The longevity of the recent ceasefire between India and Pakistan hinges on sustained diplomatic engagement, mutual trust-building, and addressing the underlying issues that have historically fueled tensions. After months of rising conflict between the two nuclear-armed states, a ceasefire was arranged with U.S. help. After 26 people were killed in an attack in Indian-administered Kashmir on April 22, 2025, India blatantly charged Pakistan without any shred of evidence and attacked multiple Pakistani areas with air-to-ground missiles. Because of the airstrikes, a large number of people, including women and children, were killed, and dozens of others were injured, and Pakistan was compelled to retaliate. Pakistan responded with a calculated operation called ‘Bunyaan un Marsoos’ by targeting Indian military installations from where attacks were lodged on Pakistani civilians. The conflict brought the two nuclear countries very close to nuclear war. The global community’s mediation and the nature of escalation led the two countries to accept the cease-fire brokered by the United States.

Due to the possible devastation of the conflict, the U.S. encouraged both countries to stop fighting and reach a truce. When Donald Trump said the United States would bring an immediate end to the conflict, it was celebrated as progress toward peace. The choice was then approved by both countries in writing, which being only a ceasefire, caused the fighting to stop for a while. Even though there is now a ceasefire, stability remains a challenge in the first period following the fighting. Only hours after the ceasefire was announced, stories of clashes and shelling appeared. With violations and suspicion surrounding the deal, people are raising doubts about whether the peace agreement can survive.

Its involvement in the ceasefire is clear through what both its diplomats and military do. Both Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar quickly assured everyone that Pakistan intends to honor the ceasefire, while Dar encouraged peace talks through regular negotiations with India. Pakistan has made clear it is ready for a composite dialogue with India to discuss key problems such as Kashmir, water problems and terrorism across the border which have long divided the two nations. Under Genera Asim Munir, Pakistan’s military has acted cautiously, avoiding aggressive moves in the first days after the ceasefire agreement. Being restrained against provocations proves that Pakistan is eager to maintain peace in the near future.

Moreover, both China and other leading countries have strongly supported the ceasefire. Wang Yi, China’s Foreign Affairs Minister, promised that China helps both states take part in open talks and reach a lasting agreement. China has stressed that Pakistan’s ally and has underlined solving the main disputes in the region, among them Kashmir. Because of support from both the United States and China and from the worldwide community, the atmosphere for dialogue has improved. Because all these countries have backed India, it is clear that regional stability in Asia matters a lot due to the chance that any dispute between India and Pakistan could become a crisis for the world.

The longevity of peace can be questioned as there has not yet been a resolution to the Kashmir dispute. For over seventy years, Kashmir has caused tension because both India and Pakistan want it as part of their own countries. Not dealing with this problem by negotiating has led to cycles of escalated violence, and only short ceasefires usually result. Ending the fighting in 2025 is good, but the agreement did not address why the situation happened. If the two sides do not negotiate over Kashmir, the ceasefire could easily end up being just a short break from fighting.

The nature of the diplomatic and political connection between India and Pakistan challenges the success of the ceasefire. The support for Prime Minister Narendra Modi in India may affect his government’s approach to peace. The Indian National Congress and other opposition parties have said Modi is exploiting the ceasefire to help the ruling party. A number of analysts suggest that Modi used the ceasefire as a way to improve his image before the 2019 elections. In Pakistan, shifts in leadership or results from elections could impact the country’s efforts for peaceful resolution. Both nations face unstable politics, so a change in leadership could change the ceasefire’s strategy and jeopardize its staying power.

The strength of the ceasefire also depends on how the economy is doing. Poverty, unemployment, and unequal development in different regions are big economic challenges for both India and Pakistan. These problems in the economy frequently lead to higher political tension, as concerns about national security come before those about looking after the home population. Even after the COVID-19 pandemic has passed, India and Pakistan are both feeling the negative effects on their economies. Since military conflict draws money away from economic activity and cuts off trade, it strongly influences the way both countries respond to a ceasefire. If peace continues for some time, both these nations would be able to put more money into building their economies and less into defense.

The ceasefire shows hope for de-escalation and prevailing sense among the two countries’ leadership, but its continuation can still not be guaranteed. The Kashmir issue, constant political shifts, and economic issues on both sides endanger the lasting stability of peace in South Asia. Although both diplomacy and international aid add hope to the situation, the ceasefire will not be permanent unless the main problems, such as the Kashmir Dispute, are addressed.