40 years ago January 20, 1986: Pakistan’s doublespeak

India and Pakistan failed to resolve their differences over preparing a single comprehensive draft, with Pakistan sticking to its reservations on the question of military bases and acceptance of the principle of bilateralism in settlement of disputes. However, on the second day of the talks, Pakistan put forward a revised draft giving new formulations regarding these two issues. Pakistan had now said that the proposed comprehensive treaty should contain a provision that both the countries should not allow their territories to be used by others against each other. But it was not prepared to commit itself that it will never allow a foreign military base to be established by a third country.

The Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi, said that he saw no reason why Chandigarh should not be transferred to Punjab on January 26 as stipulated in the Punjab accord. On whether the Centre would be intervening to settle the row between Punjab and Haryana over the transfer of Chandigarh, Gandhi said: “Let us wait for the Mathew Commission report”. Kanwar Lal Gupta, former MP and a national executive member of the Bharatiya Janata Party, died in New Delhi after a prolonged illness. The 62-year-old veteran parliamentarian was cremated at the Nigambodh Ghat.

Warring South Yemen Marxist factions were reported to have accepted a Soviet plan for disengagement of forces after radical pro-Moscow elements announced that the pro-Arab President, Ali Nasir Mohammed, had been removed. The government-run North Yemen Radio said that the agreement was reached during the talks held in Aden, and will involve the restoration of water and electricity to the besieged city.

Overall Analysis

This editorial-style historical excerpt captures the complexity and contradictions in South Asian diplomacy during the mid-1980s, particularly in India–Pakistan relations. The central focus is Pakistan’s ambiguous negotiating posture, aptly described as “doublespeak”. While Pakistan appeared to move forward by offering revised formulations during talks, it simultaneously avoided firm commitments on critical security issues, especially the presence of foreign military bases. The language highlights how apparent flexibility masked continued strategic hedging.

The piece also reflects the broader diplomatic ethos of the time, where bilateralism was a contentious principle. Pakistan’s reluctance to fully accept bilateral dispute resolution underscores a lack of trust and strategic clarity, reinforcing the theme of inconsistency. The measured yet sceptical tone suggests that revisions in diplomatic drafts were tactical rather than substantive.

Interspersed domestic political updates — Rajiv Gandhi’s remarks on the Chandigarh transfer and the death of Kanwar Lal Gupta — mirror the journalistic style of the era, where national and international developments were reported side by side. These sections are factual and restrained, serving as contextual anchors rather than analytical arguments.

The final paragraph shifts to West Asian geopolitics, reporting developments in South Yemen. Its neutral and reportorial language contrasts with the implicit criticism in the India–Pakistan section, yet it reinforces the global atmosphere of ideological conflict and Cold War influence that shaped diplomatic behaviour worldwide.

Important Vocabulary (5)

1. Doublespeak – deliberately ambiguous or evasive language used to conceal the truth.
2. Bilateralism – the conduct of relations between two states without involving third parties.
3. Stipulated – clearly specified or demanded as a condition.
4. Disengagement – withdrawal or separation of military forces.
5. Besieged – surrounded and cut off, especially during conflict.

Conclusion & Tone

The excerpt illustrates how diplomatic negotiations can be undermined by strategic ambiguity and selective commitments. Pakistan’s shifting stance exemplifies how dialogue without clarity breeds mistrust, while the broader reporting reflects a period marked by political uncertainty and geopolitical tension.

Tone: Factual, restrained, and subtly sceptical — blending diplomatic reportage with implicit critique.