Islamabad, Pakistan - The May 10 ceasefire pulled India and Pakistan back from a mature war four days after a rapidly escalating military tensions pulled India and Pakistan back from a mature war four days after the narrative battle had already erupted, with each country claiming to be “victory” between each other.

The conflict broke out on April 22 when the gunmen killed 26 civilians in Pahalgam, India-managed by Kashmir. A little-known armed group, the Resistance Front (TRF), initially claimed responsibility, and India accused Pakistan of supporting it. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi promised retaliation, although Pakistan denied any role in the attack.

Tensions exploded militarily after a series of diplomatic measures taken between neighbors. In the early morning of May 7, India launched missiles to the described "terrorist" base, not only in Kashmir, managed by Pakistan, but also in four locations in Punjab, Pakistan.

Over the next few days, both sides launched killer drone strikes on each other's territory and blamed each other for launching attacks.

Tensions peaked on Saturday when India and Pakistan fired missiles at each other's military bases. India initially targeted three Pakistani air bases, including Rawalpindi, a Pakistani city, which is home to Pakistan's army headquarters, and then launched projectiles at other Pakistani bases. Pakistan's missiles targeted military devices across the entire border of Kashmir managed by India, with at least four facilities.

Then, as the world prepares for a full-scale war between nuclear-weapon neighbors, U.S. President Donald Trump declares a ceasefire, which he claims was mediated by the United States. Pakistan thanked the United States, even though India's insistence on a stop to the fight was made only by the two neighbors without any third-party intervention.

Since the announcement, both countries have held press conferences and provided "evidence" of "achievement". Senior military officials in India and Pakistan spoke over the phone on Monday, promising to maintain a ceasefire in the coming days.

However, analysts say neither side can truly claim a clear huge crisis from the April 22 crisis. Instead, India and Pakistan can demand strategic gains, they say, even if they suffer losses.

Kashmir Internationalization: Pakistan’s Reap

Last week's military standoff - like three of the four wars between India and Pakistan, stemming from a dispute between the two countries in the Kashmir region.

Pakistan and India manage two narrow stripes together with Kashmir, as well as China. India claims all Kashmir, while Pakistan claims part of India, but not an ally of Islamabad China.

After the war between India and Pakistan in 1971, this led to the signing of the Simla agreement between Bangladesh, New Delhi and Islamabad, which was committed among other things to “resolve their differences through peaceful means through bilateral negotiations”.

Since then, India has argued that the dispute in Kashmir and other tensions between neighbors can only be resolved bilaterally without tripartite intervention. However, Pakistan cited UN resolutions to call on global communities to play a role in promoting solutions.

Trump said on Sunday that the United States is ready to help mediate the resolution against the Kashmir dispute. The US President posted on his Truth Social Platform: "I will join you both to see if there is a solution in Kashmir."

Walter Ladwig, senior lecturer at King's College in London, said the latest conflict gave Pakistan an opportunity to internationalize the Kashmir issue, which is its long-standing strategic goal.

"Islamabad welcomes mediation from various countries, including the United States, to construct the final ceasefire as evidence that requires external participation," Ladwig told Al Jazeera.

By contrast, he said India must accept a ceasefire outside, rather than ending the conflict on its own terms.

Sudha Ramachandran, South Asia editor of Foreign Ministry magazine, said Modi's government in India may have strengthened its nationalist support base through its military actions, although it may also lose some domestic political views in the ceasefire.

"It was able to score on its nationalist hawkish support base. But the ceasefire wasn't going well in the hard forest," Ramachandran said.

Emphasizing "terrorism": India's harvest

However, analysts also said the spiral of tensions last week and the trigger in the form of Pahalgam attacks helped India.

“Diplomatically, India has successfully refocused the international focus on Pakistan’s armed groups, and updated its call for meaningful action from Islamabad,” Radwig said.

He mentioned that “the reputational cost of Pakistan (to Pakistan) is once again associated with the radical groups operating from its soil”.

Ladwig added: "Although Islamabad denies participation and calls for a neutral investigation, the burden of proof of the international forum is increasingly based on Pakistan to show positive counter-terrorism efforts."

