerable to unilateral breaches.
2. Tactical Autonomy: Local commanders often initiate action based on “Autonomous Military Factors” (Happymon Jacob, Line on Fire), including morale, revenge, or territory denial.
3. Terror Infrastructure in PoK: Persistent infiltration attempts and terror camps undermine mutual trust.
4. Political Pressures: Ceasefire violations are often used by Pakistan’s military to assert domestic relevance, especially during political transitions.
5. Lack of Civilian Oversight: Military-to-military arrangements bypass institutional transparency and democratic oversight.

The Way Forward

1. Formalize the Ceasefire: Transform the informal understanding into a bilateral military protocol with clear rules of engagement.
2. Strengthen DGMO Mechanisms: Institutionalize weekly flag meetings and real-time hotline coordination.
3. Joint Monitoring Framework: Create a bilateral verification mechanism possibly aided by neutral observers to enhance transparency.
4. Revive Political Dialogue: Even limited Track II diplomacy can reinforce military CBMs and reduce miscalculations.
5. Invest in Border Infrastructure: Expand schemes like the Border Area Development Programme (BADP) for civilian resilience.
6. Curtail Terror Support: Pakistan must act against terror infrastructure to build credibility.

Conclusion

While the 2021 ceasefire understanding signaled a rare convergence of strategic interests, its sustainability is threatened by recurring structural and tactical vulnerabilities. For lasting peace, both nations must move beyond temporary understandings and commit to long-term institutional mechanisms rooted in transparency, accountability, and diplomacy.