Review article
https://doi.org/10.31820/f.37.2.1
The Rhetoric of Power: Examining Discourse on the War in Ukraine
Adriana Petra Blažević
orcid.org/0000-0002-4871-7794
; Sveučilište u Splitu, Filozofski fakultet
Abstract
This paper examines the rhetorical nuances in political speeches on the war in Ukraine. The speeches, collected from Ukraine, the European Union, the United States, and Russia, mediate the war’s narrative through distinct political contexts and employ a range of rhetorical tools. Informed by Amossy’s socio-discursive theory of argumentation (2001, 2002, 2009), Van Dijk’s theory of semantic macrostructures and knowledge frames (1977, 1980), Chilton’s model of political discourse (2004), and Fairclough and Fairclough’s framework of practical reasoning (2012), the analysis clusters around three rhetorical strategies: narrative simplification, calls to action, and appeals for solidarity. These are assessed in terms of their discursive capacity to construct meaning and mobilise political action. Figures of speech, schemes and tropes alike, are examined for their role in amplifying perceived threats and fuelling animosity toward the “other.” Notably, the speeches exhibit variation in the use of war-related and solidarity-driven language which reflects cross-national differences in the degree of political and moral commitment to the conflict. Calls to action are voiced most forcefully by the Ukrainian president, who frames them within the context of potential nuclear escalation. The President of the European Commission appeals through doxa and urges the European public to recognise their own vulnerability as Ukraine’s close neighbours. This direct rhetoric stands in contrast to the more diplomatically phrased discourse typical of both US and Russian rhetoric. In the Russian context, such language functions to mitigate the moral stigma of the war and justify its continuation, while in the US, it serves to avoid direct identification with Ukraine’s plight. Ultimately, the study demonstrates how political discourse, even when framed in humanitarian terms, can be strategically manipulated to sustain political ambivalence and partisanship.
Keywords
the war in Ukraine; political discourse; rhetorical analysis; argumentation in discourse; practical reasoning; frequency distributions
Hrčak ID:
342890
URI
Publication date:
31.12.2025.
Visits: 644 *