A Critical discourse analysis (CDA) of Obama and Trump’s speeches on Afghan policy

Abstract

This research analyzes the persuasive appeals President Obama and Donald Trump used in speeches regarding the Afghan policy using American Exceptionalism, Power and Ideology. The research used critical discourse analysis (CDA) within this study. For this purpose, the key speeches by both presidents were chosen: pronouns, voice, nominalization, word choice, and metaphors. The findings reveal that while both leaders aimed to justify America’s prolonged military involvement in Afghanistan, they employed distinct approaches. While Obama was politer and more appealed to ethical considerations pointing to the mission’s just nature, Trump was more forceful and utilitarian, framing the conflict as an endeavor for which the cost and benefits are clear. Thus, the study shows the significance of the CDA method of political speech analysis for ideology and hegemony detection and stresses that the problem of power usage accountability remains actual on the international level. The research also advocates the exploration of the speech acts towards a narrower range of power and the utilization of more kinds of analyses on a greater selection of speeches for a better understanding of the multifaceted connection between language, power, and international relations.