i don't think that if you're scared of responsibility you want to do this kind of work. it is interesting that this was the first time that simultaneous interpretation was used rather than consecutive interpretation when you first listen to the speaker and in target what he has said simultaneous interpretation was first tried in helsinki at the high level in helsinki during the meeting of george shultz and one shevardnadze in the summer of nineteen eighty five years and years ago but now it has become rather common practice at that time it was very new i was thrilled i was fascinated not afraid not scared but certainly i felt a responsibility to say you were on board the. beginning of the end of the cold war started so this is home for us as you were on board were you allowed to

have a political position where you are allowed to have a say in this things. in part that depends on the position that you have in the foreign ministry initially was a member of the department of translation and interpretation and it was only later in early one nine hundred eighty seven that i was transferred to the usa desk to the department of usa and canada of the ministry of foreign affairs in that position i was involved in the preparations both for ministerial meetings and summits and in that position i dast have maybe much influence but they could contribute but the most important moments are when the principles of the foreign minister or the president actually ask your opinion when that

happens you are on your own and you're not just an interpreter you actually have to say what you think and to me with my very limited political prior experience that was not easy but that happened because i know that her intimate with gorbachev and she were nods and know about cherie nazi is my grandfather and i know about gorbachev because you're his advisor up to this day how did you earn their trust. how does that happen how does that happen the initial process is earning the trust as a professional as an interpreter but then inevitably i work with both of them for six years and inevitably you become closer and either trust not only you as a professional translator interpreter but also they begin to trust your opinion

because they know that you have been with them through a great deal i think it started in the reykjavik with gorbachev at about the same time. and they did ask for my opinion sometimes difficult moments. during the whole process of ending the cold war it was not actually a smooth and easy process as many people now think it was a process that had its pitfalls obstacles difficult moments when miss misunderstandings occur when understanding's seemed to be breaking. i think at that time they asked my opinion just because i was closest to them physically. so you're obviously not only translating that but also emotionally and intellectually involved in

a process and it was a very difficult process like you pointed out it wasn't all smooth a lot of things were breaking into put together it was like a work of a jeweller ritual rainmaker and somehow it worked the cold war and it. before we get back to you in your profession i just one out ask you looking back now and what's happening between us and russia does it does away. well maybe not does it only because when one has the prior experience of working with. the presidents at the summit level one doesn't the stand that there are and flowed that there are moments story moments that sometimes last more than a moment sometimes last long and. look like everything is collapsing but you know she's story clearly that the moments of the past.

are never ruined totally and i think that it is a difficult moment the relationship is dismal that would be my word but it's not hopeless and i think that one day a real dialogue will resume and i wish well to those people who will be resuming their dialogue and who will help them be seen in that dialogue you have translated all these great leaders how important is the personal chemistry between two man. i mean i can say corporate chars. baker and sherry nonsectarian love us even if you're ideologically on different sides of the pack personal chemistry is there things get done would you agree with that oh absolutely i think that personal chemistry is something that is perhaps not all the important

but very important i would just add that you have to work to develop personal chemistry and i think that. the soviet side both gorbachev and should work on that. for sure regards it was somewhat easier because he show it off practically immediately forgot which of reagan it was not as easy because they had very different background because they were i would say more different initially. shots were but they worked on it and i think the great merit of those two men gorbachev and reagan is that they did so much despite the problems and obstacles does right some of the things that happened that were extremely unfortunate during that period such as the spice scandals such as

the military to military incidents you know overflights by. fighter bombers over navy ships this kind of thing unfortunately the military still seems to like this kind of thing and the military don't want a war but they sometimes do things that are risky and those things happened during those six years and the great marriage i think principle of gorbachev and reagan and gorbachev and bush is that they did not allow the process to be sidetracked to be sidelined. to be broken by those unfortunate incidents that happened. still going back to personal chemistry because not allowing to break the process is also partially thanks to the personal chemistry here that's when you can

mean a person who translates the words of another person the person who is in charge of relaying the the packaging of the leader right for us as we see trump he is very brazen is very unorthodox in his way of speaking obama was very academic like a harvard professor. bush jr was very folksy then obviously if a translator just translates that slew this out the edges of the personality and the words do you. take time and start to actually translate that person rather than just the president of a country to really. the image that he really carries from within to the person sitting in front hall well i don't know i did my best i did my best and i

think they did their best the chemistry develop between them. i think it's they who worked on that we tried to help. i had excellent people on the other side all of us really were motivated to help i think that is the most important thing otherwise whether i did try to smooth the edges whether i did try to perhaps. make certain things smooth or make certain things more neutral and to emphasize other things frankly i don't know but i don't think so i think that i just tried to do my best professionally when moments happened when they were either annoyed with each other or upset as during the final minutes in reykjavik well

