Critical Discourse Analysis of Prime Minister’s Speeches and Dialogues on the matter of “The membership of Nuclear Suppliers Group”
Abstract
This study aims at tracing the unknown intents behind words used in a language, through Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). The research performs Critical Discourse Analysis of some pieces of the speech of the Prime Minister of Pakistan related to a very crucial matter of present day world, “The Nuclear Energy and the Position of Pakistan”. Critical Discourse Analysis is scientific method of deducing real intensions behind apparently spoken or written words and then bring them in front of an audience.
Most of time words don’t take responsibility of being biased, people use them cautiously but still there are hidden meaning in them. A critical discourse is simple practice of monitoring the total situation instead of taking the sentences as it is. Through this research the words of the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Mian Muhammad Nawaz Shareef will be taken as the piece of content to be analyzed as a critical discourse and the intensions behind them will be watched carefully and scientifically. Is there any relation between qualification of being a member of The Nuclear Energy Supplier Group and the Pak-India-Conflicts?
Keywords: CDA, Nuclear Energy, Pakistan, Pak-India-Conflict
- Introduction
Language is the math of understanding human bio-social behavioral conducts in order for bridging the gulfs between people. However any human language has its own ways of communications beyond its formal structure, phonology, morphology, syntaxes and semiotics. Sometimes humans use language just for hiding something instead of expressing it. That is reason when CDA takes part in analyzing such phrases used by important people with critical reasoning and discourse. Thus, there are at least two parts of meaningful language.
- Factual
- Contextual
There is famous saying that, “actions speak louder than words”. This quote rightly asserts second meanings of a contextual speech. Especially when comes to the language used in media or the language used by politicians is already attributed as diplomatic language. As in this case everyone already knows that India and Pakistan both has a long history of wars and enmity and securing their nuclear bombs for any future threat or conflicts both of them are ahead of each other. While the speech of the prime minister of Pakistan in 2016’s General Assembly contained very specific and well cut précised sentences. Language is not itself powerful but it becomes an incredible power in the mouths of powerful people. They use it for manipulation of resources and digging deeper and deeper in order to control and impose their ideologies.
Objectives of this Study
Objectives of this study are analyzing the pieces of Prime Minister’s Speech in General Assembly and then again to attempt the message in between the lines. Why Prime Minister wanted to raise the matter membership in nuclear supplier group of world’s nations. Is there any other meaning hidden in these different chunks of his speech or the only meaning was the same he wanted to tell everybody that his country is eligible to be the member of nuclear supplier group? What his intensions were and what should be the conclusion by others and why?
Background to Study
There is long history of wars and enmity between Pakistan and India. Prime Minister’s speech didn’t only have an apparent structure which was delivered at the time but some of his context had a history. Especially when he addressed the issue of Jammu and Kashmir the prime minister was clearly blaming India for its brutality in Kashmir. He said,
“Confrontation should not be our destiny in South Asia. Pakistan wants peace with India. I have gone the extra mile to achieve this, repeatedly offering a dialogue to address all outstanding issues.
But India has posed unacceptable preconditions to engage in a dialogue. Let us be clear: talks are no favor to Pakistan. Talks are in the interest of both countries. They are essential to resolve our differences, especially the Jammu and Kashmir dispute, and to avert the danger of any escalation”
Next passages of the prime minister’s speech are more clearly blaming India very bluntly and he seems to convince the General Assembly that there is a fresh conflict being emerged from the long historical struggle of Kashmiri people for their freedom from Indian occupation. His speech briefly describes the matter but he knows that most of the people listening to his predictions about some sort of possible war in near future. After bluntly blaming the Indian brutality Pakistani Prime minister indicates some unpleasant future accidents such as the beginning of nuclear war in his hidden lines.
