On 24 April 2025, in response to a series of steps taken by India following the recent terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), Pakistan issued a warning to suspend the 1972 Simla Agreement, which defines the 749-km-long Line of Control (LoC) that effectively divides J&K between India and Pakistan. The decision was made during a meeting of Pakistan’s National Security Committee, chaired by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. Following the meeting, a statement declared that Pakistan “shall exercise the right to hold all bilateral agreements with India, including but not limited to Simla Agreement, in abeyance”.
What is the Simla Agreement?
The Simla Agreement was signed on July 2, 1972, between Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and Pakistani President Zulfikar Ali Bhutto following the 1971 war that led to the creation of Bangladesh. It established key principles for bilateral relations, emphasizing peaceful dispute resolution, non-interference, and direct negotiations without third-party mediation. A significant outcome was the formal delineation of the LoC in J&K, replacing the 1948 ceasefire line, to serve as a mutually respected boundary.
While reaffirming the need for bilateral engagement, the Simla Agreement also solidified the LoC as the de facto border, though without prejudicing the final settlement of the Kashmir issue. It remains a cornerstone of Indo-Pak relations and is often referenced in international forums as a basis for dialogue.
Why is the Simla Agreement under threat now?
The latest diplomatic standoff was triggered by a deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam on April 22, 2025. The attack claimed 26 lives— 25 Indian nationals and one Nepali citizen—and injured more than 20 others. The Resistance Front (TRF), a proxy of the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba, claimed responsibility.
India responded with a set of punitive measures, including suspending the Indus Waters Treaty, closing the Attari border crossing, and tightening military deployments along the LoC.
Pakistan responded to India’s moves by closing its border, suspending trade, and banning Indian flights. The reaction—especially the threat to abrogate the Simla Agreement—indicates the gravity with which Pakistan views India’s post- attack posture. Pakistan asserted that India should refrain from its reflexive blame game and cynical, stage-managed exploitation of incidents like Pahalgam to advance its narrow political agenda. It also warned that such tactics—amplified by the extremely irresponsible warmongering of state-controlled Indian media—only inflame tensions and obstruct prospects for regional peace and stability.
What are the implications of suspending the Simla Agreement?
If Pakistan proceeds with suspending the Simla Agreement, it would mark a significant rupture in the foundational framework that has guided India-Pakistan relations for over five decades. A suspension could imply a reversion to the 1949 Ceasefire Line (CFL)—a vague and outdated demarcation lacking the relative stability and mutual understanding associated with the current LoC. Such a move would not only reignite territorial disputes but also significantly increase the risk of military confrontation, especially in contested sectors of the LoC.
Moreover, suspending the Simla Agreement could bring renewed attention to the 1949 Karachi Agreement, which established the initial ceasefire line under United Nations supervision. This shift risks reversing decades of bilateral understanding and reintroduce the international community into an issue India firmly considers bilateral. This move would not only undermine the core principle of the Simla framework but also signal Pakistan’s willingness to abandon direct dialogue in favour of external intervention—a red line for India.
Reactivating the UN’s role, particularly through the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP), would mark a tectonic diplomatic shift and threaten to reopen the Kashmir dispute on the global stage. Increased UN involvement could complicate conflict resolution, fuel geopolitical rivalries, and severely disrupt regional stability. India regards any such move as an unacceptable intrusion into its internal matters and a dangerous precedent that would erode trust and diplomatic progress between the two countries.
India’s official response: What has been said?
India has not issued an official public statement directly addressing Pakistan’s threat to suspend the Simla Agreement. However, government sources have conveyed that Pakistan should first address cross-border terrorism before questioning bilateral accords. They emphasized that Pakistan’s actions, including the threat to suspend the Simla Agreement, are viewed as attempts to divert attention from its own internal challenges and to internationalize the Kashmir issue which India considers a bilateral matter.
While India has refrained from escalating rhetoric, it remains vigilant and prepared to take necessary measures to protect its sovereignty and citizens. From India’s perspective, Pakistan’s threat of abrogation is viewed as a provocative step with serious implications for regional stability.
What lies ahead?
Analysts are divided on whether Pakistan will follow through with the suspension or use the threat primarily as leverage in negotiations. The use of the term “abeyance” leaves room for interpretation, potentially allowing Islamabad to walk back or recalibrate its decision without causing irreversible diplomatic damage.
Nevertheless, the immediate outlook remains tense. Any miscalculation along the LoC could trigger further escalation. The threat to the Simla Agreement adds another layer of complexity to an already volatile relationship.
India is likely to intensify its diplomatic outreach to rally international support against terrorism and reaffirm its interpretation of bilateral frameworks. Simultaneously, backchannel diplomacy—often mediated/conducted via third parties like the UAE or Saudi Arabia—could play a crucial role in defusing tensions.
The warning to suspend the Simla Agreement marks a serious downturn in India-Pakistan relations. It reflects the volatile interplay of terrorism, geopolitics, and nationalist posturing that continues to shape South Asia’s security architecture. As both nations navigate the post-Pahalgam landscape, the fate of the Simla Agreement could be pivotal in determining whether India and Pakistan remain locked in a spiral of confrontation or find a path back to cautious dialogue.
