Answer

The Simla Agreement (1972), signed by India and Pakistan post the Bangladesh Liberation War, provided a framework for peaceful resolution of disputes, bilateral dialogue, and respecting the Line of Control (LoC). Pakistan’s recent suspension of the Simla Agreement after the Pahalgam terror attack marks a serious diplomatic rupture.

A Significant Shift in Indo-Pak Relations

• Undermining of Bilateralism Principle: The Simla Agreement affirmed that disputes would be resolved bilaterally; its suspension opens doors for internationalisation of the Kashmir issue.
  For example: Pakistan has already raised Kashmir more aggressively at platforms like the OIC 2024 meeting and at the UN General Assembly.
• Erosion of Existing Conflict Management Frameworks: The Agreement provided guidelines for maintaining the sanctity of the LoC; its suspension weakens mechanisms to de-escalate border tensions.
• Reversal of Past Diplomatic Progress: Previous confidence-building measures (CBMs) such as cross-LoC trade, bus services, and people-to-people ties were anchored in the spirit of Simla.
• Greater Strategic Alignment with China: By discarding Simla’s commitment to bilateralism, Pakistan may strengthen its dependency on China’s support, deepening India’s two-front security challenge.
  For example: The Pakistan-China Joint Statement (2024) reiterated joint opposition to Indian policies in Jammu & Kashmir.
• Shrinking Scope for Future Peace Talks: The Agreement, despite limitations, provided a reference point for dialogue; without it, future negotiations may become more polarised and conditional.
  For example: Analysts fear that platforms like Track II dialogues and back-channel diplomacy will become harder to revive without a common diplomatic foundation.

Implications for Regional Peace

• Escalation of Cross-Border Skirmishes: The suspension undermines respect for the Line of Control (LoC), leading to higher chances of ceasefire violations and military clashes.
  For example: The 2021 India-Pakistan LoC ceasefire understanding could weaken, risking a return to frequent shelling incidents seen during 2016-2018.
• Destabilisation of South Asia’s Fragile Security Balance: Growing mistrust between India and Pakistan could impact the broader South Asian peace framework and regional cooperation.
  For example: The virtual collapse of SAARC summits post-2016 Uri attack already reflects the fragility of South Asian integration efforts.
• Encouragement to Non-State Actors and Terror Groups: The breakdown of bilateral norms emboldens terror outfits operating from Pakistan-occupied territories.
  For example: Groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed could exploit the diplomatic vacuum to escalate cross-border attacks, as seen in Pulwama (2019).
• Internationalisation of the Kashmir Issue: Pakistan may aggressively lobby for third-party intervention, creating external pressure and potential geopolitical instability.
  For example: Pakistan’s recent push at the OIC (2024 meeting) sought to bring Kashmir back into international focus, although India has strongly opposed such attempts.
• Potential Arms Race and Militarisation: Increased border tensions can trigger an arms build-up, diverting scarce regional resources away from development priorities.
  For example: India’s defence budget rose by over 12% in 2024, partly to counter sustained security threats along the western front.
• Humanitarian Fallout on Border Communities: Renewed tensions adversely impact civilian life along the border, leading to displacement, disruption of livelihoods, and human rights concerns.
  For example: Villages along the LoC in Poonch and Rajouri districts faced large-scale displacements during ceasefire violations in early 2024.

Implications for Bilateral Diplomacy

• Collapse of Bilateral Dialogue Framework: The Simla Agreement served as the foundation for direct talks; its suspension removes a key platform for future structured negotiations.
• Revival of Third-Party Mediation Pressures: Pakistan may seek international intervention, challenging India’s consistent position that Kashmir and other issues are bilateral matters.
• Deepening Diplomatic Freeze and Mutual Distrust: The diplomatic missions in each other’s countries may remain downgraded, limiting normal consular and citizen-to-citizen engagement.
  For example: Following the Pahalgam terror attack (2025), India expelled Pakistani military advisors, withdrew Indian counterparts, and reduced High Commission staff.
• Complications in Regional and Multilateral Forums: India and Pakistan’s confrontation could paralyse regional groupings and complicate agendas at platforms like SCO, SAARC, and even G-77.
  For example: At the SCO Foreign Ministers’ Meeting (2023), Pakistan opposed India’s chairmanship over Kashmir references.
• Hardening of Visa Regimes and People-to-People Barriers: With tensions high, cross-border movement of scholars, artists, pilgrims, and divided families will continue to suffer.
  

Way Forward after the Suspension of the 1972 Simla Agreement

• Reaffirm Commitment to Bilateralism at Global Forums: India must consistently highlight the principle of bilateral dispute resolution under the UN Charter to prevent internationalisation of Kashmir.
  For example: At the UN General Assembly (2024), India reiterated that Jammu & Kashmir is an internal matter, rejecting third-party interventions.
• Enhance Diplomatic Outreach to Isolate Pakistan’s Narrative: Build stronger coalitions with countries like the US, France, UAE, and ASEAN to neutralize Pakistan’s international propaganda.
  For example: The India-France Strategic Dialogue (2024) included commitments against cross-border terrorism and upholding territorial sovereignty.
• Invest in Regional Connectivity and Alternative Partnerships: Focus on SAARC-minus-Pakistan initiatives, BIMSTEC, IORA, and Central Asia connectivity to dilute Pakistan’s relevance in regional frameworks.
  For example: The operationalisation of the Chabahar Port Project (2024) strengthens India’s access to Afghanistan and Central Asia bypassing Pakistan.
• Promote Development and Normalcy in Jammu and Kashmir: Accelerate socio-economic development, investment promotion, and political integration in J&K to deny space for external interference.
  For example: Since the abrogation of Article 370 in August 2019, Jammu and Kashmir has received investment proposals worth Rs 1.63 lakh crore.
• Continue Firm but Calibrated Military Posture: Maintain operational readiness while avoiding unnecessary escalation; respond decisively to provocations without appearing aggressive internationally.
  For example: India’s Balakot airstrikes (2019) demonstrated calibrated use of force without crossing into full-scale war.

The suspension of the Simla Agreement signals a retrogression in Indo-Pak relations, undoing decades of hard-won diplomatic mechanisms. India must respond with measured firmness reaffirming its territorial sovereignty, strengthening global partnerships.

DOWNLOAD PDF