Bangkok--Dec 17--MFA
Director Captain Adul Pinsuvana,
Members of the Board of Directors of the AUA Language Center,
Teachers,
Honoured Guests,
Distinguished Graduates,
It is an honour to be invited to deliver this year’s commencement address.
First of all, my sincere congratulations to all of you the graduates of the AUA Language Center. You have rightly earned your certificates through, I presume, hard work, dedication and certainly honesty. These are values that I hope will remain with you always.
You have also gained another strong asset. And that is a better understanding of the English language. This is what the AUA Language Center has given you, as it has done for many other graduates throughout the years.
So congratulations also to the AUA Language Center for producing yet another fine crop of graduates.
I have pondered truly on what I should discuss at this graduation exercise. In view of what the graduates have been educated in, I thought perhaps I could talk a little about language. My remarks will thus focus on Language and Diplomacy -- the importance of good use of language in the art of diplomacy in which I have practiced all my life.
Rest assured, graduates, that there will not be any quizzes afterwards!
Distinguished Graduates,
Language is the primary tool of diplomats who, in turn, are the chief communicators of messages between Governments. The position of diplomat as messenger was, and, I hope, still remains, sacrosanct. Hence the term “Don’t kill the messenger” -- an appropriate motto for us diplomats.
Indeed, in less modern times, to ensure that messages were truthfully conveyed and that harmful influences were not disseminated to a receiving country, the Diplomat had to go through purification rituals. According to Sir Harry Nicolson in his book “Diplomacy”, envoys to the Tartar Khans were required to pass through fire before they can deliver their messages. I guess that this is the diplomat’s version of “trial by fire”.
Thankfully, I did not have to go through any of this purification challenges while I was serving as ambassador. Diplomacy fortunately also benefits from progress!
A good diplomat is often characterized as someone who is able to tell another person to do something in such a manner that the other person actually feels good about complying with the request. So diplomacy requires careful use of language. The message conveyed is usually couched in very polite terms.
Take the following example of diplomatic correspondence in the early 20th century, drawn from “A Guide to Diplomatic Practice” by Sir Ernest Satow. It is about the reaction of one government to the decision of another to build a canal. The passage reads, with modifications, like this:
I wish to add before closing that it is only with great reluctance that my Government have felt bound to raise objection on the grounds of treaty rights. … Animated by an earnest desire to avoid points which might in any way prove embarrassing to your Government, my Government have confined its objections within the narrowest possible limits and have recognized in the fullest manner the rights of your country to control the canal.
I have a quiz for you now. Did anyone fully understand what was just said? It is all right if you do not. Well, what the diplomat was trying to say is: “You have the right to control the canal. We are objecting to only a small aspect of this issue. So don’t be too upset.”
The passage may seem long and complex. But the use of superlatives was deemed necessary to ease the impact of an objection on the overall good relations between the two countries. This is a large part of what diplomacy is all about -- maintaining good relations through appropriate use of language.
Distinguished Graduates,
Sometimes, the use of a single word can affect adversely relations between States. One may recall the use of one word several years ago that affected relations between two countries in the Asia-Pacific region.
In a heated exchange of words through the media, one leader called the other a “recalcitrant” which means obstinately defiant. Upon deeper examination, it refers to horses, in the literal sense “to kick back”, and is related to the expression “stubborn as a mule”, according to “Webster’s Dictionary of Word Origins”. Things got from bad to worse when the word recalcitrant was translated into the local language of the other country where it could imply “an obstinate child”.
No one likes being compared to a stubborn mule or an obstinate child. As you can imagine, relations between the two countries did not fare well at that time. In diplomacy, as in life, one can never be too careful with words.
Distinguished Graduates,
Sometimes, the use of “foreign language” in diplomacy can bring about better results than expected.
In 1996, right before the historic first Asia-Europe Meeting or ASEM Summit in Thailand, former French President Jacques Chirac started his keynote address marking a new French policy towards Asia with the words, “J’aime l’Asie”. (I love Asia).
These words were awe inspiring in and of themselves. But the English translation that was eventually circulated was even more beautiful -- it was “I have a love affair with Asia”. This phrase evokes many sentiments, from affinity to romance. Although written in English, the sentiments conveyed were so French! French speakers among you would hopefully agree with me.
This set a very positive tone for the successful Summit in Bangkok. Here was a case where a less literal translation brought about an even more positive result in diplomacy.
As the above anecdote indicate, the use of foreign words can convey a strong message in diplomacy. But the translation had better be correct!
Chirac benefited from it. Others may not be so lucky.
It is told that in negotiations between two countries, neither of which had English as their mother tongue, confusion broke out when the rank of Permanent Secretary -- the highest rank in the civilian bureaucracy -- was translated into English as “eternal typist”. No wonder questions were raised as to the mandate of this Permanent Secretary!
