The third issue in the negotiations is Kashmir.

In fact, relatively speaking, this problem is not a problem.

Although the Indian military government initially insisted that the Pakistani army withdraw to the position it had held before the conflict, i.e., to give up the occupied Indian-administered Kashmir, everyone knew that the Pakistani authorities would never agree, and the Indian military government was unlikely to adhere to this principle.

Let's not forget that if the Indian military government adheres to this principle, there will be no need for armistice negotiations between the two sides.

India's military government insists on the withdrawal of Pakistani troops from Indian-administered Kashmir, both for the sake of face and for the sake of gain.

During this period, Indian border guards also harassed the Pakistani army on several occasions.

Of course, the results were all one-sided.

After more than a month of deployment, the Pakistani army has completed the construction of a defensive line and has deployed a large number of combat troops in Kashmir.

At that time, Pakistan deployed hundreds of heavy artillery pieces in the area alone.

Fortunately, the Pakistani authorities have been very restrained and have only responded to the provocations of the Indian army without expanding the scale of the conflict.

Of course, the Pakistani authorities have repeatedly warned the Indian military government that truce talks would break down if the border friction is allowed to develop.

The point is, what exactly does the Indian military government want to gain?

At that time, the Indian military government was nothing more than trying to occupy a few pieces of land in the southern part of Kashmir, that is, near Jammu, in order to claim that it still controlled a part of Kashmir, and that it was not defeated in Kashmir, at least not completely.

Just, is it possible?

If the Indian army can really take advantage of the battlefield, will it sit down and negotiate with Pakistan?

Besides, if the Pakistani authorities are not sure enough that they will occupy the entire Kashmir region and resolutely refrain from negotiating the matter with the Indian military government?

It can be said that there is no need to talk about this matter at all, and there is no need to talk about it.

However, because the Indian military government was unwilling to compromise, the third phase of the negotiations dragged on for more than a month, and there were many threats of breakdown.

According to incomplete statistics, nearly 3,000 Indian officers and soldiers were killed or injured in the conflict in the past month or so.

Pakistan also had some losses, but not too severe.

Of course, for the Indian military authorities, the conflict in the border area of Kashmir has had a very serious, if not catastrophic impact, on their dominance at home, or on the situation in India, which in turn proves the status quo in India.

What is the current situation?

War weariness.

In fact, to put it more bluntly, it is the high level of dissatisfaction of the people with the military government.

You know, the military government can get the support of the people, especially the people in the northwest region, to a large extent, it is willing to sit down and negotiate with Pakistan, and through negotiations to resolve the dispute, so as to end the war that has affected all Indians.

Now, the military government refuses to talk, what does that mean?

Could it be that for the sake of Kashmir, which is impossible to reclaim, continue to fight with Pakistan?

To put it bluntly, what the Indian people need now is peace, not war.

What's more, even if it continues to fight, India will not be able to regain the lost Kashmir region.

Because the Indian military government insisted on going its own way and wanted to entangle with the Pakistani authorities over the Kashmir issue, in the past month or so, riots broke out in various parts of India, especially in the northwest region, where there was turmoil in many cities, and even problems in the army.

Why?

Even Indian officers and soldiers don't want to fight!

The results are clear.

Forced by the domestic situation, the Indian military government could only compromise in negotiations.

On the 157th day of the war, the Indian military government finally agreed to the compromise plan proposed by the Security Council, that is, to leave Kashmir's sovereignty aside for the time being, and after the signing of an armistice agreement, the Security Council would organize comprehensive negotiations between India and Pakistan on this issue.

To put it simply, it is to implement the armistice issue first.

Of course, the status quo must be maintained.

Subsequently, the Indian military government and the Pakistani authorities reached a basic agreement to reduce the likelihood of clashes between the two armies during daily patrols by withdrawing 5 kilometers each of the border guards in the direction of Kashmir and establishing a 10-kilometer wide isolation zone.

In order to implement the agreement, both sides agreed to have a United Nations observer mission to oversee its implementation.

As for the cost of building the quarantine zone, both sides will bear their own costs.

Of course, this is for the future.

It was not until two years later, after India had completed general elections and the military government handed over power to an elected government, that India withdrew from the border areas as agreed.

Because the Indian army did not retreat, neither did the Pakistani army.

After that, it took three years for each side to complete the construction of the entire military separation zone under the supervision of the United Nations delegation.

Although the Indian authorities have not compromised on the issue of sovereignty and continue to claim Kashmir as Indian territory, India has completely lost the opportunity to seize and control Kashmir unless it once again risks defeat and starts a large-scale war.

Since then, the negotiations have entered the fourth phase.

Of course, there are no critical issues at all at this stage.

Why?

The discussion is about disarmament.

What can be discussed?

Of course, it is the Indian military government that wants disarmament.

Why?

If Pakistan does not disarm, India will not be able to disarm, and what India needs most now is to use its limited resources for nation-building.

That said, India does have pressure to disarm.

The point is, does Pakistan need to be disarmed?

Although during the war, Pakistan also mobilized and the size of the army was expanded, but the mobilized personnel were actually reservists, which could be dismantled after the end of the war, and there was no need for large-scale disarmament, after all, Pakistan's military scale itself was not very large.

That is, the Pakistani authorities do not want to talk about this issue at all.

If there is no need for disarmament, what is there to talk about?

After several consultations, the Indian military government abandoned the topic.

Quite simply, if Pakistan remains on the scale of its pre-war military, then the threat to India is not very great, and it still has to adopt a strategic defensive posture.

Since there is no threat, then what is there to talk about?

By the 178th day of the war, the two sides had finally agreed on all issues.

Two days later, in the presence of more than a dozen members of the UN Security Council, the plenipotentiaries of India and Pakistan signed a formal armistice.

It's just an armistice, not a peace agreement.