i was perhaps as upset as they were and i was part of the i don't think that i tried to modify it to module it those things i don't think so but then you know to break the ice in situations like this humor always worked well for gorbachev and sharing our men translating the humor in the right way is essential is clear because i see so much goodness humor mistranslated chris putin has this very russian specific base humor and when it's translated into english it isn't making any sense now you translate or be asheri who both had an amazing sense of humor and the other side obviously got the humor and laughed how hard is it to correctly translate the humor of the person you're translating all the choices basically between a literal translation between a word for word translation perhaps with a little explanation or finding something in there that would work in english

and sometimes you make that choice sometimes you risk and maybe comment a little bit to make it more understandable. i must say that both gorbachev and shevardnadze. gorbachev with a more improvise ational way shevardnadze prepared for every conversation. very meticulously but both of them too can to count the cultural differences and they tried not to say too many things that would require a lot of cultural interpretation put in again i think that. when she speaks here and when she negotiates. and i did interpret the other side during some of the negotiations with putin i think it's a little different i think she is more folksy she is moat jokey when she talks to

russians then when she talks to americans or europeans when they're take a break right now when we're back we'll continue talking to. legendary translator better aides to me how great of a child we're talking about how not to lose interest place in the course of world politics. so we've got to do is identify the threats that we have it's crazy confrontation let it be an arms race is often spearing dramatic developments only going to resist i don't see how that strategy will be successful very critical time to sit

down and talk. appreciate it sort of. its first bloody. good you might begin the minute you did it wasn't i go to the. losing has its appeal. for the good of your own good it would put me on. a number of well it was pretty grave as a. crow but you're still too much for hope i don't get down on first. here do you mean you're learning you know. strong. for my look from moods. of craft.

and we're back with. legendary translator eight to me how about which of mr allen's wonder when all these great leaders shake hands laughs formally at formal jokes in front of the cameras smile. when it's obviously a mask it's a role that they play in front of the media now you being with them behind closed doors are the masks off once they sit down to the negotiation table are they different or they keep playing this role. for the most part you know in my experience the masks are off and they begin to be very human. they

obviously make an effort. to explain they sometimes see the. the other side doesn't understand they think that the other side doesn't want to understand he can become annoyed they can become upset i saw sometimes tears in the reagan's eyes in reykjavik where example but i also saw them in very human situations when the media was present but they were extremely natural and not wearing masks during public moments so i would not agree that during public moments when they smile and when they say things that they are playing a role that this is a mask not always some of it is a mask and that's necessary because you know the heads of state they are also

diplomats and diplomats can be totally open but some of it is quite natural how do you know when they're playing and when their real crisis with reagan especially it was impossible to know when it was genuine not the man was acting all the time he was an actor he was an actor absolutely but he was an actor i think not only because he was an actor during part of his career but because he was kind of theatrical perhaps. histrionic one might say by nature she waited she the first thing i saw that i concluded during the very first moments when i first was interpreted in for shevardnadze and the reagan during the september one thousand and five meeting at the white house the very first meeting was that he was eager to please that he was eager to be liked that was part of his nature and not just because he was an actor so i know that it happened at least

once you were the only translator in the room. during those top high level talks americans didn't take their translator maybe because they were scared that. information would be read one is a happening i don't i think that it happened on the few occasions i think that. they actually reagan and bush trusted the translator they just wanted to indicate to the soviet leaders that this is additional sign that there would be no leaks but absolutely they trusted translators and there were i know that. washington is full of leaks. i also know that interpreters translators are never ever the

source of those leaks because you know these things become known even the famous deep throat the leaker who destroyed president nixon we now know who that was there has never ever been any assumption or accusation. of any one of us of our profession to actually leak something that's impossible because of the ethics of the job because of the ethic of the profession that i think practically all of us certainly those of us who work at the highest level very much observed i just want to ask you a couple of few technical questions about your profession exam always wondered phrases and no one sat that if you hear an obvious mistake for instance a person says iraq instead of iran you just chance but how do you know if you for sure says iran and syria iran well it's intuition it's intuition that comes with

experience that come with hours and hours of work. on the other hand you take a risk in simultaneous interpretation you cannot ask the person in consecutive interpretation when you sit near him yes it is possible if you have doubts to to ask but it's undesirable you don't want to do it in both cases in simultaneous interpretation the choice is either you're correct when you are one hundred percent sure or you say iraq and say that's what the speaker has said even though you assume that probably human iran so this kind of thing people sometimes. misspeak yes. that happens. and then also there must be some difficulties understanding certain accents i'm sure not not all accents are as accessible as american or british i don't you

