Sunday, May 18, 2025

Kyiv Gains a Small but Important Victory in Istanbul: Its Delegation Brings a Translator

Paul Goble

            Staunton, May 17 – Journalists from around the world have been trying to find clues as to what actually happened at the meeting of the Russian and Ukrainian delegations in Istanbul. But in their rush to give one or another side points on this or that question of how to end the war in Ukraine, overwhelmingly they have missed what may be the most important development.

            And that is this: the Ukrainian side brought a translator to the meeting, a clear diplomatic signal that from Kyiv’s point of view, its negotiating team was meeting with a foreign, even alien power and not a fellow member of the Russian-language community Putin talks so much about and that if accepted gives the Kremlin yet another undeserved victory from the outset.

            Nadezhda Pototskaya, a Ukrainian consultant on strategic communications and the head of the Kyiv Center for Economic Recovery, explains what the Ukrainian action matters and why it should be the model for the future (nv.ua/opinion/russkiy-ukrainskiy-o-chem-govorit-perevodchik-na-peregovorah-s-rossiey-v-stambule-50514731.html).

            Her words are so important that below is a translation into English of her article:

Although these negotiations did not end with concrete peace agreements, there was a small victory for Ukraine: our delegation invited an interpreter. The negotiations were conducted with his participation.

We do not know the exact details of this decision, the conversations, or what languages ​​were spoken there, but the effect is powerful.

Ukrainian negotiators not only distanced themselves from the language of the aggressor for protocol's sake but also demonstrated to all participants in the process — including international ones — that they were not dealing with a "single people." In fact, they were dealing with two different countries: the dictatorship and tyranny of the Russian Federation on the one hand, and a free and independent Ukraine, on the other.

A specific message was conveyed: we are different, Russian has long ceased to be a “common and unified language,” and we even need a translator. We have different values, different futures, different states.

This is an important statement not only for Russia, which still fantasizes about Ukraine as part of itself. This act is important for us as well.

The gesture in which we emphasize our own subjectivity works for the future. Language is not only a means of communication. It is an indicator of belonging, position, values.

Language is not only a means of communication. It is an indicator of belonging, position, and values.

That is why empires begin with language - as a carrier of power, influence, control.

In the occupied territories, the Russians first of all change the signs to Russian and introduce the Russian language and history in schools and kindergartens. Then they destroy those who resist. The first step of the Russian occupation - after the physical seizure of territory and freedom - is language. It becomes a tool for imposing informational and mental occupation.

No matter how much we talk about democracy and free choice, choosing Russian in 2025 is voluntary support for Russia (its present and future). You can speak Ukrainian, English, French, or freely choose hundreds of languages, but there is a specific language that helps the enemy - Russian. After all, the language children speak is the language they will think in, receive information in, and be influenced by.

In international diplomacy, symbols are no less important than statements. An interpreter at negotiations is a demonstration: we are not adapting but forming new rules. This is a gesture not only against Russia. This is another reminder to our partners that Ukraine is not just geographically but mentally and culturally not part of the "post-Soviet space."

That every "let's do it without a translator, we all understand" is a trap in which boundaries are erased. Because that's exactly how Russification has been going on for centuries: "it's easier that way", "everyone understands everything", "don't get political", "don't complicate things".

Ukrainians should not use Russian. We are no longer obliged to “politely” accept it in our lives: neither at the everyday nor at the diplomatic level. We should not “switch” — even for the sake of convenience or diplomacy. On the contrary — the diplomacy of the future should be built on principle and clear cultural boundaries.

A translator is a tool that makes our border visible. The border is not only geographical, but also linguistic, mental, and value-based.

Even if each participant in the negotiations understands Russian well, using Ukrainian or English with translation is not a loss of efficiency. This is a clear framework. We are the subject.

While children are forced to sing the Russian anthem in temporarily occupied territories, while they are kidnapped and killed for speaking Ukrainian, every diplomatic gesture in favor of the Ukrainian language is an act of dignity. Every “please translate,” “give me English” is a reminder: we are not brothers. We are not “almost agreed.” We are negotiating with an aggressor, not a partner.

Therefore, any official conversation, any document, any public statement should sound in Ukrainian or internationally — in English. Because the language is Ukraine. And every time it sounds in an international context — we become visible, understandable, heard. On our own terms.

 

No comments:

Post a Comment