If a critical approach be made upon the speech and all discussed matters in it one can see following facts before analyzing the content of his speech,
- All governments of BJP in India have been extremist in their nature including Vajpayee’snotorious government for its different phases of religious crisis in India and the present Government is again the government of BJP. BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) is a right wing and the largest party of Indian people. BJP is also well known for its manifesto of Hindu Nationalism.
- Indian Prime Minister Narenda Modi had announced the purchase of 36 Rafale fighter jets from France because according to many war experts India was not properly competing Pakistan in its Air Forces and BJP’s government realized the necessity of being equal fighter in case of war against Pakistan. Pakistani Prime Minister knew this fact and he indicated it in his speech.
- There was a terrorist attack in India at the location of Uri on 18 September 2016. According to Time Magazine, “No group has claimed responsibility for the attack”. But most of the BJP leaders immediately accused Pakistan for those terrorist attacks [1].
- Indian Prime Minister needed favors of his people for the highest budget in ages for defense so he immediately cashed the terrorist attack in favor of the purchase of 36 Rafale fighter.
- Meanwhile and Indian freedom leader was murdered by Indian Armed forces in Jammu and Kashmir and there was a situation of Curfew that’s been documenting by the international media continuously.
All this background study tells a new story about the wish of being a Member of The Nuclear Supplier Group internationally.
Review of the Related Literature
Because our research is based on a very recent speech of the prime minister of Pakistan that’s why there are still no researches made by any institute, organization or individual till now on this very specific topic. This will be the first ever research paper.
Discourse
The term discourse was firstly used by the philosopher Foucault and specially for the purpose of indicating the meaning above than the structure of sentence. Discourse has many definitions but for linguistics’ purpose it only serves following duties,
- From out of the sentence
- Language in Use
- The expanse of the limits of social activities, nonspecific, non-linguistic.
With first definition a linguist watches carefully what was actually beyond the sentence. With second definition a linguist watches carefully the language in use. It is widely discussed academically that every language for every event is unique and new and is specially used for the some point in space in moment in time. Third definition is for academics or scholars, through his definition a linguist approaches towards other things such as what was the environment, how conversers were talking, what they were wearing, what was in their hands how they managed to control their emotions and displayed some specific gestures.
Critical Discourse Analysis
CDA or Critical Discourse Analysis is a précised way of seeking true meaning of the passage discussed in matter. for example, in this case our CDA will be performed on a very specific piece of prime minister’s speech which is,
“Judged on the basis of objective criteria and without discrimination Pakistan is fully eligible for membership of the nuclear suppliers group”
But in order to reach the real meaning we shall have to take some other passages of his speech and put them together in the light of three major methods, one, see what is from out of the sentence, second see what is the language in use and thirdly monitor the gestures, backgrounds, styles and all nonspecific and non-linguistic items used during all the scenario.
Moreover, van Dijk (2001:353) states that
“Critical research on discourse needs to satisfy a number of requirements in order to effectively realize its aims”
- CDA addresses social problems
- Power relations are discursive
- Discourse Constitutes Society and Culture
- Discourse does ideological work
- Discourse is historical
- The link between text and society is mediated
- Discourse analysis is interpretative and explanatory
- Discourse is a form of social action.
(Faiclough & Wodak in Van Dijk, 1998
Keeping in mind all these sophisticated criteria we shall perform CDA in order to disclose the unmasked narrative of Pakistani Nuclear Program by examining the prime minister’s speech’s one apparently unnoticeable point which was about being the member of nuclear supplier community.
Data Collection
In this research we shall take the main chunk which is our sole goal to examine, from the official website of the Prime Minister of Pakistan from Speeches section of the website. We shall also take other pieces of Prime minister’s speeches from the same website. We shall get historical evidences from different sources such as Documentaries on Jammu and Kashmir Issue and conflict between Pakistan and India. Also data from Pakistan’s energy crisis and future plans of Pakistani Nuclear Program from various online and also offline sources. Also we shall take data from media talk shows, news, programs, and events.
