I had to read it a second time. But there it was, in black and white and repeated over every single news outlet.
Russia’s most senior ‘diplomat’ (I use the term loosely; there doesn’t seem to be too much that’s diplomatic about this fellow and I speak as the daughter of one who gave decades of loyal service alongside Her Majesty’s finest) this week described talks with UK foreign secretary Liz Truss as a conversation of ‘the mute with the deaf’.
The comment came as the pair discussed the escalating situation in Ukraine, and the foreign secretary warned Russia of tough sanctions if it went on the attack there.
At the distinctly chilly encounter, Sergei Lavrov, a foreign minister of approaching two decades’ experience, bemoaned the lack of common ground with Truss, saying their talks revealed little in the way of trust – ‘just slogans’.
In other reports of the talks, the Telegraph writes that Lavrov said that meeting Truss, the fist UK foreign secretary to visit the Russian capital in four years, was ‘like talking to a deaf person’. He reportedly added: ‘It’s like they’re listening to us but not hearing’. The newspaper also said Lavrov characterised the encounter as a ‘conversation between deaf and dumb’.
Truss herself has, unsurprisingly, hit back at these remarks.
Curious choice of words, though, from Russia’s top diplomat. I have no inside information on the current state of Ms Truss’s hearing, but I am not aware that she is in fact deaf.
But, as a cochlear implant wearer, I was struck by the comments.
Surely Lavrov here is really equating ‘deaf’ with ‘stupid’ and ‘out of her depth’? By dismissing meeting Truss as ‘like talking to a deaf person’ he is surely implying that that would be a uniquely undesirable thing to do?
And where do you even start with expressions like ‘mute’ and ‘dumb’? Does it not matter what words you use as a top diplomat at a global news conference?
Cards on the table time – I’m not her biggest fan by any means, but Truss clearly was talking during the meeting, and urging a diplomatic solution to the present crisis, say what you like about her.
So not ‘mute’ at all. The Telegraph may have twisted the word somewhat in translation, but it’s hard to see Lavrov could have been any more dismissive.
It seems that the charmer then appeared to storm off somewhat abruptly at the end of the presser, leaving her standing alone.
According to yet another paper (the Evening Standard if you’re interested) the Russian minister claimed talking to Truss was like ‘the deaf talking to the blind’ – and what would be wrong with that? The blind person would surely be able to hear the deaf one?
Again according to the Standard, Lavrov’s words were: “I’m rather disappointed that it was a bit like talking to a deaf person.” Sorry that we’re such a disappointing bunch to communicate with, Serge.
Interestingly, news website City A.M. also reported the ‘disappointing’ angle, describing Lavrov’s words as a ‘stinging attack’.
I turned (where else?) to Facebook to try and see if I was alone in what I was fretting about. I only got two comments back, neither of them especially concerned about the words exchanged.
“I think that you’re about to make a mountain from a molehill,” mused one Chris Williams. Fellow member Catherine Edwards asserted: “I didn’t find it offensive at all but I do find Liz Truss offensive!” (Fair comment reasonably enough made.)
What would the reaction have been had the Russian likened Truss to someone from another minority?
And why was ‘deaf’ the insult of choice he reached for? Why has this not been more remarked upon? At the very least, such remarks are hardly likely to defuse the situation’s undeniable tensions.
To be fair, Lavrov wasn’t the only Russian to hurl barbs at our foreign secretary. Flagship state TV news show 60 Minutes mocked her much-photographed black fur hat, which echoed the headgear Margaret Thatcher sported on one Kremlin visit.
The programme’s anchor said: “She [Truss] went out for a walk around Moscow as soon as got off the plane. Or maybe she went out to show off her hat? Thank God she did not take a balalaika [stringed Russian musical instrument] and a samovar [teapot] with her.”
OK, in truth maybe I wasn’t so wild about that hat, either. And perhaps I am getting a bee in my bonnet over nothing, to coin yet another cliché. I just don’t much like ‘deaf’ being hurled around as a clear term of insult on the international stage. As I say, curious choice of words.
Genuinely, I’d be interested to learn what others think about this one. Is it just me?
Photo: RUSSIAN FOREIGN AFFAIRS MINISTRY/EPA
azz169
February 11, 2022
Lavrov is probably one of the most senior diplomats in the world, i didn’t mind his choice of words as he was clearly referencing a block in communication in Truss not listening. I didn’t feel it was a slur against me. At the presser Truss just repeated her prepared responses like a robot. She is embarrasing.
Frankly, the topic concerns much more grave things than a word that can be arbitrarily taken to be offensive, depending on who you ask.
If you follow this long running & very important issue & what you are concerned with is a single innocently used word, perhaps you are not that interested in the issue at all.
srhplfrth
February 12, 2022
It’s not just you at all. This insult is as bad as the slightly more elegant and more familiar, though equally wrong, ‘dialogue of the deaf’ used by to describe talks that go nowhere. The equation of deaf with stupid, dumb, etc is not only rude and bigoted, it’s inaccurate and archaic. We should not let these careless remarks go unheeded.
Helen Luker
February 13, 2022
I’m hearing, and I find it bizarre at best, insulting at worst. As you say, it’s definitely not diplomatic.
Penelope Beschizza
February 15, 2022
I did mention this in Facebook.
https://www.facebook.com/603121290/posts/10160016759716291/?d=n