When Words Decide Nations: The Hidden Power of Treaty Language
International treaties are often signed with great ceremony, but their real power lies quietly in words. A common belief holds that French is used in treaties because it has no ambiguity. This is a myth. Like English or any other language, French too carries multiple meanings. What truly governs treaty interpretation is not linguistic purity, but law, intent, and context.
Modern international law follows the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), which states that when a treaty exists in multiple authentic languages, all versions are equally authoritative unless specified otherwise. When differences arise, courts do not blindly prefer one language. Instead, they examine the treaty’s purpose, background, and real-world application.
History shows how language disputes can shape destinies. From border disputes in Africa to trade rulings at the WTO and indigenous rights in New Zealand, small variations in wording have altered political and legal outcomes. Courts have learned that justice cannot depend on a dictionary alone.
In an increasingly multilingual world, treaties reflect compromise, not perfection. Precision comes from careful drafting, defined terms, and fair interpretation—not from believing that any language is immune to ambiguity.
Ultimately, international law reminds us of a simple truth: words matter, but intention matters more.
No, that statement is not entirely true.
The reality behind the claim
International treaties are often drafted or authenticated in French, but not because French words have only one meaning.
Like all natural languages, French also has ambiguities, synonyms, and words with multiple meanings depending on context.
Why French is used in treaties
Historical reason: From the 17th to early 20th century, French was the primary language of diplomacy in Europe and international relations.
Legal tradition: French legal drafting developed a reputation for precision, structured syntax, and carefully defined terms.
Diplomatic custom: Many older treaties were written in French, and the practice continued alongside English.
Modern treaty practice
Today, most international treaties are bilingual or multilingual, commonly in English and French, and sometimes in other languages.
Treaties clearly state which texts are “equally authentic” or which language prevails in case of interpretation differences.
If ambiguity arises, international law (Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969) provides rules for interpretation—not reliance on any one language being ambiguity-free.
Myth about “no two meanings”
The idea that French has no double meanings is a popular myth.
French is used in international treaties because of historical prestige and drafting discipline, not because it is free from ambiguity. That is why treaties rely on definitions, context, and legal interpretation, not linguistic perfection.