In the old days, interpretation had to be made through a commonly understood third or even fourth language. In the era of Thai diplomacy prior to the late 19th century, when knowledge of European languages was severely limited, some of the negotiations between Thai and Western powers had to be interpreted through several languages.
The Treaty of Amity and Commerce between Siam and the United States of 1833, for example, had to be written in four languages! English, Portuguese, Chinese and Thai. Because the Thais did not understand English and the Americans did not understand Thai. Matching texts in Portuguese for the Americans and Chinese for the Thais had to be made.
Things got better in the late 19th century onwards when Their Majesties King Rama IV and King Rama V pursued reform and modernization of the nation, leading to greater awareness of European languages and modern diplomacy.
Thus, by the time Prince Wan Waithayakon Krommun Naradhip Bongsprabandh was able to negotiate in the 1920s a special Convention involving the Mekong River with the Government General of Indochina under France, interpreters were no longer needed.
Here, the Thai side insisted that the Mekong was an international river while the other side, contrary to previous agreement, regarded it as a French river. To break the deadlock, the Thai side tactically withdrew its insistence and instead suggested that the Mekong was a frontier river, which the other side could not but agree. This had the ultimate effect of reaffirming what had already been recognized in the past -- that the Mekong serves as an international boundary. Through a simple change in words, a vital national objective was achieved.
Distinguished Graduates,
While the words used by diplomats may seem tedious to some and even confusing to others, they nevertheless form part of a growing lexicon of diplomatic terms. They are “code words” that enable diplomats to convey finely tuned messages to their counterparts.
Thus, while the phrases, “I note”, and “I acknowledge with appreciation” and “I welcome” may not seem too different from one another to many observers, they do indicate fine variations in emphasis that are so important in diplomacy. Choice of words becomes even more crucial in multilateral diplomacy such as at the United Nations where 192 nations sometimes have more than 192 interpretations of what a certain word means!
But sometimes it is better NOT to be clear.
Take the issue of terrorism for example, an issue made more urgent by the events of 9/11. Some countries feel that one needs to address the root cause of terrorism while others feel that emphasis on root causes detracts attention away from the acts of terrorism themselves. This has led to heated debates on whether one can use the words, “root causes” of terrorism.
Alternatives were suggested over the years such as “underlying causes”, which was deemed as a compromise because “underlying” was not as deep as “root”. Preliminary agreement was reached on wording to the effect that the causes are “multi-dimensional in nature” because it could refer to anything, root or underlying, depending on who is speaking.
This is what is meant by constructive ambiguity. By not being clear, everyone can still feel that their interpretation is correct and therefore they claim victory. This is also part of diplomacy.
Dear Graduates,
And finally what of Thai itself? How has the Thai language played a role in diplomacy?
Well, it has in its small way, and we can be proud of it. Indeed, the Treaty of 1833 between Siam and the U.S. referred to previously, in its preamble, affirms the sincerity of friendship and commercial intercourse between the two nations “so long as heaven and earth shall endure.”
This has its roots in the Thai text “ตราบชั่วฟ้าและดิน”, a very pretty phrase indeed, which is part of the language of Thai diplomacy and treaty making at that time.
But the reality is that, for the foreseeable future, English will still be the main language of diplomacy.
As I look at usage of English, I am reminded of the 1964 hit musical “My Fair Lady” starring Audrey Hepburn. For most of you, this may be long before your time! In that musical, the character Prof. Henry Higgins, played by Rex Harrison, sang a song on the English language as it was used in certain countries and chided that “in America, they have not spoken it for years”.
I hope that the AUA and all you graduates will prove Prof. Higgins/Rex Harrison wrong!
I hope that all of you graduates will continue to appreciate better the language in which you have been trained and use it well and correctly in the years ahead.
In closing, allow me to give three small pieces of advice with regard to language use.
First, say what you mean and mean what you say. It is always good to be truthful. But, when possible, be diplomatic as well. It will help you to achieve your goals with perhaps greater ease.
Second, education in languages, including English, is a lifelong commitment. Languages evolve, they do. So to be constantly proficient in it, one must continue to study and practice it. Otherwise, you will be considered to be out-of-fashion by the next generation!
And third, do not forget your Thai. It is our language with a proud history and a beauty of its own. Continue to cherish it. Moreover, the effectiveness of your use of English in Thailand can only be enhanced with good understanding of Thai.
I look forward to the continued success of the AUA Language Center and its contributions in promoting correct use of the English language.
But more importantly, I look forward to your contributions, distinguished graduates, to the continued progress of this country and to your own successes.
And should some of you wish to practice the use of language in diplomacy, do give me a call.
Thank you.
Prime Minister at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Press Division, Department of Information Tel.(02) 643-5170
Fax. (02) 643-5169 E-mail : div0704@mfa.go.th End.
