A Ceasefire agreement halts hostilities in an armed conflict and often sets the stage for a broader peace process. Its success depends on the ability to address the root causes of the conflict, as well as the capacity of the parties and non-state actors to negotiate a lasting settlement.

A ceasefire can be local, encompassing a specific geographic area, or general, applying to the whole conflict. It can also be of indefinite or limited duration. The choice of a ceasefire arrangement can significantly influence the outcome of a conflict and may have implications for the application of the jus in bello rules (see section II below).

Conflict parties agree on the terms of a ceasefire, which can include detailed provisions on objectives, timelines and security arrangements. Disputes over these aspects can sometimes prove challenging.

The precise wording of a ceasefire agreement is important militarily. This includes the delineation of buffer zones and a clear statement about the movement of troops during the ceasefire. Buffer zones may be supervised, and international peacekeeping forces are often involved in ensuring compliance with ceasefire agreements. Precise language may also help reduce the scope for’mistakes’ that could lead to renewed fighting.

In some contexts, a ceasefire is recommended or imposed by the UN Security Council, eg in Resolution 687 (1991) concerning the Iraq-Kuwait War and Resolution 1701 (2006) concerning the Israel-Hizbollah conflict in Lebanon. This imposes a legal obligation on the parties to respect and implement the terms of the ceasefire. It also allows the Security Council to authorize the use of external force in order to enforce its recommendation.