LEGITIMIZING ACTION: LINGUISTIC AND IDEOLOGICAL DYNAMICS IN PAKISTAN’S MILITARY DISCOURSE

Abstract

This research applies Teun A. van Dijk’s sociocognitive Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) model to analyze the Pakistan Armed Forces’ press release (PR-152/2025-ISPR, May 12, 2025), issued during the Marka-e-Haq conflict for Operation “Bunyanum Marsoos.” It explores how linguistic and contextual elements construct ideology, power, and “us vs. them” dynamics in the India-Pakistan geopolitical rivalry. Employing van Dijk’s triadic framework that is discourse, cognition, society. The study examines discourse strategies, cognitive models, mental models, and social implications to understand how the text legitimizes military action and exhibit national identity. The qualitative methodology analyzes the ISPR-sourced press release, focusing on polarization (e.g., “dastardly” for India, “justice” for Pakistan) and presuppositions (e.g., India’s aggression). Research questions investigate how these strategies embed nationalist and Islamic ideologies and marginalize adversarial voices. Findings show that the use of emotive lexicon, religious references (e.g., “Almighty Allah”), and technological framing (e.g., “cyber warriors”) to portray Pakistan as a righteous defender, reinforcing military authority (van Dijk, 2021b). Metaphors like “Wall of Steel” amplify the “us vs. them” narrative, aligning with van Dijk’s ideology framework (van Dijk, 2020b). The study highlights the press release’s role in reproducing power through institutional control, excluding Indian perspectives (Ahmed & Khan, 2023). By extending van Dijk’s model to a South Asian military context, it addresses gaps in non-Western discourse analysis (Khan & Ahmad, 2021). This research offers scholars and policymakers insights into how state narratives shape conflict perceptions, enhancing CDA’s global applicability and understanding of South Asian geopolitics so it is significant.