No, I don’t approve of the second Putin-Trump meeting, but I’d like to consider this as a game theory problem without its current political connotations.
Why is it bad to attend such a meeting without your own translator?
Let’s say I meet with a Greek, to talk about debt renegotiation, and don’t bring my own translator. You might think I am at the mercy of the other translator, the one hired by my Greek peer.
But how so? If the Greek speaker wishes to mislead me, he doesn’t need a biased translator to do so. He can just lie to me or otherwise mislead me in the original Greek. Either translation, from an American or Greek translator, will communicate the same lie or deception.
Alternatively, assume I believe there is some “noise” between the Greek statement and its translation into English. Some of this may stem from the imperfections of the translation process itself, or perhaps the translator has her own agenda.
If I bring my own translator, that removes the influence of the agenda of the Greek translator, but probably keeps the noise and imperfections. But is that good or bad on net?
1. I now face risk from the agenda of my own translator. That may be more biased or skewing than the agenda of the Greek translator, especially since it may relate to splits within American rather than Greek politics.
2. It might be better if I am fooled by a Greek translator who to some extent wishes to subvert the interests of her own government. For instance, the Greek translator might wish to keep smooth relations by not communicating all of the cuss words behind a threat.
3. The Greek speaker might in fact know he is regularly subverted by his own translator, and adjust his words accordingly. The “subverted” communication, as conveyed by the Greek translator, may in fact be the intended message, and thus there is little harm from the subversion.
4. By not having your own translator present, you are keeping as private information what and when you will reveal to your own countrymen. That may put you in a stronger bluffing or bargaining position.
4b. In the other direction, note you may wish to have your own translator so that your negotiating partner can do without his! That may put him in a stronger position with respect to his home interest groups and thus facilitate a deal.
Overall, it is not obvious that I am so much better off having my own translator. In fact, it seems your own translator is there, to some extent, to constrain you, as is evident from some of the discussion of the Putin-Trump meeting. For instance, it is being claimed Trump might have wanted to say things to Putin that no American functionary could be allowed to hear. If that is true, it might be bad for America, but it need not be bad for Trump’s self-interest.
On this question, the economics of having your own note-taker, or your own taping mechanism, might be very different from that of translator, but that would be another post.