UN-Truth

The UN, predictably, is moving to punish one of its staff members who is accused of making a mistake in interpretation from Arabic to English — which, as a result, caused apparent misinformation when picked up and published in a UN Press Release.

The UN spokesperson told journalists yesterday that “Action will be taken against the interpreter to the fullest extent of United Nations Rules and Regulations.”

Of course.

Staff members are not allowed to make mistakes. And, if they do, Off with their heads!

The maximum penalty under UN Rules etc. is summary dismissal.

The UN spokesperson also indicated that Syria has “informally” requested an investigation into what happened.

The UN spokesperson [Michele Montas] announced, in Thursday’s regular Noon Briefing for journalists at UNHQ/NY, that “there was a technical error in a press release that was issued on Tuesday about the work of the First Committee, which incorrectly cited a Syrian representative as mentioning a ‘nuclear facility’ in that country. In fact, the representative had simply mentioned ‘what happened on 6 September 2007 against my country’, and had not used the word ‘nuclear’ at all in that phrase. The mistake was due to an interpretation error, and a corrected press release has since been issued. We regret the error, and the department that deals with General Assembly affairs is looking further into the incident”.

Interpreters work for the Department of General Assembly affairs, while those who prepare the UN press releases work for the Department of Public Information.

Journalists asked a few questions, naturally:

“Question: On the Arab interpretation, how did you establish that it was an interpretation error, not… Because how can someone invent a word, or coin a word, when it was not uttered at all?

Spokesperson: Well it was established simply by comparing the two… the interpretation in English and the actual transcript of what he said in Arabic.

Question: Did you hear, I mean did the voice…

Spokesperson: Yes, of course, of course. Of course. It was thoroughly done yesterday. Okay. Yes. [The Spokesperson later added that that action will be taken against the interpreter to the fullest extent of United Nations Rules and Regulations.]
…

Question: Just as a follow-up to that, people looking at this story might have a lot of questions. One of them is, the UN prides itself on having very accurate interpretation and translation. What went wrong here is the first question. And the second question is that people looking at this might also think that maybe he actually said ‘nuclear’ and you guys are covering it up because they’re upset about this and you want to sort of cover up a bit of a diplomatic embarrassment on the Syrians’ part. What would you say to people who feel that way?

Spokesperson: Well, I would invite you, you are a reporter here -– a correspondent here -– I would invite you to go downstairs, get a recording and listen to it. And get your own Arabic interpreter and you will see that those words were not used.

Question: So you’re absolutely certain he did not mention the word ‘nuclear’?

Spokesperson: ‘Nuclear’ was not mentioned” …

Then, journalists questioned the spokesperson for the President of the UN General Assembly:

“Question: Do we know the name of the interpreter who sat, the name of the English interpreter who sat on the First Committee…

GA Spokesperson: I personally don’t know the name of the interpreter. I’m sure it can be found out. But I’m not sure whether it’s appropriate to give anybody’s name to the public…

Question: Well, this person almost started a World War III, so I mean, maybe it’s a little relevant to the world?

GA Spokesperson: I think Michèle had a pretty good statement on this, in the sense that there’s no name. But what the statement referred to is that there is a review of the situation and the given department is looking into all aspects of what exactly happened, how it happened, so from that angle, I guess, once everything is established, then there can probably be a decision as to making that name public or not.

Question: Do you review only the conference services and interpreters, or does it also involve the people who did the press release and the DPI?

SG Spokesperson: I’m sorry, I will answer that. As I said, in the case of DPI, they were working from a transcript in English that came to them from the interpretation service. Okay?

Question: Has Syria asked for an investigation?

GA Spokesperson: I am not aware of it. Ask Syria.

SG Spokesperson [Michele Montas]: They have informally.

Question: They have…informally?

SG Spokesperson: Yes. And they have spoken with Mr.Shaaban, who is responsible for General Assembly Services”.
The transcript of this UN daily briefing is posted here.

Filed under: Israel, Syria, UN Administration, United Nations