Crisis, Coercion and Conflict as the New Peace

A Critical Analysis of Western War Justifying Discourse

Abstract

George Orwell wrote and warned about the role of deceptive and misleading language in politics, a form of double speak to influence and persuade unwary audiences. War is an activity that requires the accumulation of political capital and legitimacy. By invoking a crisis situation, the political environment implies an extra-ordinary moment where standard laws and rules no longer apply. This is better done not by framing or narrating the ‘desired’ coming armed conflict in terms of unemotional national interests or the logical use of “just war”, but through the emotional  use of selective values and norms and through vague concepts like ‘humanitarian war’. The Orwellian language of Western politicians and other actors promoting war in the name of peace during the era of the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) and the Arab Spring from the year 2001 shall be subject to critical analysis, which reveals that the use of emotions and deceptive language are key components to the war justifying discourse. This literature review reveals that a rather systematic, symbolic and ritualistic use of war justifying discourse is the mechanism through which actors’ attempt to engineer public perception and consent to an act that in all probability undermines the interests and security of that same public. This article looks at these aspects and factors as a sum of the individual parts, rather than identifying and analysing those individual pieces as the influence of the war justifying discourse comes from the totality through the cumulative effect of the interactions.