Tue, 23 Jun 2026 Kyiv 17:24Berlin 16:24London 15:24 UKR / DE / EN

Ceasefire or Armistice: What International Law Distinguishes

The agreement between Israel and Hezbollah is a ceasefire – a temporary halt to fighting. An armistice would be more binding under international law, and a peace treaty would be the best outcome.

Ceasefire or Armistice: What International Law Distinguishes
Photo: sueddeutsche.de

Israel and the Lebanese Hezbollah militia have agreed to a ceasefire, even if it appears fragile. A ceasefire refers to a temporary or interim cessation of hostilities; it is not a term under international law. In wars, this type of pause serves, for example, to recover wounded soldiers or conduct negotiations. A famous example is the unofficial “Christmas Truce” of 1914 during World War I, when German, British, and French soldiers laid down their arms over the holidays – only to resume shooting at each other soon after.

Armistice: More Binding and Comprehensive

More binding and comprehensive, however, is an armistice, which is regulated by Article 36 of the Hague Convention on Land Warfare: “An armistice suspends military operations by mutual agreement between the belligerent parties.” In the best case, the armed conflict is then ended by a peace treaty. Sometimes, however, it remains an armistice. The Korean War between the communist North and the South, supported by a U.S.-led UN alliance, was ended in 1953 by an armistice, which was never followed by a peace treaty.

Source: www.sueddeutsche.de