"Speaking Clearly is a Democratic Right, Not Just Speaking Freely"

The director of the Instituto Cervantes, Luis García Montero (Granada, 1958), understands that language is both a means of communication and a moral territory. However, the 10th International Congress of the Spanish Language (CILE), which will debate the basic right to clear language in Arequipa, arrives with more discord than harmony. It opens again with Peru in political turmoil - President Dina Boluarte, who was to inaugurate the CILE with the King, was dismissed on Friday - and with a clash between the Cervantes and the RAE, the organisers. García Montero criticises the director of the RAE, Santiago Muñoz Machado, and the academics condemn his "untimely" statements, leaving the congress turned into a boxing ring.

-Too much tension between the RAE and the Cervantes, isn't it?

-As I said, the RAE is now led by a professor of Administrative Law in charge of an office for doing business for multimillion-dollar companies. And that creates distances and tensions, for example, when organising a Language Congress or dealing with companies in Artificial Intelligence. I reiterate that I admire an Academy led by philologists like Fernando Lázaro Carreter, Víctor García de la Concha, or Darío Villanueva, all great men of culture.

-The RAE describes your statements as "unfortunate, untimely, and incomprehensible" and expresses its rejection in a very harsh statement.

-It's not harsh. Quite the opposite. It's a way to get by. My inbox has been filled with messages of support from cultural circles. I admire many academics, and the relations between the Cervantes and the Academy have been excellent. I think it's good to maintain those good relations. But we come from very different worlds. I think everyone is happy that [Muñoz Machado] has only one year left.

-What do you expect, after all, from the Congress in Arequipa?

-To recognise that culture remains a fundamental axis, increasingly necessary in a world marked by violence, wars, the laws of the strongest, and genocides. Culture in Spanish and the Spanish language are an essential global reference to defend democratic values against those who try to corrupt democracy.

-Should we still trust in words against barbarism?

-Yes. To resist is not to be optimistic: it is not to give up, not to abandon oneself, and to continue defending with confidence what one believes. A non-naive resistance seems crucial to me in the current situation.

-Speaking clearly, a democratic obligation, is a central theme of the congress, but many politicians abuse euphemisms.

-There is a democratic illusion in making institutions communicate with citizens to inspire trust. But sometimes speaking clearly is confused with speaking freely: saying what one wants without truth or respect.

-Many find it difficult to call the massacre in Gaza a genocide.

-Yes. Once it is proven that there is a genocide, some do not want to say it, and others take the opportunity to criticise those who use the term. Against this, we must bet on a relationship of trust between institutions and citizens. The population must be informed in time and defend the right to information and truth against tension and controversies.

-Language unites us, but it also articulates and spreads hate.

-It is well studied. José Carlos Mainer analyses how, during the Republic, words like youth, homeland, or nation were manipulated for political purposes, which would end in firing squads. Cortázar shows how in the Nazi era, the linguistic manipulation of homeland or identity led to concentration camps. It is essential to be attentive to words: those who shift political tensions to language debates have an effective tool to impose authoritarianism.

-Another axis of the congress will be the 'enriching' mestizaje of languages.

-That the Congress is in Arequipa reminds us of the need for dialogue between diverse identities. Mestizaje should be seen as wealth, not as the erasure of original languages. Spanish must defend diversity: no one has the authority to say how one should speak. Let no one tell Argentinians how to speak Spanish, Borges said. Respecting the identity of Medellín, Seville, or Barcelona is essential. And respecting the coexistence with the original languages of Peru, such as Quechua or Aymara, is equally important.

-Machines already speak Spanish well. With Artificial Intelligence, is the challenge to avoid biases?

-Yes. AI can contribute a lot, but we must avoid it generating automatons or programmed responses without human participation. We must ensure it does not serve supremacism, sexist biases, or impose a neutral Spanish over regional variants.

-What will determine whether AI is an ally or an enemy?

-Our ability to trust in human freedom and our responsibility to imagine a just future. Platforms like Facebook have shown they can manipulate opinions and elections. We must bet on freedom, not control. They are useful in teaching to reproduce dialogues, even simulating emotions. But language is much more than vocabulary; it needs presence and human interaction. Teaching should not be reduced to machines.

-What does Spanish owe to Mario Vargas Llosa, another pillar of the congress?

-A lot. The Cervantes has prepared a Vargas Llosa dictionary with words selected by writers, family, and journalists, recognising his literary work and his dialogue between Spain and America. His dual Peruvian-Spanish nationality strengthens cultural and literary understanding.

-Is the future of Spanish hopeful?

-Without a doubt. It is powerful and can grow in science and technology, supporting cooperation between institutions and countries in Latin America and Spain. If we maintain unity and respect for diversity, we will be a global cultural reference.