Data to be analyzed,
Our Target phrase,
““Judged on the basis of objective criteria and without discrimination Pakistan is fully eligible for membership of the nuclear suppliers group”
List of all coming element to be analyzed,
Element 1:
“Mr. President,
As a responsible nuclear weapon state, Pakistan will continue to cooperate with all international efforts that seek to promote fair and equitable solutions to disarmament and non-proliferation challenges.
We have introduced ‘state of the art’ measures to strengthen the safety and security of our nuclear materials and facilities. We have adopted a comprehensive export control regime that is fully consistent with international standards.
Judged on the basis of objective criteria, and without discrimination, Pakistan is fully eligible for membership of the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group”.
http://www.pmo.gov.pk/pm_speech_details.php?speech_id=78
Element 2:
Pakistan has a vital stake in ending conflicts, fostering peace, fighting terrorism, strengthening democracy, promoting human rights, generating global growth and overcoming the challenges of environmental degradation. We can achieve these goals, and create a new and peaceful world order, only through the United Nations and by strict adherence to the principles of its Charter.
http://www.pmo.gov.pk/pm_speech_details.php?speech_id=78
Element 3:
“WASHINGTON: A prominent political scientist and an expert on Pakistan and India has warned that the two countries could skid into a nuclear war that would be disastrous for them, the New York Times reported on Thursday”.
Element 4:
“We will destroy India if it dares to impose war on us. Pakistan army is fully prepared to answer any misadventure of India,” Pakistan’s Minister of Defense Khawaja Asif said Wednesday to a local TV network. “We have not made atomic device to display in a showcase. If such a situation arises we will use it and eliminate India.”
Element 5
In future, while implementing our decisions, we have to strike a balance between confidentiality and openness; and steer away from both alarmism and complacency.[ref]
…………………………………………..
Critical Discourse Analysis
Element 1:
“Mr. President,
As a responsible nuclear weapon state, Pakistan will continue to cooperate with all international efforts that seek to promote fair and equitable solutions to disarmament and non-proliferation challenges.
We have introduced ‘state of the art’ measures to strengthen the safety and security of our nuclear materials and facilities. We have adopted a comprehensive export control regime that is fully consistent with international standards.
Judged on the basis of objective criteria, and without discrimination, Pakistan is fully eligible for membership of the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group”.
http://www.pmo.gov.pk/pm_speech_details.php?speech_id=78
Analysis
We know that Pakistani Nuclear Program has been badly criticized by international community in sense of proliferation nuclear technology and on one occasion Pakistani Atomic scientist Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan announced an apology in order to fix the reputation of the country and he said,
“The investigation has established that many of the reported activities did occur, and that these were inevitably initiated at my behest……… It pains me to realize… that my entire lifetime achievement… could have been placed in serious jeopardy…………. I give an assurance, my dear brothers and sisters, that such activities will never take place in the future”
http://fas.org/nuke/guide/pakistan/nuke/aqkhan020404.html
Now if we carefully watch the first chunk of this element it says,
“Mr. President,
As a responsible nuclear weapon state, Pakistan will continue to cooperate with all international efforts that seek to promote fair and equitable solutions to disarmament and non-proliferation challenges.
Mr. Prime Minister used the words, “As a responsible nuclear weapon state”. This elaborates the hidden fact that Pakistan’s been accused for proliferation of atomic weapons. If the same statement was made by some other responsible nuclear weapon state’s prime minister the same phrase would never have given the meaning that prime minister is somehow attempting to remove the blame on his country. The second statement that “Pakistan will continue to cooperate with all international efforts” again has some sort of historical background in the same sense as we discussed before. And in the end of the his statement he used the words, “non-proliferation challenges” which clearly refers to the same psychology in this very specific case.
Now we’ll see the second chunk of the first element which is,
“We have introduced ‘state of the art’ measures to strengthen the safety and security of our nuclear materials and facilities. We have adopted a comprehensive export control regime that is fully consistent with international standards”.
