If we can spend billions of dollars (estimated) invading Iraq, might we spend a few million dollars teaching useful foreign languages to our diplomats and students? The New York Times has a brilliant story about a shortage of diplomats willing to work in edgy countries and a paucity of language skills among the few who are ready to forego Paris for, say, Pakistan. “While newly minted diplomats are more eager than ever to serve their country and even express interest in hardship assignments, they are quick to say they would avoid places that might pose a risk to their families,” the Times reports. “As the State Department scrambles to fill the holes, it is turning to employees who do not have adequate language skills. In China, 62 percent of the Foreign Service officers did not meet the language proficiency requirements for their positions, the G.A.O. found. In Russia, 41 percent of the officers do not speak Russian…Even diplomats whose chief duty is to explain American policy to foreign populations are often unable to speak the language. In Pakistan, five public diplomacy positions in three cities were held by employees with insufficient language skills, the G.A.O. found. In Saudi Arabia, the head of public outreach for an American consulate spoke no Arabic.”
The State Department is not to blame; America’s educational system is at fault. How many high schools teach Arabic? Or Urdu or Mandarin? And how many teach French? Unfortunately, America needs people who understand the language of bin Laden, not Voltaire. Every college student who is taking a year off in Paris (as I did many years ago), or who is studying in any Western European capital, should be offered a free ticket to Cairo or Amman or, for that matter, Beijing or Jakarta. These days, it’s much better, and more interesting, to study in the Third World than on the Left Bank.
