The words describing the temporary or permanent halting of hostilities in times of armed conflict and war are many. The four most frequently referred-to terms are cease-fire, humanitarian pause, truce, and armistice. All these terms have specific legal and practical meanings that are important to know for their application in conflict resolution and with the recent happenings in the Ukraine-Russia and Israel-Palestine conflict, readers should be acquainted with what these words actually mean.
Cease-fire
A cease-fire is a formal agreement between the parties in conflict to stop fighting for a certain period. It is often part of broader peace negotiations aimed at achieving a long-term resolution to the conflict. According to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, a ceasefire is usually intended to open up an avenue for dialogue and may apply to the whole geographical area of conflict. While it does not mark the end of a war, it provides a framework for negotiations that may result in a more enduring solution.
The term “cease-fire” is, of course, derived from the military order to the troops to stop their activities. A cease-fire can be thought of as a tactical interlude permitting the contending parties to regroup and to begin talking about possible peace settlements. There have been cease-fires in the Korean War and throughout the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict where the combatants agreed to temporarily stop hostilities in order to talk or permit humanitarian efforts5.
Humanitarian pause
Whereas a ceasefire is more general, a humanitarian pause refers to the temporary cessation of hostilities purely for humanitarian purposes. The latter allows, among others, the delivery of food, water, and medicine to the affected populations in situations of armed conflict. The UN describes it as a measure requiring the agreement of all the parties concerned, usually limited in time as well as in its geographical scope.
Humanitarian pauses are commonly invoked in the heat of conflict, where civilian populations are under grave humanitarian duress. For example, during recent fighting in Gaza, there have been demands for humanitarian pauses to permit access by aid while ensuring that hostilities do not restart immediately following the delivery of such aids. Unlike cease-fires, which aim at broader political dialogue, humanitarian pauses focus on the amelioration of human suffering.
Truce
A truce is a type of informal agreement where the parties to the conflict agree to a temporary stop in hostilities. This may be done without formal documentation or international supervision, and can be based on tacit or mutual understanding. Truces have limited objectives, such as retrieving wounded soldiers, burying the dead, or exchanging prisoners, among others.
Historically, truces have been used in many different conflicts, including several prominent examples during World War I where soldiers on both sides put down their arms to celebrate Christmas together. These types of informal agreements demonstrate glimpses of humanity within battles, but do not always lead to longer term peace talks.
Armistice
An armistice is an official agreement among fighting sides to cease hostility and is considered more binding than a ceasefire or truce. Unlike those other terms, an armistice is generally the result of extended negotiations and can include terms in regard to military position and future conduct pending peace talks. It doesn’t end a war but suspends it while a permanent peace treaty is worked out.
Armistices have long formed turning points of sorts in conflicts. For instance, the Korean War ended in 1953 with an armistice agreement that called a ceasefire without concluding with a peace treaty. To this day, this has made for very tense relations on the Korean Peninsula.
Read more: Who is Lori Chávez-DeRemer, Trump’s pick to be the new Secretary of State for Labor
Read more: What is water fluoridation, the system that RFK Jr. wants to eliminate when he becomes Secretary of State for Health and Human Services