-PM-
Director Captain Adul Pinsuvana,
Members of the Board of Directors of the AUA Language Center,
Teachers,
Honoured Guests,
Distinguished Graduates,
It is an honour to be invited to deliver this year’s commencement address.
First of all, my sincere congratulations to all of you the graduates of the AUA Language Center. You have rightly earned your certificates through, I presume, hard work, dedication and certainly honesty. These are values that I hope will remain with you always.
You have also gained another strong asset. And that is a better understanding of the English language. This is what the AUA Language Center has given you, as it has done for many other graduates throughout the years.
So congratulations also to the AUA Language Center for producing yet another fine crop of graduates.
I have pondered truly on what I should discuss at this graduation exercise. In view of what the graduates have been educated in, I thought perhaps I could talk a little about language. My remarks will thus focus on Language and Diplomacy -- the importance of good use of language in the art of diplomacy in which I have practiced all my life.
Rest assured, graduates, that there will not be any quizzes afterwards!
Distinguished Graduates,
Language is the primary tool of diplomats who, in turn, are the chief communicators of messages between Governments. The position of diplomat as messenger was, and, I hope, still remains, sacrosanct. Hence the term “Don’t kill the messenger” -- an appropriate motto for us diplomats.
Indeed, in less modern times, to ensure that messages were truthfully conveyed and that harmful influences were not disseminated to a receiving country, the Diplomat had to go through purification rituals. According to Sir Harry Nicolson in his book “Diplomacy”, envoys to the Tartar Khans were required to pass through fire before they can deliver their messages. I guess that this is the diplomat’s version of “trial by fire”.
Thankfully, I did not have to go through any of this purification challenges while I was serving as ambassador. Diplomacy fortunately also benefits from progress!
A good diplomat is often characterized as someone who is able to tell another person to do something in such a manner that the other person actually feels good about complying with the request. So diplomacy requires careful use of language. The message conveyed is usually couched in very polite terms.
Take the following example of diplomatic correspondence in the early 20th century, drawn from “A Guide to Diplomatic Practice” by Sir Ernest Satow. It is about the reaction of one government to the decision of another to build a canal. The passage reads, with modifications, like this:
I wish to add before closing that it is only with great reluctance that my Government have felt bound to raise objection on the grounds of treaty rights. … Animated by an earnest desire to avoid points which might in any way prove embarrassing to your Government, my Government have confined its objections within the narrowest possible limits and have recognized in the fullest manner the rights of your country to control the canal.
I have a quiz for you now. Did anyone fully understand what was just said? It is all right if you do not. Well, what the diplomat was trying to say is: “You have the right to control the canal. We are objecting to only a small aspect of this issue. So don’t be too upset.”
The passage may seem long and complex. But the use of superlatives was deemed necessary to ease the impact of an objection on the overall good relations between the two countries. This is a large part of what diplomacy is all about -- maintaining good relations through appropriate use of language.
Distinguished Graduates,
Sometimes, the use of a single word can affect adversely relations between States. One may recall the use of one word several years ago that affected relations between two countries in the Asia-Pacific region.
In a heated exchange of words through the media, one leader called the other a “recalcitrant” which means obstinately defiant. Upon deeper examination, it refers to horses, in the literal sense “to kick back”, and is related to the expression “stubborn as a mule”, according to “Webster’s Dictionary of Word Origins”. Things got from bad to worse when the word recalcitrant was translated into the local language of the other country where it could imply “an obstinate child”.
No one likes being compared to a stubborn mule or an obstinate child. As you can imagine, relations between the two countries did not fare well at that time. In diplomacy, as in life, one can never be too careful with words.
Distinguished Graduates,
Sometimes, the use of “foreign language” in diplomacy can bring about better results than expected.
In 1996, right before the historic first Asia-Europe Meeting or ASEM Summit in Thailand, former French President Jacques Chirac started his keynote address marking a new French policy towards Asia with the words, “J’aime l’Asie”. (I love Asia).
These words were awe inspiring in and of themselves. But the English translation that was eventually circulated was even more beautiful -- it was “I have a love affair with Asia”. This phrase evokes many sentiments, from affinity to romance. Although written in English, the sentiments conveyed were so French! French speakers among you would hopefully agree with me.
This set a very positive tone for the successful Summit in Bangkok. Here was a case where a less literal translation brought about an even more positive result in diplomacy.
As the above anecdote indicate, the use of foreign words can convey a strong message in diplomacy. But the translation had better be correct!
Chirac benefited from it. Others may not be so lucky.
It is told that in negotiations between two countries, neither of which had English as their mother tongue, confusion broke out when the rank of Permanent Secretary -- the highest rank in the civilian bureaucracy -- was translated into English as “eternal typist”. No wonder questions were raised as to the mandate of this Permanent Secretary!
