A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF BENJAMIN NETANYAHU'S TWEETS DURING THE CEASEFIRE OF JAN-MARCH 2025

Authors

  • Sultan Asif Zahid MS Scholar, Department of English Linguistics and Literature, Air University, Islamabad, Pakistan. Author
  • Dr. Sajid Iqbal Assistant Professor, Department of English, University of Malakand, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Author
  • Tahir Shah PhD Scholar, Department of English, University of Malakand, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Author
  • Tariq Ullah PhD Scholar, Department of English, University of Malakand, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Author

Keywords:

Fairclough's Critical Discourse Analysis Model, Political Discourse, Israel-Palestine Conflict, Ceasefire Agreement, Benjamin Netanyahu’s Tweets

Abstract

The purpose of using language is not only to communicate but also to serve as an effective tool to construct power relations and ideological narratives. X (formerly Twitter) is increasingly being used by political leaders in order to shape public discourse by the use of language. Taking Benjamin Netanyahu’s tweets during the Israel-Palestine ceasefire period (Jan 19 to Mar 18, 2025), this research indicates how media discourse influences perceptions and strengthens dominance in conflict situations.  This study conducts a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) of Netanyahu’s tweets which linguistically construct power through lexical choices, grammatical structures, and metaphorical framing. It investigates discursive strategies that relegate Palestinian narratives and reinforces Israeli hegemony; and examines the role of religious and historical intertextuality in legalizing unequal power structures. This study applies Norman Fairclough's three-dimensional model on Netanyahu’s 15 purposively sampled written tweets in order to discuss how linguistic, rhetorical, and discursive resources uncover linguistic and ideological patterns. Tweets in Hebrew from Netanyahu’s official X account were taken and translated for analysis of recurrent discursive strategies. It was found that the tweets use active voices, militarized diction, and rhetoric which shape ideological narratives while political authority is legitimized through intertextuality and hegemony with reinforcing Zionist ideology. The research highlights how political discourse is used as a weapon to defend actions, control perceptions, and maintain hegemony during conflict settings. It demonstrates the hidden and inevitable role of social media in maintaining hegemony and underlines the need and importance critical media understanding to decipher power-laden narratives in digital spaces.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aharony, N. (2011). Twitter use by three political leaders: An exploratory analysis. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 63(6), 733–744.

Algurjia, H. D. A., Almukhtar, A. T. A., Mahdi, A. A., & Essa, S. M. (2024). Manufacturing consent: A critical discourse analysis of Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to the United States Congress in 2024. Journal of International Conflict, Rhetoric and Communication, (issue/volume not always available online). [PDF]. Retrieved from JICRCR.

Atmawijaya, T. D. (2024). Reclaiming the narrative: A critical discourse analysis of Donald Trump's 2024 Super Tuesday campaign speech. k@ta, 26(2), 87–102.

Barthes, R. (1967). Elements of semiology. Jonathan Cape.

Bhowmik, S., & Fisher, J. (2023). Framing the Israel–Palestine conflict 2021: Investigation of CNN’s coverage from a peace journalism perspective. Media, Culture & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437231154766.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.) Sage.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.) Sage publications.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.) Sage.

Dijk, T. A. (1985). Introduction: the role of discourse analysis in society. In Handbook of discourse analysis (Vol. 1). T. A. van Dijk (Ed). London: Academic Press.16.

Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. Longman.

Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Polity Press.

Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.

Fairclough, N., &Wodak, R. (1997). Critical discourse analysis. In T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse social interaction. Sage.

Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge. Routledge.

Foucault, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge: selected interviews and other writings. Pantheon Book.

Gee, J. P. (2014). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method (4th ed.).

Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks (Q. Hoare & G. Nowell Smith, Eds) International Publishers.

Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action; Vol. 1. Reason and the rationalization of society. Beacon Press.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. Edward Arnold.

Hameleers, M. (2025). The visual nature of information warfare: the construction of visual disinformation narratives on social media. Journal of Communication, 75(2), 90

Kadim, E. N. (2023). A critical discourse analysis of Vladimir Putin‟s speech announcing „special military operation‟ in Ukraine. International Journal of Humanities and Educational Research, 5(1).

Kumar, R. (2019). Research methodology: A step-by-step guide for beginners (5th ed.). Sage.

Mumtaz, I., Zahra, F. T., & Hussain, I. K. (2023). A critical discourse analysis of President Barack Obama’s Cairo speech “A new beginning.” Pakistan Languages and Humanities Review, 7(4), 606–618.

Nusrat, A., Sardaraz, K., & Shehzadi, S. (2020). Critical discourse analysis of Imran Khan‟s dharna speeches in socio-political perspective. Sir Syed Journal of Education & Social Research (SJESR), 3(1), 9–19.

Pressman, J. (2025). Israel’s response to allegations of human rights violations. Journal of Human Rights Practice. (Article discussing Netanyahu tweets in context).

Rangkuti, R., & Yusuf, M. (2021). The impoliteness strategies of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Twitter. LingPoet Journal of Linguistics and Literary Research, 2(2), 24–37.

Reisigl, M., & Wodak, R. (2009). The discourse-historical approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (2nd ed., pp. 87–121). SAGE.

Routledge.

Tzelgov, E. (2024). The political Twittersphere as a breeding ground for populist ideas: A neural-network analysis of the Israeli Twittersphere. Social Media + Society.

Van Dijk, T. A (2001). Discourse, ideology and context. Folia Linguistica, 35(1-2), 11-40.

Van Dijk, T. A. (1990). Discourse and society: A new journal for a new research focus.Discourse and society, 1(1), 5.

Van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 249283.

Van Dijk, T. A. (2001). Critical Discourse Analysis. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. E. Hamilton (Eds.), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis (pp. 352-371). Blackwell.

Wodak, R. (1989). Language, power and ideology: Studies in political discourse. John Benjamins Publishing.

Wodak, R. (2001). Methods of critical discourse analysis. SAGE Publications.

Wodak, R. (2015). The politics of fear: What right-wing populist discourses mean. Sage.

Published

2025-06-30

How to Cite

Sultan Asif Zahid, Dr. Sajid Iqbal, Tahir Shah, & Tariq Ullah. (2025). A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF BENJAMIN NETANYAHU’S TWEETS DURING THE CEASEFIRE OF JAN-MARCH 2025. International Premier Journal of Languages & Literature, 3(2), 830-851. https://ipjll.com/ipjll/index.php/journal/article/view/216