The term ‘ceasefire’ has been used loosely in recent conflicts, with continued fighting despite agreements. A ceasefire is supposed to be a temporary suspension of hostilities, but its meaning has become blurred.

History of Ceasefire

The concept of a ceasefire has been around since the mid-19th century, but its definition has evolved over time. The United Nations notes that there is no single, universally accepted definition of the term, leaving parties in armed conflicts to determine what it entails for their particular situations.

Recently, the US and Iran signed a memorandum of understanding that kicked off a 60-day period of negotiations to end the war. However, despite the agreement, fighting continued, and the US eventually decided to end the ceasefire. This raises questions about what constitutes a ceasefire and when it can be considered broken.

Expert Insights

Foreign policy experts say that a ceasefire is only as good as the fine print. ‘Ceasefire’ is a broad term, so it’s essential to be clear on what was agreed upon. For example, is the agreement short-term or long-term, and exactly what ‘fire’ the parties agree to ‘cease’?

Some experts argue that the term ‘ceasefire’ has lost its meaning, and new terms have been coined to describe situations where fighting continues despite agreements. For instance, when Israel continued to fire on Lebanon after a ceasefire was reached, some experts referred to it as a ‘less fire’ situation.

Original reporting: El Paso News (HLL/CB) — read the source article.