Pragmatic Strategies in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Comparative Analysis of Arab and Western Political Discourse on Identity, Diplomacy, and Conflict Resolution
Rafka Hasan Kareem
1
(
English Department, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
)
Elahe Sadeghi Barzani
2
(
English Department, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
)
salih Mahdi Adai Al-Mamoory
3
(
Department of English Language, College of Education for Human Sciences, University of Babylon, Hilla, Iraq
)
Ehsan Rezvani
4
(
English Department, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
)
کلید واژه: Pragmatic Strategies, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Arab Politicians, Western Politicians, Identity Rhetoric, Conflict Resolution, Strategic Maneuvering,
چکیده مقاله :
This research provides an exploration of the dominant pragmatic strategies employed by Arab and Western politicians in their strategic maneuvering discourse on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Through a detailed analysis of political speeches and public statements, the study identifies key rhetorical strategies that each group uses to influence their audiences and advance their respective agendas. Arab politicians frequently deploy emotional appeals, collective identity references, and strong moral condemnations aimed at Israel, resonating deeply with domestic and regional audiences. In contrast, Western politicians emphasize diplomacy, legality, and a balanced approach, reflecting their need to navigate complex geopolitical dynamics and maintain alliances on both sides of the conflict. The study compares the usage of these strategies between Arab and Western politicians, highlighting significant differences that stem from cultural, historical, and political contexts. For Arab politicians, the conflict is often framed in existential and emotional terms, while Western politicians tend to focus on security, stability, and legal frameworks, portraying themselves as neutral arbiters. The findings of this research suggest that while identity-based appeals by Arab politicians consolidate domestic support, they may entrench polarized narratives that hinder constructive dialogue. Meanwhile, the Western emphasis on diplomacy and legality can enhance credibility in international forums but may fail to address power imbalances, potentially perpetuating the status quo. These findings contribute to a broader understanding of political communication by demonstrating how language is strategically used to shape public opinion, reinforce narratives, and influence policy.
چکیده انگلیسی :
This research provides an exploration of the dominant pragmatic strategies employed by Arab and Western politicians in their strategic maneuvering discourse on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Through a detailed analysis of political speeches and public statements, the study identifies key rhetorical strategies that each group uses to influence their audiences and advance their respective agendas. Arab politicians frequently deploy emotional appeals, collective identity references, and strong moral condemnations aimed at Israel, resonating deeply with domestic and regional audiences. In contrast, Western politicians emphasize diplomacy, legality, and a balanced approach, reflecting their need to navigate complex geopolitical dynamics and maintain alliances on both sides of the conflict. The study compares the usage of these strategies between Arab and Western politicians, highlighting significant differences that stem from cultural, historical, and political contexts. For Arab politicians, the conflict is often framed in existential and emotional terms, while Western politicians tend to focus on security, stability, and legal frameworks, portraying themselves as neutral arbiters. The findings of this research suggest that while identity-based appeals by Arab politicians consolidate domestic support, they may entrench polarized narratives that hinder constructive dialogue. Meanwhile, the Western emphasis on diplomacy and legality can enhance credibility in international forums but may fail to address power imbalances, potentially perpetuating the status quo. These findings contribute to a broader understanding of political communication by demonstrating how language is strategically used to shape public opinion, reinforce narratives, and influence policy.
Abu-Zahra, M. (2018). Narratives of resistance: The role of collective identity in the Palestinian cause. Middle East Journal, 72(3), 321-339.
Asseburg, M. (2020). Legal discourse and diplomacy: Western approaches to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. International Politics Journal, 45(2), 201-219.
Bayat, R. (2022). Content vs. strategy in political rhetoric. Middle Eastern Politics Journal, 14(3), 265-289.
Dajani, O. (2022). Rhetoric and reality: Arab political discourse on the Palestinian cause. Journal of Middle Eastern Politics, 14(3), 265-289.
Hadar, L. (2022). Western engagement in the Middle East: The politics of security and stability. Georgetown University Press.
Holliday, P. (2022). Strategic maneuvering in conflict rhetoric: Western diplomatic discourse on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. International Relations Review, 23(4), 310-329.
Jones, M., & Brown, T. (2023). Balancing act: Western diplomacy and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. International Affairs Review, 98(1), 101-118.
Khalidi, R. (2023). The hundred years' war on Palestine: A history of settler colonialism and resistance. Metropolitan Books.
Khatib, L. (2019). The role of Ummah in Arab political discourse: The Israeli-Palestinian context. Journal of Arab Studies, 14(1), 45-62.
Lakoff, G. (2021). Framing political narratives: The role of metaphors in shaping discourse. Political Discourse Analysis Quarterly, 30(2), 150-169.
Lynch, M. (2019). Cultural contexts and political rhetoric in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Comparative Politics Quarterly, 52(1), 78-97.
Mearsheimer, J., & Walt, S. (2023). The Israel lobby and U.S. foreign policy. Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
Nassar, J. (2023). Arab political identity and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Journal of Arab Studies, 18(2), 150-172.
Rabinowitz, D., & Rafeef, Z. (2023). The power of discourse: Israeli and Arab narratives in the media. Communication Studies Quarterly, 22(4), 387-405.
Searle, J. R. (2017). Pragmatic theory and conflict discourse: A case study of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(4), 245-267.
Smith, A. (2022). International law and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: Western legal discourse and the two-state solution. Cambridge University Press.
Tessler, M. (2020). The disconnect between Arab and Western approaches to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Middle East Journal of Politics, 16(2), 200-215.
Tindale, C. W. (2021). Argumentation theory and strategic maneuvering in political rhetoric. Argumentation Journal, 25(3), 344-361.
Van Eemeren, F. H., & Houtlosser, P. (2020). Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse. Journal of Argumentation Theory, 27(1), 90-112.
