SPIEGEL ONLINE on Iraq: "Disaster" or "Quagmire"?

(By Ray D.)

We at Davids Medienkritik could hardly wait for SPIEGEL ONLINE to publish a recent interview with columnist Robert Kagan on its "English Site." Why? Well, as has so often been the case in the past, we anticipated the English version would contain certain differences that have become a hallmark at the SPIEGEL ONLINE website. Put another way, we knew the magazine's "English Site" would publish a version of the interview noticeably milder than the German version to make it more digestible to the English-speaking audience, much as it did in a recent interview with Donald Rumsfeld. 

What we really had our eye on when we first saw the German version was the use of the word "disaster" (or in German "Desaster") to describe the Iraq War in the opening question of the interview. Those of you already familiar with the magazine know that this is no uncommon practice. The word has been used scores of times since 2003 to describe Iraq. "Debacle" has also been another frequently used favorite. So when we saw the word "Desaster" in the German version on Monday, we strongly suspected the English version might contain a "softer" word. We weren't to be disappointed:

German Version Above: "The Iraq War is a disaster,"

---

English Version Above: "Iraq is a quagmire,"

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Another Translation Disaster or Intentional Translational Quagmire?

Unlike the recent Rumsfeld interview, in which the translation irregularities appeared in the magazine's introductory paragraph, the problem here is in the actual text of the interview. The translation of the magazine's first question to Kagan is remarkably precise...save one glaring exception. In the German version, the Iraq War is very clearly described as "a disaster" or "ein Desaster". Yet the English version of the interview uses the word "quagmire" instead of "disaster". Why might that be?

You don't have to be a professional translator or a PhD in German to know that the German word "Desaster" is virtually identical to its English equivalent. So one would not anticipate problems with the translation of this particular word in either direction. Is this just another coincidental mistake or part of a larger pattern of (mis)interpretation? Just have a look at these other examples and decide for yourself:

• SPIEGEL ONLINE on Rumsfeld: One Interview - Two Introductions
• Kannapolis Translation: SPIEGEL ONLINE Crumbles Under Massive Pressure
• SPIEGEL ONLINE: "Iraq: The Start of the Civil War"

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Wringing its hands over Anti-Americanism in Europe

Perhaps the most amusing segment of the entire interview is the magazine's sudden expression of dismay at the current state of transatlantic relations and what it describes as American "anti-Europeanism". Kagan is asked the following:

"SPIEGEL: Will the present contempt for Europe in the US recede eventually? Or is anti-Europeanism here to stay, like the anti-Americanism in Europe that US commentators like to point to?

Kagan: My sense is that it's not such a big deal anymore. Europe is not very much on Americans' radar screens anymore. People here spend a lot more time talking about the US than Americans spend talking about Europe.

SPIEGEL: Because Europe is more affected by what the US does than vice-versa ...

Kagan: But what happened with Katrina does not effect Europe! There is a kind of fixation on the American culture these days. For 200 years there has been a common European critique of American society as grasping and greedy and selfish and brutal. First it wasn't religious enough and now it's too religious. This is not new, but the Cold War made us forget that we are not the same even though we have tremendous amounts in common. Our picture of the Cold War is this paradise of friendship, but that is not the norm."

How touching and refreshing to see SPIEGEL ONLINE showing such genuine concern for transatlantic relations and "anti-Americanism in Europe." Of course they themselves have nothing to do with any of that...

Comments

[Gabi]

Another subject:

I think this is really much too late but finally they understood that the nonsense in the media needs some answers.

Please read this:

"Setting the Record Straight: The New York Times Editorial on Pre-War Intelligence

The New York Times Editorial Says Foreign Intelligence Services Did Not Support American Intelligence. "Foreign intelligence services did not have full access to American intelligence. But some had dissenting opinions that were ignored or not shown to top American officials." (Editorial, "Decoding Mr. Bush's Denials," The New York Times, 11/15/05)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051115-1.html

Clinton said also this:

"When I left office, there was a substantial amount of biological and chemical material unaccounted for. That is, at the end of the first Gulf War, we knew what he had. We knew what was destroyed in all the inspection processes and that was a lot. And then we bombed with the British for four days in 1998. We might have gotten it all; we might have gotten half of it; we might have gotten none of it. But we didn't know. So I thought it was prudent for the president to go to the U.N. and for the U.N. to say you got to let these inspectors in, and this time if you don't cooperate the penalty could be regime change, not just continued sanctions."
Bill Clinton, July 22, 2003

[Dan Kauffman]

Bring the Troops HOME!

From Germany!

I mean VE Day was the 8th of May l945.
Isn't 60 years enough time to have finished the job?
How about Bosnia? Ten years so far, how long
will we continue that quagmire

[Assistant Village Idiot]

Erdapfel oder Kartoffel?

Remember the context.

[Kuch]

Even if you set the "translation tricks" aside, the nature of the line of questioning is more provocation than journalism. The earlier interview by Der Spiegel with the investment banker from Goldman Sachs was even worse. It seemed that of the twenty or so questions, the vast majority were negative...negative...and, more negative. His final answer said it all. Germany needs optimism more than anything, and this kind of journalism in certainly not helping matters.

[Pamela]

"SPIEGEL: Will the present contempt for Europe in the US recede eventually?

Um, that would be "No".

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone!

[Doughnut Boy Andy]

@ Dan K

Please dont bring all the troops out of Germany... their presence here makes some of us feel safer.

[joe]

Germany does not need more optimism. Germany needs a reality check.

France along with other memebers of the chocolate summit will provide all the protection Europe needs and deserves.