In the light of allegations brought on Pakistan due to so many other “discourse analysis needed factors” we can see that prime minister is simply trying to erase the impact of being not eligible for Nuclear Energy from the minds of worlds’ community. Imagine if it were some other nuclear country rather than Pakistan they would have never set such excusive arguments in form of a general assembly’s speech.
In 2015 before the visit of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to Washington, The “New York Times” reported that the Obama administration was concerned that,
“Pakistan might be on the verge of deploying a small tactical nuclear weapon that would be harder to protect from falling into hands of militants”[ref]
Element 2:
“Pakistan has a vital stake in ending conflicts, fostering peace, fighting terrorism, strengthening democracy, promoting human rights, generating global growth and overcoming the challenges of environmental degradation. We can achieve these goals, and create a new and peaceful world order, only through the United Nations and by strict adherence to the principles of its Charter”.
http://www.pmo.gov.pk/pm_speech_details.php?speech_id=78
Analysis
In this text we find our prime minister is trying to develop hi argument through his proofs in favor of a modern liberal thinking. It’s like not only set your attempts before the world community which apparently seems but in depth it’s some sort of Appeal to pity in order to obtain hidden purposes that are actually related to Pakistani Defense. See the wordings,
- Pakistan has a vital stake in ending conflicts
- fostering peace
- fighting terrorism
- strengthening democracy
- promoting human rights
- generating global growth
- overcoming the challenges of environmental degradation
The prime minister attempts to keep pace with the modern secular legacy of the modern world knowing that he is the Prime minister of a country that claims to be an Islamic Republic and there are so many issues in this extremely religious minded community but he assures the world that the face of Pakistan will be always cool and yesS! They believe in strength of United Nations.
Now it’s easier to conclude that above mentioned chunk of his speech was not what it was being expressed apparently but it was an attempt to collect the favors of international community in order to keep Pakistan’s Nuclear Program alive. But here one question comes across, why on Earth Pakistan feel a need to make world mentality in favor of his nuclear program on such an event. Because the iron was very hot. India did violated various human rights in Jammu and Kashmir and there was nuclear threat in case of war between two countries. The accession of the meeting of General Assembly was a suitable place to bring forward the hot issue and save our nuclear program, because it’s the right time to say what you want to say.
Element 3:
“WASHINGTON: A prominent political scientist and an expert on Pakistan and India has warned that the two countries could skid into a nuclear war that would be disastrous for them, the New York Times reported on Thursday”.
Analysis
In element 3 we clearly see that Hegelian dialectics are in their full form working to make an appropriate threat for the communities in order manipulate the situation as it is wanted by some higher international authorities. If know the history of wars between two countries there is no situation of nuclear attacks in any case. India could never afford the war because it does not only have problems with Pakistan but it has major issues with a super power like China and not only this, India is badly involved in domestic anarchy in her several major regions of many provinces like Kashmiri freedom fighters, Tamil freedom fighters, Sikh nationalists and religious extremists of Shive Sina. How could India ever afford such a battle that would possibly end with complete destruction of both countries. Apart from the political position of India and Pakistan it’s almost impossible to begin a nuclear between India and Pakistan because it’s not the actual bone of contention of modern day’s international community. Clearly the threat of war and such descriptions like one of New York Times are to create an environment of threat fear because Pakistan is developing very strong relations with China and they are almost ready to complete the project of the construction of long, long road from China to Karachi Port. That’s the actual threat for western world’s economy and would never wish to see completing this road.
So a western analyst promotes a false threat in order to create the situation of tension through out the world which would possibly stop Pak-China great projects if a little show-time war begins.
Element 4:
“We will destroy India if it dares to impose war on us. Pakistan army is fully prepared to answer any misadventure of India,” Pakistan’s Minister of Defense Khawaja Asif said Wednesday to a local TV network. We have not made atomic device to display in a showcase. If such a situation arises we will use it and eliminate India.”
