The French excluded from European defense. Financial mismanagement. Strategic error

(B2) It is a fact now. In CSDP missions and operations, in EU foreign policy, the only working language has become English, which has imposed itself insidiously, methodically and effectively. Speaking French is not only difficult, it has become impossible, due to the number of people who not only don't speak French but don't understand it (or don't want to understand it). It's even forbidden.

French forbidden

I witnessed it. I was invited to speak to the PPIOs (spokespersons and information officers) of the various missions/operations of Defense Europe. AT priori, a spokesperson for a European mission should be rather polyglot, able to express himself and communicate in any language... He is also paid for this (with a higher than average salary). That...that's the theory. In fact, it is the opposite. What was my astonishment in front of this assembly of wise and competent communicators, normally engaged on the basis of bilingualism (compulsory in the CFSP), to see that very few spoke or even understood French. English please ! I was literally 'called to order' by a civil servant when I dared to utter, aside, a few words of French with a French speaker in the audience (1).

A well-organized system

Is it an epiphenomenon, a one-off slippage? No. It's a well-organized system, now well-established, which was put in place to favor English and gradually eliminate French. It seems a long time ago when European advisers could 'switch' (to use an English term) from one language to another, with an ease and intelligence that not only made their remarks intelligible but could only arouse a real feeling of admiration.

Recruitment notices published in English only

To be sure of not recruiting French-speakers, all recruitment notices in CSDP missions are only published in English (see here), including details of positions, even in missions taking place in French-speaking countries: example for a recent call for recruitment for the mission in Niger, ... where French is more than recommended. The vast majority of job interviews are conducted in English. Result: not all agents speak French (and some do not understand it).

When you try to switch to French, the European diplomatic service server displays this. It's symbolic: 

Anglophones favored when hiring

In the other missions, if English is mentioned as compulsory, French is placed at best as a "desirable" in hiring. Training at the European Security and Defense College (of which France is nevertheless one of the most ardent defenders) takes place almost exclusively in English. And for English speakers (there may be excellent advisers who only speak English), the possibilities of developing or perfecting their French language skills seem to be the least of the worries of the European diplomatic authorities.

A practice aimed at the regression of the French language

Today, in certain missions, even established in French-speaking countries (Mali, Niger...), the working language is therefore English. Because " in Brussels not everyone speaks French says a participant in these missions. If only to be sure of being understood, it is therefore better to write in English. So we are recruiting English speakers. It's a vicious circle. To the point that European soldiers or agents are unable to understand their African interlocutors and are sometimes forced to resort to translators to make themselves understood.

english only to the European Defense Agency

This rule is not specific to the "operational", we note that this "all English" has become the rule throughout the European defense environment. Thus at the European Defense Agency, we decided for simplicity to communicate only in English. This in defiance of all the usual rules. It does not matter that France, together with Germany, are among the countries that contribute the most to defense capabilities and therefore have the largest range of specialists (with the United Kingdom now on its way out). Never mind that the very technical terminology of this agency deserves a translation (2).

Press releases from the High Representative in monolingual

Ditto, in the service of the High Representative of the Union, Federica Mogherini. The vast majority of press releases are only available in one language: English. Even the press releases that concern the French-speaking zone a little bit remain in English only, with the possible exception of West Africa. Example: the communicated on the EU and Africa or the speech of the High Representative at the University Institute of Florence (the very place where Jean-Claude Juncker decided to speak only in French because English was the language of the outgoing).

One in four press releases translated: often not the most important ones

Here, it is not a question of linguistic incompetence, all the communicators of the High Representative speak/understand French perfectly (and a whole series of other languages), like the High Representative herself and the management of the EEAS . It is a deliberate will (3). According to a survey we conducted, only one out of four press releases is available in French. It is a maximum. Not to mention the qualitative aspect. The most important, in political terms, are not translated (example recently the meeting with the Prime Ministers of the Balkans or the Quartet in Libya).

 Multilingualism Systematically Ignored

Worse, while a language version exists, already translated by other European services, the EEAS continues to offer only one language. This is the case with the press release on the future of defence, issued by the European Commission at the end of May.

Here is what the EEAS website shows:

When we click on the link, we see that the European Commission offers a translation of this press release in 22 languages!

This is not a simple linking error. It's almost systematic. We saw this when we wrote our book on CSDP. While all official decisions for the framing or launching of a mission are available in all the languages ​​of the European Union (since they have been published in the Official Journal), only one version is offered: English.

An illegal, inconsistent, inefficient system

This position is based on bases that are completely incomprehensible, first of all with regard to the European rules in use, but above all obsolete with regard to the necessities of modern communication and the strategic realities of today's world.

A serious miscommunication

At a time when Europe seems to have distanced itself from the peoples, when the populations have doubts about Europe's usefulness, when, despite everything, European defense and security remains one of the (rare) points of consensus, when in almost all countries, Europeans believe that we must have a foreign policy, not communicating in European languages ​​is a fundamental mistake. Especially in the age of the internet, which functions as a single gigantic well of information.

