Intercultural Communication Paper

Intercultural Communication

Communication is important when international commerce, foreign policy, and situations involving more than one culture or country are concerned. Influencing factors change the way cultures communicate with each other and among themselves; effects may result in a negative manner according to historical examples. Intercultural communication between two countries is defined by the differences in cultural patterns, identities, bias, and devices used for interacting. Theories for intercultural communication address specific issues and provide suggestions for resolving or eliminating conflict from miscommunication. The lack of successful intercultural communication has been scrutinized and blamed for many instances resulting in injury or death of soldiers or civilians.

Miscommunication resulting in friendly fire

An example of a miscommunication that created an international incident is the situation between a NATO helicopter and a group of Afghan soldiers. The soldiers were mistaken for individuals assumed to be insurgents planting bombs by the roadside; six of the soldiers were killed and one was injured in the attack (afp.com, 2011). Friendly fire is generated from the lack of intercultural communication with foreign forces that control operations and make engagement decisions. Individuals involved in this situation followed the correct procedures before the helicopter open fired on an unidentified group in an active fighting zone digging by the road. To decrease potential detonations and casualties the order was given not knowing there was a miscommunication about the location of the Afghan soldiers. The example, taken from a article, lacked detailed information because it related to political, governmental, and war engagement material. This makes it more difficult when classified information is held back when it has the potential of benifiting future situations.

Cultural patterns

Social norms and traditions, along with beliefs that are shared among a group are considered cultural patterns if the behaviour is consistent during comparable situations. Created from these patterns are standard procedures and practices through verbal and non-verbal actions for those in the group to follow (Lustig & Koester, 2006, p. 85). The differences in cultural patterns between the majority of NATO countries and Afghanistan begin with the way individuals in the group approach life choices. Afghanistan is one of the regions that practice collectivism and their actions center around the situation at hand. Regions associated with NATO, using the United States as an example for this paper, promote individualism which is a contradictory cultural pattern for group activities and functions (Feghali, 1997).

Other differences in cultural patterns are language, religious beliefs, and the importance of family. Adapting to the changing conditions and cultures surrounding Afghanistan allows individuals to decipher or understand multiple languages; normally there would be a conflict without the ability to communicate with surrounding cultures (Feghali, 1997). Americans often rely on the slogan that it is who you know rather than those you can rely on, such as an extended family. Peers are less significant to have in the Afghanistan culture because of their meaning of extended family, anyone sharing in the same cultural belief. Status is something that both cultures have in common, however this is based on the family value in Afghanistan rather than personal worth to the group (Marjan, 2009).

Communication

Communication plays an important role for both cultures as a way of interacting with members of the same group and outsiders. Technology for both cultures has made it possible to maintain contact with details and material related to decreasing situations like friendly fire. The soldiers that were affected by the mistake followed the proper steps to ensure their patrol location and coordinates were communicated through the proper chain of command. Incorrect information on the location of the patrol was revealed to the local NATO unit overseeing the area at the time. These occurrences are not common but this situation has created a requirement to identify and then change engagement rules. Since the life and death of individuals may be determined by the effectiveness of communication between groups and cultures the priority should be with the way details are passed along.

This situation does not divulge what specific devices were used in this example but it is assumed that dealing with NATO and Afghan soldiers that modern devices were available. Whether or not the devices were onsite or used by the soldiers may not have made a difference because the helicopter pilot is required to maintain contact with their base. The order to engage and open fire on a suspected