mention somewhere nigerian action for instance if you're sitting in summertime it's a chance leading this top level meeting and you don't really understand what that person has sat what happens. normally there i was lucky i mostly worked with people who spoke very good russian and very good english frankly so it was who also had it in the n.c.a.a. shouldn good good diction but yes it has happened on a few occasions more during my work at the un and subsequently at the council of europe where there are some people who speak with a heavy accent and who. is not very good so what do you do for the most part you pause and you don't interpret where you don't understand

hoping and that hope. works most of the time that it will become clear. it will become clear lead in most cases it does become clear later but you don't. sometimes you say what you think hugh she meant. but it's better to admit something and then to hope that things will become clear if. it hasn't happened too often for me that i took a risk but it has happened and then there are always. for instance sarah gay lover who is brilliant in english i remember he was sitting down with clinton and obama in the translator was translating and then turns around and corrects the translator i mean this kind of embarrassing does that happen a lot when you're translating a person who is perfection in a language that you're translating to the to the to the other reader well sure i

mean. deputy foreign minister laurence office might have had excellent english. i've been corrected but. to my knowledge to my recollection not at that level so fortunately you know maybe they missed something that i missed translated decided not to correct me but i haven't been corrected at that level i have been corrected in my career you know i've been in this profession for almost fifty years so i have been corrected for the most part i have been corrected correctly but sometimes. people who correct. they don't know what they're doing it also happened so when they are trying to correct you and you stand by your translation you have to say so and that happened to me too when they are correcting you and you think that

perhaps it's basically a matter of taste. you might want to repeat what they said it's a matter of it's not very important but you don't quarrel with them but when you are sure then you have to stand by your translation that has happened to me fortunately not at the highest level because you don't want that kind of bickering happening well as one very few have in your arsenal of memory is something maybe who areas or something that one horribly wrong for instance i remember just recently quit and set about trying. to cherry it is a bright man meaning he's unorthodox he is someone you know that believes the mark as a person and then the american media translate as bright in terms of mastery of stock which is a mistake yeah it is a mistake but if the interpreter had said colorful that would have been

a way but it's not the first thing more about it would have been ok bright of course means he's smart and the world will not work there and walks out on mr and gracious great crew shows translations or we will bury you that's when the charter . are all these three mystery ideas from the language have you ever had that when you missed it they went wrong or horary free it never happened i. let the guy down but i was sometimes quite happy. with the rendering that i gave that happened and if it was repeated. in another conversation normally i would be ready i would be ready because i thought while he said this funny phrase. it's not all to discuss. and. my rendering initially was not quite

good and i thought about it when they were entering now are you would say well. two ways of doing it closer to the original you would say you can break people like a stick. but more idiomatic would be you can't break the people's back. because that shows the sense of it that you should understand. that the wrong things that have to be done carefully when you're dealing with the destinies of nations so there were moments when i felt but but there were also moments when. i mean i. was surprised myself that i found a practically perfect rendering on the spot. and that's what makes the interpreter happy but you shouldn't be too happy because when you're too happy with the

excellent rendering that you have come up with then you can lose concentration and the most important thing in simultaneous interpretation in translation is concentration. thank you so much for this wonderful into your wish it the best of luck thank you i had a good time because it was. desists is a sticker from the water bottle phone in the stomach of a fish the brand is part of the coca-cola company which sells millions of bottles

of soda every day the idea was that let's tell consumers there are the bad ones there's a litter box for throwing this away industry should be blamed for all this waste the company has long promised to reuse the plastic. and may look at suitable sets for their class of course the only. thing your own that special projects funded me. on i'm your best at is the end of a fully tea cup for now the mountains of moist only grow higher. with just manufacture consent instance of public wealth. when the ruling class to the rich. themselves. when the final larry go round lifts only the one percent.

whole middle of the room six. million real new. during the great depression which i'm old enough to remember there was most of my family were unemployed. and it wasn't it was bed much worse objective listen today but there was an expectation that things were going to get better. there was a real sense of hopefulness there isn't today today's america where shape by the ten principles of concentration of wealth and power. reduced democracy at tax holiday out engineer elections manufacture consent and other principle holds according to no i'm chomsky one set of rules for the rich opposite set rules for.

that's what happens when you put her into the hands of a narrow sector of will switch will is dedicated to increasing power for itself just as you'd expect one of the most influential intellectuals of our time speaks about the modern civilization of america. that's geysers financial survival bill they say money that the. plot of jesus this

is a central plank support diagram is kind of problem right now so they stopped. the remains of forty one people killed after a russian plane burst into flames during an emergency landing in moscow now recovered from the crash site twelve year old girl and the flight attendant who died helping passengers escape the inferno are among the victims. investigators are currently looking at three possible causes of the tragedy pilots have a system malfunction. we focused on real politics russia's foreign minister holds talks with the u.s. secretary of state saying he's found no support for any military into.