MODALITY, PRONOUNS, AND POWER: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF BENJAMIN NETANYAHU’S U.S. EMBASSY SPEECH FOLLOWING THE DOHA AIRSTRIKE

Abstract

This study investigates political rhetoric in Benjamin Netanyahu’s U.S. Embassy address following the September 2025 Doha airstrike. The objective is to deconstruct how language functions to mask military aggression and legitimize state actions during an acute diplomatic crisis. Utilizing a qualitative case study design, the research applies Norman Fairclough’s Three-Dimensional Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) framework, triangulated with Teun van Dijk’s Ideological Square and media framing theory, using a BBC News report as the empirical baseline. Findings reveal that at the micro-linguistic level, the speech weaponizes polarized personal pronouns and high-affinity modality markers to construct absolute moral boundaries. At the meso-structural level, aggressive political framing—specifically euphemism and spatial recontextualization—masks sovereign geography and civilian casualties to shield bilateral alliances. Finally, at the macro-sociocultural level, the discourse reproduces asymmetrical power relations by anchoring contemporary violence in historical trauma, constructing an ideology of moral exceptionalism. Ultimately, this study demonstrates how crisis rhetoric is linguistically engineered to sanitize state-sponsored violence and naturalize a paternalistic hierarchy.