Ceasefire violations on the border between Pakistan and India and across the Line of Control in the Jammu and Kashmir region are both a product of broader bilateral tensions and a contributor to them. Drawn from field research and extensive interviews with both Indian and Pakistani officials and senior military figures, this report argues that ceasefire violations are generally not planned, directed, or cleared by higher military commands or political establishments, but are driven by the dynamics on the frontlines. The report explains these factors in context, offering recommendations on what could be done to better manage or even avoid both tensions and escalation of conflict.

Summary

  • Violations of the ceasefire agreement of 2003 between India and Pakistan in the Jammu and Kashmir region are a significant trigger in bilateral military, political, and diplomatic tensions.
  • Ceasefire violations (CFVs) have the potential to not only spark bilateral crises but also escalate any ongoing crisis, especially in the aftermath of terror incidents.
  • The failure on the part of both countries to comprehensively assess the causes of CFVs has led both governments to adopt policies that have been unsuccessful in curtailing recurrent violations.
  • India asserts terrorist infiltration from Pakistan is the primary cause for CFVs. Pakistan claims that the larger outstanding bilateral disputes are the issue.
  • Even if terrorist infiltration were to end, however, ceasefire violations could potentially continue.
  • Local military factors in the India-Pakistan border are in fact behind the recurrent breakdown of the 2003 agreement. That is, CFVs are generally not planned, directed, or cleared by higher military commands or political establishments, but are instead driven by the dynamics on the frontlines.
  • The 2003 agreement tends to hold when a dialogue process is under way between India and Pakistan on key disputes, local factors seeming to have little or no influence under such a positive environment.
  • During times of bilateral tension, however, as has been the case since 2009, the agreement tends to break down and CFVs are routine. During such phases, local factors tend to have a dramatic influence on ceasefire violations.
  • From a policy perspective, then, it is as important to focus on measures on the ground to sustain the ceasefire as it is to address the fundamental political dispute between the two countries.

About the Report

Ceasefire violations along the Line of Control and international border between India and Pakistan have over the last decade been the primary trigger of tensions and conflict between New Delhi and Islamabad in the long-disputed Kashmir region. This report, supported by the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) and based on extensive field visits to the border areas, in-depth interviews with Indian and Pakistani military officials, and several primary datasets explains the factors behind the violations and suggests ways to control them within the context of the broader bilateral political dispute.

About the Author

Happymon Jacob is associate professor of diplomacy and disarmament studies at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. He has previously worked with the Observer Research Foundation (New Delhi), University of Jammu (J&K), Central European University (Budapest), and the Jamia Millia Islamia University (New Delhi), has participated in or organized some of the influential India-Pakistan Track II dialogues, and has written extensively on India’s foreign policy, the Kashmir conflict, India-Pakistan relations, and security issues in South Asia.


Related Publications

Toward a Durable India-Pakistan Peace: A Roadmap through Trade

Toward a Durable India-Pakistan Peace: A Roadmap through Trade

Thursday, June 27, 2024

Despite a three-year long cease-fire along their contested border, trade and civil society engagement between India and Pakistan has dwindled, exacerbating the fragility of their relationship. With recently re-elected governments now in place in both countries, there is a window of opportunity to rekindle trade to bolster their fragile peace, support economic stability in Pakistan, create large markets and high-quality jobs on both sides, and open doors for diplomatic engagement that could eventually lead to progress on more contentious issues.

Type: Analysis

Economics

How Have India’s Neighbors Reacted to Its Election?

How Have India’s Neighbors Reacted to Its Election?

Tuesday, June 25, 2024

Narendra Modi was sworn in on June 9 for his third consecutive term as India’s prime minister. Public polls had predicted a sweeping majority for Modi, so it came as some surprise that his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) lost ground with voters and had to rely on coalition partners to form a ruling government. Although India’s elections were fought mainly on domestic policy issues, there were important exceptions and Modi’s electoral setback could have implications for India’s regional and global policies.

Type: Analysis

Global Elections & ConflictGlobal Policy

After India’s Surprising Elections, What’s Next for Modi’s Foreign Policy?

After India’s Surprising Elections, What’s Next for Modi’s Foreign Policy?

Tuesday, June 11, 2024

Widely expected to cruise to a third-straight majority in India’s parliamentary elections, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) instead lost ground and must now rely on its National Democratic Alliance partners, especially the Janata Dal (United) party and the Telugu Desam Party, to form a coalition government. While the stunning results will have immediate consequences for Modi’s domestic agenda, foreign and national security policies are not top priorities for India’s new parliament. Still, the political changes associated with coalition rule and the BJP’s unanticipated electoral setback could affect India’s international relationships in important ways.

Type: Analysis

Global Elections & ConflictGlobal Policy

What Does Further Expansion Mean for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization?

What Does Further Expansion Mean for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization?

Thursday, May 30, 2024

Last week, foreign ministers from member-states of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) gathered in Astana, Kazakhstan. The nine-member SCO — made up of China, India, Russia, Pakistan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan — represents one of the largest regional organizations in the world. And with the SCO’s annual heads-of-state summit slated for early July, the ministers’ meeting offers an important glimpse into the group’s priorities going forward. USIP’s Bates Gill and Carla Freeman examine how regional security made its way to the top of the agenda, China’s evolving role in Central Asia and why SCO expansion has led to frustrations among member states.

Type: Question and Answer

Global Policy

View All Publications