Ceasefire holds between India and Pakistan despite accusations and diverging narratives

A fragile ceasefire between India and Pakistan, reached on Saturday after the deadliest fighting in decades, largely held on Sunday—even as both countries traded blame and offered conflicting versions of how the truce was brokered.

Despite mutual accusations of violations, calm largely returned on Sunday along the Line of Control between India and Pakistan, following a ceasefire agreement intended to end four days of intense cross-border attacks.

India reported breaches in the hours after the truce was announced. Its foreign secretary, Vikram Misri, cited “repeated violations of the understanding arrived at earlier this evening.” Pakistan, however, denied the claims, insisting its military upheld the ceasefire and instead pointed to Indian provocations.

By Sunday afternoon, hostilities had largely ceased. Omar Abdullah, chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir, said there were “no reports of ceasefire violations” that day, even as blasts had been heard in Srinagar the night before.

U.S. President Donald Trump welcomed the ceasefire, pledging to "increase trade, substantially, with both of these great Nations," and offered American support in resolving the Kashmir dispute. While Islamabad embraced the idea, New Delhi reiterated its opposition to any third-party mediation on the matter.

Pakistan’s military spokesperson, Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry, stated Sunday night that the armed forces were “holding the Line of Control ceasefire” with full certainty and discipline. India’s top military commander, Lieutenant General Rajiv Ghai, warned that further breaches would face a “fierce and punitive” response, but acknowledged that such agreements “take time to manifest on the ground.”

The ceasefire followed a deadly escalation triggered by an attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir, on Wednesday, which killed 25 Indian civilians and a Nepali national. India blamed cross-border militant groups and responded with drone and missile strikes targeting what it said were launch pads and supply centers in Pakistan. Pakistan responded in kind with its own strikes, including across the Indian border.

Each nation blamed the other for starting the hostilities. Civilian casualties mounted, and India raised alarms over Pakistani troop build-up near key sectors of the border.

On Saturday, Pakistan’s foreign minister, Ishaq Dar, said both sides had “agreed to a ceasefire with immediate effect,” underscoring Pakistan’s desire for peace and its stance on national sovereignty. India’s foreign secretary confirmed that military-to-military talks occurred earlier that afternoon, resulting in a decision to cease all operations by 17:00 local time.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that Washington had engaged with senior officials from both nations in the days leading up to the truce. He highlighted phone calls with Prime Ministers Narendra Modi and Shehbaz Sharif, as well as their national security advisers. Rubio said both countries agreed to consider broader talks.

However, an Indian official later clarified that no formal agreement had been made to begin negotiations beyond the ceasefire. The official emphasized that the ceasefire initiative was bilateral and stemmed from a direct military communication requested by Pakistan. Pakistan, on the other hand, cited international coordination and earlier outreach from India to justify its response.

Despite the differing narratives, the agreement has brought a much-needed pause in hostilities. Whether it leads to sustained peace or another cycle of violence remains uncertain.

Copied