Listen to this article

The year is 1962. A US spy plane photographs Soviet Nuclear sites under construction in Cuba. In the following days, the US raises the readiness of its nuclear forces to the highest level short of war. At the height of the tension, an American News Correspondent and a KGB station chief meet in a Chinese restaurant. This starts a chain of delicate meetings, letter exchanges and fraught translations that not only pull the world back from the brink of war but also foster de-escalation and disarmament.

The story is one of the 20th century’s most eye-catching and compelling examples of the power of language. Only through instinctive and nuanced understanding could peace be achieved. At one point, when the Soviet Premier sent two conflicting letters, the US had to decide which to respond to. It was the most heightened moment in the crisis. Making the correct choice may just have been one of the most consequential decisions in human history.

It is because of stories like this that I take extremely seriously the warnings from linguists this month about the potential neglect of their craft when it comes to defence, in favour of fields like robotics, AI and cybersecurity. None of this is to say that those aren’t enormously important fields, but as illustrated above, sometimes there is no substitute for traditional skills like linguistics.

In the words of Britain’s ambassador to Moscow during the Cold War, linguists are ‘every bit as important for keeping the country safe as the armed forces’. In short, languages shouldn’t be seen as a nice-to-have, but instead a national security necessity. One needed not just to keep us safe, but to enable the vital work........

© LBC