Arabic handicap

Great piece in the Washington Post today about the problems facing Arabic language instruction and competence in the State Department and US government more widely.  I'm not going to summarize, it's worth reading the whole thing to see both the nature of the problem and the difficulties inherent in any of the possible solutions. 

Comments

[collounsbury]

That is an interesting piece indeed.

[praktike]

I sent her an attaboy. Good piece.

[Anna in Cairo]

This article is incredibly accurate. (I say this because it is the first time in living memory where there was a long news article from the mainstream media, on any subject that I personally know a lot about, that I thought was 100% accurate.)

When I had the 2 years of FSI training (93 - 95), I was a top student along with a military intelligence guy. I got a 3+/4 and he got a 4/3+ (speaking/reading). No one else came close to that and we were unusual in that we had had prior trainign to the FSI (I had had one year intensive at Georgetown in addition to informal practice with my husband, and he had had 6 months at DLI in Monterrey).

It is hard to expect the FS to spend more than the 2 years on any language because it costs an incredible amount of money to keep a FSO in training that long.

I agree with the writer of the article that they should try to do some targeted lateral recruitment of first or second generation descendants of Arab immigrants who have native fluency in both English and Arabic. (Like my kids, in a few years! Hint hint!) :)

[Michael]

Ditto, and it's especially nice to see it in WP, where it might actually make a difference.

There is one thing here that I can't quite puzzle out about the numbers. I have no experience with formal language training, so I'm sure I'm missing something. Why wouldn't someone who's built a working vocabulary (which would for Arabic be, I guess, on the level of 10K for FS-type activities?) and solid speaking foundation attain 4 levels on the FSI scale naturally, just by talking to people and exposure to the media over a couple years? Does the FS tend to rotate people to keep them from "going native" (as the French do, I think)? Are FS folks just too busy with other things? Natural aptitudes vary, of course, but I still can't understand that 27/200 ratio.

[collounsbury]

Michael

First, Arabic is diglossic. The language of the Media is one thing, the spoken language another. Rather like Latin to Spanish or French. Mere exposure is simply not going to do it, unless one is already fairly advanced, and has the time to focus on these things.

Second, yes, the American diplos get rotated I believe on a 3 year basis. Bloody annoying as the moment one of them starts getting useful he (or she) has to fuck off to another country, and as often as not, out of the region.

Now add to this there are serious, indeed enormous differences in Arabic intra region and between countries, that makes 'picking up' Arabic practically impossible for someone simply working in Embassy. Especially as the US facilities have become ridiculously difficult to get into (and the US diplos having a hard time getting out and about). If someone such as myself finds it annoying and sometimes difficult to have sustained contacts with US diplos, imagine "ordinary" people.

Further to that, their ordinary contacts are likely to be, all things being equal, of the Arab elite that speak European languages far, far better than they speak Arabic.

Looking at this in a practical working view, it makes great sense.

[collounsbury]

I should note, by the way, when I say "starts getting useful" I mean with respect to me. Useful with respect to the United States or America as a general matter may be a seperate issue. But that's not my interest.

[Anon]

The article is accurate in its reflections on the practical difficulties of getting Americans well versed in Arabic but I think it glosses over the employment policies of the relevant agencies. Yes, the president says he wants more Arabic speakers, but the agencies don't seem to behave that way. I say this as a person with some modest Arabic language skills who is trying to get his foot in the door at a US foreign policy agency. The CIA DI and FBIS want people with massive amounts of experience, they don't seem to want to train people from the ground up. The FBI seems to need Arabic speakers, but their counter-terror chief doesn't need to know anything about Islam or the Middle East to get his post. The DIA seems pretty unresponsive. I haven't had any luck with any agency I've yet contacted and I don't think it's because of a lack of qualifications(perhaps I just need some more wasta...)

I see the argument that to train someone to be at level 4+ is expensive, but how expensive can it be relative to buying just one more fighter plane or tank? I can't imagine that room&board and tuition at the DLI is so expensive that the Defense Department, with it's hundred billion dollar budget can't squeeze out a little for a relative handful of upper-level students. Hell, send people over to the Bourguiba institute in Tunis or the American University of Beirut or any number of universities in the Arab world, it would probably be cheaper than paying graduate school scholarships in the US and would mean better immersion and interaction with local Arab people/politics/culture.

It seems to me that this really isn't an issue of money, it's an issue of priorities and bureaucratic inertia. No one has stepped up to the plate to say, "Hey, we're not going to just talk about this, we're going to actually do it, and what's more, here's the money and clear orders to make it happen."

[Dan]

I just scanned the article. I THINK it missed one idea that would help: Put a premium on recruiting people that already had some proficiency. Over bonuses to CASA kids to sign up, others who already speak some arabic, then when they're junior pour resources into improvement.