India and Pakistan agree to a ceasefire: What does that mean? | India Pakistan news tensions

India and Pakistan arrived cease-fire US President Donald Trump announced on Saturday that the agreement shortly after hostilities during the past few days.

Earlier on Saturday, the neighbors targeted the military sites for each other as Pakistan launched the “Bonyan Marso operation” after three of its air missile bases were wounded to the surface in India. Both sides claimed that they objected to most of the projectiles, but also admitted that some strikes caused damage.

More than 60 people have been killed since then India fired missiles Under the title “Sindoor Operation” on Wednesday, which said that “terrorist camps” in Pakistan and Kashmir, which is run by Pakistan. Pakistan confirmed the killing of 13 people on its side of the LOC line, on the realistic borders between the two countries that divide the disputed Kashmir region.

The strikes were raised Fears of a wider conflict Among the nuclear armed neighbors. While international mediation has resolved conflicts between India and Pakistan before, it remains to see whether this ceasefire will keep it and whether people will be able to relax.

What agreed upon by India and Pakistan?

“After a long night of talks in the middle of the United States, I am pleased to announce that India and Pakistan have agreed to a full and immediate ceasefire,” Trump wrote on the social truth platform on Saturday.

“Congratulations to both countries for using a good sense and great intelligence. Thank you for your interest in this matter!” It is understood that multiple countries have participated in these talks.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Isaac Dar and Indian Foreign Minister Vikram Missri confirmed the ceasefire after a short period.

“It was agreed that both sides will stop all combat and military action on the ground, air and sea as of 17:00 Indian standard time today (11:30 GMT).”

“Instructions have been submitted on both sides to implement this understanding. General managers will talk to military operations again on May 12 at 12:00.”

India and Pakistan also activated military channels and hot lines after the deal, according to Dar.

Will the two countries participate in other talks now?

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio as well He said India and Pakistan have agreed to start talks on “a wide range of issues in a neutral site.”

However, in a statement on social media, the Ministry of Information in India denied this in part, saying: “There is no decision to hold talks on any other case anywhere else.”

Supry Senha, director of the South Asian Institute at Soas University in London, told Al -Jazeera that the broader bilateral talks would be a very difficult process because India had previously rejected such a development.

Sinha said: “One of the arguments on this alleged strong policy towards Pakistan adopted by the Moody government is that it is no longer possible to sit and discuss a wide and long -term commitment to resolve issues,” Sinha said.

Therefore, this would represent a reflection of the Indian government’s position and can play badly with the right wing in India, whose members called for an attack on Pakistan.

Sinha said both Endoswatering Treaty, Which India suspended its participation and Simla AgreementAnd that Pakistan threatened to withdraw from, you will need to be fully resumed and “to look (in) perhaps as rules to move forward.”

Was India and Pakistan already in war?

Officially, no. Despite intensive military exchanges, including missile strikes, drone attacks, and artillery shelling, none of the government issued an official announcement of the war.

Instead, India and Pakistan described their military actions as specific “military operations”.

On Saturday, Pakistan launched a retaliatory attack called “a jobAnd Arabic for “the wall of lead”, just days after the start of India.Sindoor OperationResponse to A fatal attack on tourists Pahagam on April 22, which was blamed for the Pakistan -based armed groups.

However, this is not unusual for these two countries. They did not officially announce the war in Previous major conflictsEven when thousands of soldiers and civilians died.

Is the third party interference the conflicts between India and Pakistan before?

Yes. Third party mediation Conflicts have resolved Since 1947, when the Indian subcontinent was divided through division, India and Pakistan, they fought their first war. After a year of war on the ownership of Jammu and Kashmir Emiri, an effective intermediate fire at the United Nations between the Indian regions and Pakistan run by Pakistan in 1948.

The Indian Pakistani War ended in 1965 with a announcement of Tashman in January 1966, after mediation by the former Soviet Union. The agreement witnessed the Indian Prime Minister Lal Beldor Sharesteri and Pakistani President Ayoub Khan agreed to return to pre -war sites and restore diplomatic and economic relations.

During 1999 Cargill WarPakistani forces crossed and seized Indian positions. President Bill Clinton, President Bill Clinton, persuaded Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to withdraw, with a warning of international isolation.

In 2002, the then Minister of Foreign Affairs and the United States claimed that he and his team had mediated at the end of a tense confrontation along LOC after an attack on the Indian parliament in December 2001. In the next June, Powell said that through negotiation, he had received armed armed assurances.

What constitutes war?

There is no single definition. International humanitarian law, such as the Geneva Conventions, uses the term “international armed conflict” instead of “war”, and knows it wider as any use of the armed forces between countries, regardless of whether any of the two sides is called “war.”

In modern international law, all the uses of power are classified as a “armed conflict” regardless of justifications such as self -defense, according to Bilal Soyvi, a lawyer in the Supreme Court in Pakistan, also specialized in international law.

He added that the suspension of the treaty could also indicate the beginning of the war. India has suspended its participation in the Landome Waters treaty with Pakistan on April 23, a move that Pakistan described as a “hostile work”.

“Politicians usually say that the war is still present until after the fighting becomes very intense – it is usually 1000 deaths of battle,” said Christopher Clarri, a university science professor at Albani. “For governments, although wars exist whenever they say it.”

Experts argue that the recent escalation in military measures by India and Pakistan was about the power of reference as much as it was about the military targets, and it was also part of a broader effort to manage local and international awareness.

Sean Bell, a UK -based military analyst, said many of the current discourse from both India and Pakistan aims at the local public. Al -Jazeera said that every side “tries to show their residents that there is a strong military response, and that they split for any measures.” But Bell warned of this dream of dynamic, of the dangers, it is difficult to stop as soon as it starts.

Why are the two countries reluctant to officially announce the war?

After the adoption of the United Nations Charter in 1945, “there is no country claiming” war “or declaring” war “as, legally, is seen as illegal use of power,” as Sofi stated on the island of the island.

Officially, the presence in a state of armed conflict leads to international legal obligations, such as following the rules of armed conflict and responsible for war crimes.

In the latest confrontation in India, Pakistan, both other sides were portrayed as the aggressor, insisting that the person who must be attached must be.

The lack of an universally acceptable definition of the war means that countries can participate in sustainable military operations without officially declaring the war. The ambiguity also allows governments to frame military measures in ways to suit their political or diplomatic goals.

For example, Russia has consistently described its invasion of 2022 to Ukraine as a “special military operation”, despite the deployment of large -scale forces, air strikes and regional occupation. Likewise, the United States referred to the Korean war in the fifties of the last century as a “police action” and framing its long -term activities in Afghanistan and Iraq as “anti -terrorism operations.” Israel often uses terms such as “military campaign” or “operation” for cross -border donations, such as “Protection Edge” during its 2014 Gaza war.