Language and Ideology in the Iranian Nuclear Issue: An Analysis of the Speeches of Two Successive U.S. Administrations and the Iranian Response

Abstract

Renowned linguist Norman Fairclough (1992) says, “Language is never neutral because it reflects the interests of those in power who play a crucial role in shaping issues” (p.12). On this basis, the underlying hypothesis of the present study is that language can be used as an efficient tool for persuasion in political discourse. In an attempt to analyze the language of persuasion within the context of the Iranian nuclear issue, the aim of the analysis is two-fold: first, to uncover, on the one hand, the discursive strategies employed by Bush and Obama representing the American point of view. In order to convince the international community of the legitimacy of the sanctions imposed on the Iranian regime, guaranteeing the safety and stability of the world as a whole. On the other hand, the aim of the analysis is to unravel the discursive strategies employed by the Iranian point view to persuade the international community of the Iranians’ right to gain nuclear technology. The analysis will be conducted on the basis of the identity construction of the ‘other’ within the context of the Iranian nuclear issue.