India Pakistan Ceasefire: How Global Powers Are Shaping South Asia’s Future. India and Pakistan have a long-standing history of unresolved tensions, with the Kashmir conflict persistently straining bilateral relations.
While the core issues remain unresolved, both nations have historically adhered to certain unwritten rules that helped prevent major escalations. These measures enabled some stability, keeping hostilities from spiraling out of control.
However, the most recent flare-up shattered these norms, pushing both countries dangerously close to open conflict. This escalation occurred amidst global indifference, as international players showed minimal interest in de-escalating the crisis.
The United States, once a prominent mediator, initially distanced itself. US Vice President J.D. Vance even stated that a potential conflict between India and Pakistan was “none of our business.” Despite this public stance, behind-the-scenes diplomacy revealed ongoing American efforts, which eventually played a part in brokering a ceasefire.
Saudi Arabia took a more active diplomatic role this time. While it’s unclear whether Riyadh can match the historical influence once wielded by Washington or Moscow, the Kingdom has recently positioned itself as a key global mediator. It has engaged in peace efforts in Africa and even attempted to mediate in the Russia-Ukraine war — all while maintaining strong ties with both Moscow and Western powers.
The UAE, too, is expanding its diplomatic influence. It was instrumental in facilitating the 2021 ceasefire between India and Pakistan, halting persistent border clashes since 2019.
Despite these efforts, the entrenched nature of the India-Pakistan conflict — especially over Kashmir — calls for a fundamentally new diplomatic strategy. Saudi Arabia has become increasingly assertive on the world stage, deepening ties with India under Prime Minister Narendra Modi and recalibrating its approach toward Muslim-majority South Asian countries, including Pakistan. Yet, whether Riyadh holds sufficient sway over New Delhi remains uncertain.
The recurring debate around third-party mediation resurfaces each time conflict escalates. Although India and Pakistan insist on bilateral dialogue, both have historically relied on international actors to help de-escalate. Still, they’ve shown they can cooperate directly — the Non-Attack Agreement of 1988 is a prime example, where both countries continue to share the coordinates of their nuclear sites every January.
The 1972 Simla Agreement, with American backing, aimed to ensure peaceful dispute resolution and prevent unilateral changes along the Line of Control. However, India’s recent indication of exiting the Indus Waters Treaty prompted Pakistan to question the Simla Agreement’s validity, raising concerns about the sanctity of the LoC.
Previous accords, including the Karachi Agreement (1949), the Tashkent Declaration (1966), and the 2003 ceasefire agreement, also reflect significant, albeit temporary, strides towards peace — often driven by foreign mediation.
Extensive research by regional and international scholars, diplomats, and policy experts consistently highlights a critical factor: the role of political leadership. Sustained peace demands leaders brave enough to confront entrenched power structures and reshape public sentiment.
Today, such leadership is sorely lacking. The Indian government, led by the BJP, has adopted a hardline approach, favoring unilateral decisions over dialogue. Its move to revoke Article 370 in Kashmir in August 2019 and its current stance on the Indus Waters Treaty violate established bilateral and international norms.
India-Pakistan conflict resolution. Peace negotiations are further undermined by the absence of strong civil society lobbies in both nations. Although a bilateral framework addressing key concerns like Kashmir and terrorism exists, it requires bold political will and a long-term vision to yield real results.
In times of intense conflict, third-party intervention may not solve the underlying issues but can provide a critical pause to de-escalate tensions and foster dialogue.
True diplomatic progress will demand wider international engagement. While China’s role is expected due to its alliance with Pakistan, India views its involvement with skepticism. Russia, too, faces limitations because of its strategic ties with India. Meanwhile, organizations like the UN, OIC, EU, ASEAN, and SCO lack the influence to decisively mediate.
With the latest ceasefire now in place, both India and Pakistan are at a pivotal moment — an opportunity to reconsider the long-term costs of conflict and embrace the potential for a renewed, peaceful engagement.