There are concepts that appear everywhere during certain periods, which also become mantras. They appear to us in a positive and necessary way, without too much debate and without thinking about them. It seems to me that one of these mantras is internationalization, which has its origin – as it could not be otherwise – in the economic sphere and which appears to us forcefully in many areas of society, especially in education. It is so successful in this field that it is increasingly present in school enrolment campaigns. In the case of universities, the importance of the supposed internationalization is even greater. We can say similar about concepts such as digitalization or innovation.

Why does internationalization appear to us as so important, unavoidable, uncontroversial? And, above all, what lies behind this concept? First of all, we must bear in mind that, in my opinion, we are facing a euphemism. When we talk about internationalization, it is not about being open to the international community and approaching global trends, languages, cultures, policies, etc. All these positive values, of course. On the contrary, internationalization is, in reality, synonymous with the practice of English, since almost no one thinks of linking internationalization with Arabic or Chinese, not to mention minority languages. But instead of mentioning the processes of English-speaking (or Americanization), what is sold is internationalization.

Therefore, in my opinion, the issue of English on the one hand and internationalisation on the other is a matter that must be distinguished. In fact, for example, today we talk about International Baccalaureate, instead of English Baccalaureate, when it would be more correct. This subject of English would seem like a lot to dig deeper, but we will limit ourselves to two nuances. On the one hand, there is no denying that English is currently the main lingua franca, at least in most areas and in the West. Language is important, it is clear, and for those who speak minority languages there are also many possibilities, because in our case it can also be a way out of the servitude of Spanish and French.

But, on the other hand, linked to English, we must emphasize that, in most cases, we are talking about acting in a language other than our own, with the limitation that this often implies in quality and depth. The latter issue is particularly important in the field of education. In a way, it seems to me a subject that needs to be problematized, especially in schools: what subjects are offered in English, why, for what? Is it appropriate and desirable in compulsory education to study History, for example, in English? Is it reasonable for a Basque teacher to teach Basque students the history of the Basque Country in English?

Internationalization, therefore, should not simply be equated with English. If we want to talk about internationalisation, I believe that other languages should also be mentioned and taken into account, without using euphemisms. From a national perspective, cultivating French in the Southern Basque Country should probably be important (and Spanish on the other side of the border). Likewise, other languages that are very important worldwide should not be forgotten, considering that some of these languages are also native or domestic languages of some Basque citizens.

Internationalization, in short, should not be synonymous with English; and it should be considered that, beyond the language, it is not even a good thing per se.