Analysis
In this passage two points are to be noticed,
- “We will destroy India if it dares to impose war on us”
- “We have not made atomic device to display in a showcase”
It’s Pakistani defense minister who is threatening India directly. His words are very strict, “We will destroy India” and “We have not made atomic device to display in a showcase”. That’s attention grabbing statement from throughout the world. In this statement defense minister is crystal clear in his words but his intention is not to threaten India but to warn the world about possible outcomes of extraordinary involvement in Pakistan’s projects of progress with China and of course development of nuclear energy for the long run. If India has an atom bomb to throw on Pakistan, Pakistan does have the right to keep his bomb as long as India keeps its own. No one is actually going to drop a nuclear bomb, they are all instant narratives and they are all elephants teeth, not for eating and just for the display.
Element 5
In future, while implementing our decisions, we have to strike a balance between confidentiality and openness; and steer away from both alarmism and complacency.[ref]
Analysis
This chunk of the speech of Prime Minister was taken out of the opening Remarks of Muhammad Nawaz Sharif at the Informal Plenary on the future of the Nuclear Security Summit The Hague
If we concentrate on one of his words, “alarmism” right after expressing Pakistan’s intention of implementing their decisions, has something of very great significance. It’s clearly been shown that Prime Minister and his government will continue to face all four sides of the fight, i.e. confidentiality and openness at the same time and keep herself away from alarmism and complacency. Pakistan just wants to steer away the alarmism and that’s the actual fact. No one is going to surrender anything on the name of humanity till “All Supper” superpower like USA herself initiates such sincere activities on the name of world safety. Pakistan will continue it’s nuclear program and diplomacy at the same time. Analyzing the speeches and complete situation of the matter it seems that Pakistan has succeeded in saving its nuclear program. If, once international community accepts eligibility criteria of Pakistan’s program it will at least consider to list Pakistan in not immediate threats to international security because of its nuclear progress.
Conclusion
Above mentioned chunks of different descriptions explain something that Pakistan continuously struggled to save its nuclear program. It was necessary because after being exposed the Iranian nuclear program Pakistan became the most notorious country on the matter of proliferation of nuclear weapons. The founder of Pakistani Nuclear Weapon program Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan’s apology will remain the part of history when he openly admitted some loop holes in his personal commitment with peace and humanity. Iranian Nuclear activities brought Pakistan on this stage and its nuclear program at stake.
Because before Iranian program Pakistan was never in such a critical position and the reason was that Pakistan was fighting the war of America in Afghanistan.
However there was a series of reports from all over the world about the security of nuclear weapons in Pakistan. Meanwhile Pakistan’s been uninterruptedly performing successful nuclear experiments including a “Successful test of the Hatf-5B Pakistan ballistic missile”.
Joseph V Micallef wrote in his report,
“Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program, however, may prove to be just as dangerous and just as destabilizing as that of Tehran’s” [ref]
A large debate came into existence right after the completion of American involvement in Afghanistan. Almost all western writers started to pin point the Pakistan as nuclear threat to the world.
This scenario was creating international environment against the existence of Pakistani Nuclear Program. Therefore Pakistan continued its campaign to show the soft face of Pakistan and the assurance of the security of nuclear weapons in the long run.
Now if Pakistan shows it’s wishes to be the member of international nuclear energy suppliers group it would be a huge demand from the western world. Technically it should be considered the same thing as Pakistan’s been blamed for supplying nuclear technology to Iran and some other countries.
The world is of course round. Pakistan now wants to be the part of international nuclear energy suppliers group. Is this the reality? Is Pakistan serious to spread nuclear energy while being in the hugest crisis of energy by itself?
It seems that the intention of prime minister was to divert the attention of international community towards the necessity of Pakistani Program. In other world Prime Minister just committed a fallacy called “Red Herring”.