VINOD BHAT
NEW DELHI, July 31: The Government of India on Thursday reaffirmed that the Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) of Pakistan had approached his Indian counterpart on May 10, 2025, requesting a halt to cross-border firing and other military activities amid escalating tensions during Operation Sindoor. The request, according to the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), was accepted by India the same day, resulting in an agreement on cessation of hostilities through direct military-to-military communication, with no involvement of any third party.
Responding to a written query in the Rajya Sabha, Minister of State for External Affairs Kirti Vardhan Singh made it clear that the ceasefire was the outcome of a bilateral and direct understanding between the two DGMOs, denying any foreign mediation.
“There was no third-party intervention. On May 10, the DGMO of Pakistan reached out to his Indian counterpart for cessation of firing and military operations, which was mutually agreed upon the same day,” Singh stated categorically. “The understanding was arrived at directly between the two Director Generals of Military Operations.”
In a follow-up query, Kerala MP Haris Beeran, a member of the Indian Union Muslim League, asked whether any formal bilateral agreement had been signed post the ceasefire. To this, Singh replied with a simple “No”, further emphasizing the informal yet official nature of the mutual understanding.
Earlier on July 25, the Government had made a similar statement in the Lok Sabha, stating that the initiative for ceasefire came from Pakistan and the engagement between the DGMOs was conducted through direct channels. Singh had also reiterated India’s “focused, measured and non-escalatory” approach during this period, adding that all global interlocutors were briefed consistently.
In a separate question raised in the Rajya Sabha on Thursday, the Ministry of External Affairs was asked how Pakistan, widely seen as a hub of terrorism, was allowed to assume important roles within the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) structure.
Minister Singh clarified that the appointment of chair and vice-chair positions for UNSC subsidiary bodies is part of a routine annual allocation process, determined by consensus among member states. “As per established practice, all chair and most vice-chair roles are offered to non-permanent members,” he explained.
For the 2025–26 term, Pakistan, a non-permanent member of the UNSC, has been appointed Chair of the 1988 Sanctions Committee (Taliban) and Vice-Chair of the Counter-Terrorism Committee (UNSC Resolution 1373), alongside Russia and France.
Elaborating on Pakistan’s limited responsibilities, Singh said, “As Chair, Pakistan’s role is primarily procedural – to convene meetings, facilitate discussions, and coordinate among members to implement the mandate of Resolution 1988.” He emphasized that all decisions in these committees are taken by consensus, ensuring no single nation, including Pakistan, can independently steer the agenda.
Similarly, Singh said that Pakistan’s Vice-Chair role in the Counter-Terrorism Committee is largely ceremonial, limited to logistical support for smooth functioning. “No individual country, regardless of designation, can unilaterally influence the agenda or content of discussions,” he reiterated.
Responding to another question, Singh provided details about recent all-party parliamentary delegations sent abroad in the wake of the Pahalgam terror attack and Operation Sindoor. The objective was to rally global support against terrorism and counter Pakistani propaganda on Jammu and Kashmir.
“Seven delegations comprising Members of Parliament from various political parties and former diplomats visited 33 countries, meeting key figures across governments, legislatures, think tanks, media and the Indian diaspora,” Singh said.
These delegations, he noted, “informed their counterparts about the long history of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism in India, the recent Pahalgam attack, and India’s security response through Operation Sindoor.”
According to Singh, the global reception to the delegations was positive. “All interlocutors unequivocally condemned terrorism against India and many recognized India’s right to defend itself. The delegations were successful in both exposing Pakistan’s terror links and countering disinformation on Kashmir,” he said.