India has long accused Pakistan of financing, training and asylum armed groups in support of Kashmir's separation from India. Pakistan insists that it only provides diplomatic and moral support to the separatist movement in Kashmir.

The plane may be a gain from Pakistan

India claims its strike killed more than 100 "terrorists" on May 7. Pakistan said Indian missiles hit mosques and residential areas, including 40 civilians, including children, in addition to 11 military personnel.

Islamabad also claims it disrupted its fighter jets in response and lowered multiple Indian jets.

India neither confirmed nor denied these claims, but Pakistan's military publicly shared details about the shot down aircraft. French and U.S. officials have confirmed that at least one gust of wind and a Russian-made jet were lost.

Indian officials also confirmed to Al Jazeera that at least two planes crashed on Indian managed territory without clarifying the country they belong to.

Analysts say India and Pakistan agree that jets on both sides crossed the border and there were debris on planes crashed on Indian managed territory, suggesting they may be Indians.

Following the ceasefire, Asfandyar Mir, a senior researcher at Stimson Center in Washington, D.C., expressed benefits for Pakistan’s gains. "In particular, the landing of aircraft confirmed through various independent sources. Therefore, it (Pakistan) may think that the ceasefire is better for consolidating the dividend."

Muhammad Shoaib, an academic and security analyst at Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad, called India's strike against Pakistan a strategic miscalculation. "They have flaws in reading Pakistan's ability to repel," he said.

However, Ludwig said it is wrong to exaggerate the importance of Pakistan's success, such as the landing of Indian jets. "These are symbolic victory at best. They do not represent clear or clear military rewards," he said.

India's harvest may be a harvest that goes further across borders

Analysts say in many ways that the more military achievement is.

On May 7, Indian missiles also targeted four locations in Punjab, Pakistan’s most populous state and the country’s economic neurological center.

Over the next two days, India also fired drones that reached the depths of Pakistan's region, including Pakistan's main population centers such as Lahore and Karachi.

On May 10, Indian missiles hit three Pakistani air bases, deeper in the depths of Punjab in Pakistan than the Indian bases that Pakistan hit that day.

In short, India has a greater influence than Pakistan. This is the first time since the 1971 war, India managed to attack Punjab.

Ramchandran said that the de facto borders of the two countries in Kashmir not only launched a military response across the entire control, but also going deep into Pakistan has been India's main target. India achieved this goal.

Ludwig also said India's success against Punjab achieved a serious violation of Pakistan's defensive posture.

Will the ceasefire be held?

Military officials from both countries spoke on Monday and agreed to a ceasefire, and agreed to take immediate measures to reduce the presence of troops along the border. A second round of dialogue is expected to be held within 48 hours.

But later that day, Indian Prime Minister Modi said the fight was only a "pause".

Still, Mir at the Stimson Center believes a ceasefire may take place.

“Both sides face restrictions and opportunities that emerged in the last week, making the ceasefire a better outcome for them,” he said.

Ladwig responded to this view, saying the truce reflects a common interest in downgrades, even if it does not resolve tensions that lead to the crisis.

"India has changed the rules of the game significantly in this episode. The Indian government seems to have completely gotten rid of the game, which has led to the first families of Islamabad and Rawalpin claiming reasonable denial of anti-Indian terrorist groups," he said.

“What the Pakistani government and military and groups on the soil do seem to be a key factor in determining the robustness of the ceasefire.”

Shoaib of Quaid-i-Azam University is also a researcher at George Mason University in the United States, stressing the importance of ongoing dialogue.

He warned that peacekeeping would depend on security dynamics in Kashmir, which is managed by India and in Pakistan's Bal Luchistan province.

Just as India accused Pakistan of supporting cross-border separatism, Islamabad claims that New Delhi supports Balochistan's separatist insurgency, a claim that India denies.

"Any violence that follows can become more bloody and more common," Shoaib said. "Both sides are fighting for loss, which can cause significant damage to the urban population without getting anything from the conflict."