In the old days, interpretation had to be made through a commonly understood third or even fourth language. In the era of Thai diplomacy prior to the late 19th century, when knowledge of European languages was severely limited, some of the negotiations between Thai and Western powers had to be interpreted through several languages.
The Treaty of Amity and Commerce between Siam and the United States of 1833, for example, had to be written in four languages! English, Portuguese, Chinese and Thai. Because the Thais did not understand English and the Americans did not understand Thai. Matching texts in Portuguese for the Americans and Chinese for the Thais had to be made.
Things got better in the late 19th century onwards when Their Majesties King Rama IV and King Rama V pursued reform and modernization of the nation, leading to greater awareness of European languages and modern diplomacy.
Thus, by the time Prince Wan Waithayakon Krommun Naradhip Bongsprabandh was able to negotiate in the 1920s a special Convention involving the Mekong River with the Government General of Indochina under France, interpreters were no longer needed.
Here, the Thai side insisted that the Mekong was an international river while the other side, contrary to previous agreement, regarded it as a French river. To break the deadlock, the Thai side tactically withdrew its insistence and instead suggested that the Mekong was a frontier river, which the other side could not but agree. This had the ultimate effect of reaffirming what had already been recognized in the past -- that the Mekong serves as an international boundary. Through a simple change in words, a vital national objective was achieved.
Distinguished Graduates,
While the words used by diplomats may seem tedious to some and even confusing to others, they nevertheless form part of a growing lexicon of diplomatic terms. They are “code words” that enable diplomats to convey finely tuned messages to their counterparts.
Thus, while the phrases, “I note”, and “I acknowledge with appreciation” and “I welcome” may not seem too different from one another to many observers, they do indicate fine variations in emphasis that are so important in diplomacy. Choice of words becomes even more crucial in multilateral diplomacy such as at the United Nations where 192 nations sometimes have more than 192 interpretations of what a certain word means!
But sometimes it is better NOT to be clear.
Take the issue of terrorism for example, an issue made more urgent by the events of 9/11. Some countries feel that one needs to address the root cause of terrorism while others feel that emphasis on root causes detracts attention away from the acts of terrorism themselves. This has led to heated debates on whether one can use the words, “root causes” of terrorism.
Alternatives were suggested over the years such as “underlying causes”, which was deemed as a compromise because “underlying” was not as deep as “root”. Preliminary agreement was reached on wording to the effect that the causes are “multi-dimensional in nature” because it could refer to anything, root or underlying, depending on who is speaking.
This is what is meant by constructive ambiguity. By not being clear, everyone can still feel that their interpretation is correct and therefore they claim victory. This is also part of diplomacy.
Dear Graduates,
And finally what of Thai itself? How has the Thai language played a role in diplomacy?
Well, it has in its small way, and we can be proud of it. Indeed, the Treaty of 1833 between Siam and the U.S. referred to previously, in its preamble, affirms the sincerity of friendship and commercial intercourse between the two nations “so long as heaven and earth shall endure.”
This has its roots in the Thai text “ตราบชั่วฟ้าและดิน”, a very pretty phrase indeed, which is part of the language of Thai diplomacy and treaty making at that time.
But the reality is that, for the foreseeable future, English will still be the main language of diplomacy.
As I look at usage of English, I am reminded of the 1964 hit musical “My Fair Lady” starring Audrey Hepburn. For most of you, this may be long before your time! In that musical, the character Prof. Henry Higgins, played by Rex Harrison, sang a song on the English language as it was used in certain countries and chided that “in America, they have not spoken it for years”.
I hope that the AUA and all you graduates will prove Prof. Higgins/Rex Harrison wrong!
I hope that all of you graduates will continue to appreciate better the language in which you have been trained and use it well and correctly in the years ahead.
In closing, allow me to give three small pieces of advice with regard to language use.
First, say what you mean and mean what you say. It is always good to be truthful. But, when possible, be diplomatic as well. It will help you to achieve your goals with perhaps greater ease.
Second, education in languages, including English, is a lifelong commitment. Languages evolve, they do. So to be constantly proficient in it, one must continue to study and practice it. Otherwise, you will be considered to be out-of-fashion by the next generation!
And third, do not forget your Thai. It is our language with a proud history and a beauty of its own. Continue to cherish it. Moreover, the effectiveness of your use of English in Thailand can only be enhanced with good understanding of Thai.
I look forward to the continued success of the AUA Language Center and its contributions in promoting correct use of the English language.
But more importantly, I look forward to your contributions, distinguished graduates, to the continued progress of this country and to your own successes.
And should some of you wish to practice the use of language in diplomacy, do give me a call.
Thank you.
Prime Minister at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Press Division, Department of Information Tel.(02) 643-5170
Fax. (02) 643-5169 E-mail : div0704@mfa.go.th End.
-PM-