When I first saw Saving Private Ryan, the character I attached to almost immmediately after hearing his story was "Corporal Upham", who was brought on the near-suicide mission because he spoke French and German. Granted, wars are not expected to pop up in large European countries anytime soon, but in a way I've shaken in my boots since watching the scene in which Upham is recruited, causing me to imagine myself in his shoes almost simultaneously. In light of me having gotten my selective service card today in the mail (surprise!), the subject of what I would do with myself were I ever to be in a multilingual war has been scurrying about in my head. In the end, if either Spanish or French were primary languages of said hypothetical conflict, I would opt to be an interpreter. But is such a post any more or less dangerous than that of a unilingual, traditional footsoldier?
In the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, translators and intepreters face much of the same dangers as Coalition forces do. Although the large majority of interpreters are native to the particular country, they risk being killed if found out; to many communities, working with the U.S. military equates you with being a traitor. Some interpreters even hide when the find out they might be called up for an imminent job. Even more risky to the survival of soldiers, civilians, and missions, however, is the fact that many interpreters do not speak fluently some of the languages they say they do. An interpreter named only as Yousef--for security reasons--said that a town's pastures for grazing, populated by and governmentally designated for a myriad of livestock, were mortared and destroyed due to Yousef's confusion of the army word "illume" (for "flare") with "mortar" in the language of Pashto, which he had lied about speaking fluently. The livestock were largely massacred and the ISAF (international forces) had to repay the villagers. It gets worse; whole towns of civilians have been destroyed due to misunderstood army messages (which even a fluent speaker of both English and Pashto would have a hard time understanding and translating without a solid comprehension of official army jargon). In our contemporary wars, this may portray an image of interpreters being incompetent and not worth our time. The opposite, however, can also be true.
Army Lt. Jason Faler grew so close with friend and translator Walid while in Iraq that Faler chose Walid as one of the very first people to hear of the Lieutenant's new child--news he recieved and happily dispersed while on duty in Baghdad. Since returning to the States, Lt. Faler has started the Checkpoint One Foundation, a fund that seeks to bring interpreters from Iraq and Afghanistan to the United States for a safer existence. Walid was the first recipient of this token of gratitude by the Lieutenant; since then, Faler has helped an Afghani couple move from San Francisco to a cheaper Portland, Oregon area suburb by the Falers for support. Since then, with help from :Lt. Faler to establish bank accounts, a steady income, and other fundamental components of a healthy life, the couple has been able to move to the East Coast and provide proudly for themselves. Faler hopes that someone with a stronger economic foundation can soon take the reigns of the Foundation to give a larger contingent of interpreters the free lives they deserve.
In the end, the dynamics of the relationship between soldiers and interpreters, as with interpreters and the success of missions in their native countries remain as murky as a botched translation itself. But who can deny the bravery of going against the expectations and threats of one's own community to help him or herself survive and/or to help along a cause that is misunderstood and rued within his/her society? To what extent ought we re-evaluate the interpreter-making process? In a conflict that so fundamentally relies upon good communication from one side to the other, interpretation is, no matter what, a subject that cannot be ignored or--even worse--intentionally cast aside in lieu of less co-operative military action.
What do you think?
Wow. What a powerful post, Dylan! I never realized interpreters were so integral to military success and cooperation. I can't imagine someone lying about being fluent in a job that important-- and hiding or winging it, like the interpreters in your articles did, is just horrible. What do you suggest the military change about its hiring policies and training in this field? Do you think recruiting from the CIA would be beneficial?
ReplyDelete