Not being available in French (or in other European languages) means depriving yourself of the ability to penetrate the majority of homes. European officials believe, naively, that everyone speaks English and communicates in English. This is false: in principle, a person of ordinary sensibility first searches in their natural language (especially on google which preferably records the language of the country where you live). If she can't find it, she'll move on. And it is only rarely that she will attempt a search in another language.

A financial mess

In terms of the use of public funds, this turns out to be a huge mess. As a matter of principle, European agents and civil servants are granted a salary higher than what would normally be practiced, in order to be able to attract multilingual and competent staff. Europe thus finds itself having to pay twice: extra wages for people who cannot speak and understand in the main European languages ​​and translation services. In addition, it requires citizens and the European press to translate European communication themselves. Which is a shame: Europe is no longer at the service of citizens. It is the citizen who becomes at the service of Europe.

A manifest illegality

The publication of recruitment notices in a single working language is a manifest illegality which has been regularly sanctioned by European justice. As for the requirement of a single working language and not the others, it must be, according to the judges, truly justified by the nature and activity of the job concerned. And this justification cannot normally justify the exception to the knowledge of at least two of the European working languages. Considering French as an optional language is at least (very) difficult to justify in an international environment. This illegality also places a formidable sword of Damocles on all agents hired under these procedures, it suffices that a "failure", a union or an association, or a Member State attack . And this one has a very good chance of being canceled.

A strategic mistake

Finally, and above all, this forced monolingualism is a strategic error. The Russians have understood very well the importance of French. Most of their diplomats speak the language of Molière (sometimes even in a very refined way). And the website Russia Today (in French) often comes first in an internet search on the topic of European defense or foreign policy. Ditto for the Chinese who, through the New China agency, offer a fairly complete service on the same themes, in several European languages. Finally, even the Americans now systematically translate all the important remarks on the international scene from their Ministry of Foreign Affairs, or even of Defence. Only the Europeans seem to have given up the fight. A cruel paradox: at a time when Europeans complain of being subjected to vast Russian "propaganda", they leave the Russian media free to translate their political thought as they see fit, because they prove unable (or unwilling) ) translate their own press releases into the main European languages ​​(4). In military terms, it has a word: lower arms, flee the battlefield, rout, betrayal... take your pick.

Comments

The AJE (association of European journalists), French section (of which I am a vice-president), sounded the alarm two years ago (read here). We had written to the various European authorities. We had received responses from each of the institutions... who had wanted to let it be known that they were well aware of this issue and that they were making an effort (5). Only one authority did not respond: the European diplomatic service and the authorities responsible for the CSDP. Rather paradoxical for a service that deals with international issues.

This European attitude, to say the least contemptuous, must change. It is no longer possible today for the European diplomatic authorities to play the ostrich, to consider that it is a "detail", an "omission" or a "technical problem" not to have the French version available. Or as a spokesperson told me: we don't have the money for that.

Communicating in a single language (English) is no longer enough. That time is over. This now amounts to serious misconduct. French, but also German, must be reintroduced as a compulsory language in all foreign policy communications. This is entirely possible, at no additional cost to the European institutions. All you have to do is recruit the right people or send them for training. Immobilism is no longer justifiable and justified.

(Nicolas Gros-Verheyde)

NB: By writing this article, I know that I am exposing myself to derogatory remarks or accusations of "little franchouillard". It is true that it seems so much more modern to be "fluent english"... The problem is not the use of one language or another, it is frenzied monolingualism. Because the use of a language is first and foremost an instrument of power and influence just as much as an instrument of communication. History teaches us that... Not to translate is obviously easier. Translation is not easy. It obliges, beyond literary translation, to understand and explain, to take risks and finally to clarify. We witness this daily: at B2, we regularly practice the translation of all official prose: English of course, but also German, Spanish, Italian, Polish among others. All this without a subsidy pesetas. It is however necessary if we want Europe to be understood on a daily basis. Why the European institutions, which have the means, cannot keep their commitment to ensure at least the translation of all their writings into the two or three most common languages ​​in Europe? It's a mystery that, for me, has only one answer: to keep power over others.

---

(1) Is it necessary to specify that I intervened completely free of charge to bring my testimony as journalists. We are in a complete reversal of the rule that the institution adapts to the language of the citizen. Here, it is the citizen who adapts.

(2) Translation requires perfect understanding of a technical term. It is therefore not a purely mechanical gesture.

(3) A European official explained to me (text): “ We don't have the means that the Americans have, it costs too much. And it's not up to us to do the translation... " No comment !

(4) A paradox taken to its climax, where to thwart Russian propaganda, the EEAS translated a speech by High Representative Federica Mogherini into Russian, but "forgot" to translate it into the other main European languages ​​(French, German, Spanish,...). As a result, the only excerpts from this intervention on the internet in these European languages ​​can be found... on Russia Today. We say thank you !

(5) The Council of the EU in particular has decided to make CFSP press releases available in both languages ​​within the same (or if not shorter) timeframe. With few exceptions, they kept their word. Which shows that with a little good will, it is quite possible.