POWER RELATIONS AND HEGEMONY IN GLOBAL POLITICS: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS By Shazia Ayyaz NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF MODERN LANGUAGES ISLAMABAD December 2016 Power Relations and Hegemony in Global Politics: A Critical Discourse Analysis By Shazia Ayyaz M.A., National University of Modern Languages, Islamabad. A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In English Linguistics To FACULTY OF LANGUAGES NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF MODERN LANGUAGES, ISLAMABAD © Shazia Ayyaz ii NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF MODERN LANGUAGES FACULTY OF LANGUAGES THESIS AND DEFENSE APPROVAL FORM The undersigned certify that they have read the following thesis, examined the defense, are satisfied with the overall exam performance, and recommend the thesis to the Faculty of Languages for acceptance: Thesis Title: Power Relations and Hegemony in Global Politics: A Critical Discourse Analysis Submitted by: Shazia Ayyaz Registration #: 567-MPhil/Ling/Jan11 Doctor of Philosophy Degree name in full Degree Name English Linguistics in Full (e.g Master of Name of Discipline Philosophy, Doctor of Philosophy) Dr. Nighat Sultana ______________________ Name of Research Supervisor Signature of Research Supervisor Prof. Dr. Muhammad Safeer Awan _____________________ Name of Dean (FoL) Signature of Dean Maj. Gen. Zia Uddin Najam HI(M) (R) _____________________ Name of Rector Signature of Rector Date iii CANDIDATE DECLARATION FORM I Shazia Ayyaz Daughter of Muhammad Ayyaz Registration # 567-MPhil/Ling/Jan11 Discipline English Linguistics Candidate of Doctor of Philosophy at the National University of Modern Languages do hereby declare that the thesis Power Relations and Hegemony in Global Politics: A Critical Discourse Analysis submitted by me in partial fulfillment of PhD degree, is my original work, and has not been submitted or published earlier. I also solemnly declare that it shall not, in future, be submitted by me for obtaining any other degree from this or any other university or institution. I also understand that if evidence of plagiarism is found in my thesis/dissertation at any stage, even after the award of a degree, the work may be cancelled and the degree revoked. Signature of Candidate _________________ Date Shazia Ayyaz Name of the candidate iv ABSTRACT Thesis Title: Power Relations and Hegemony in Global Politics: A Critical Discourse Analysis This qualitative study explores the power relations and hegemony in the global political discourse by utilizing the theory of Critical Discourse Analysis. The study is backgrounded in the situation created after the YouTube release of the movie trailer The Innocence of Muslims in September 2012. The video of the trailer containing blasphemous content against Islam and the Prophet Muhammad (SAWW), received protests by Muslims throughout the world culminating in destructions and deaths. The main concern of the study was to explore the construction and reconstruction of power relations through discursive practices of the world political actors in a particular context. I chose 67th United Nations General Assembly Meeting 2012 as setting of the study. I selected six speeches which were delivered in the meeting as data for this research. The data has been analyzed utilizing Fairclough’s (1992a) framework of intertextuality and hegemony. The analysis is based on the study of various intertextual references present in the selected speeches. The detailed analysis of the data shows that power relations are exposed in discursive practices of the world political actors. The study concludes that the discursive strategies of the political actors disclose the construction, sustenance and fracture of the power/hegemonic relations in the context of global politics. The dominant political actors use different discursive strategies to construct powerful self-image and intensify the negative aspects of the subordinate group. The subordinate political actors struggle to construct positive self-image and assist the dominant group in constructing and sustaining the power relations and hegemony. However, their economic status and political situation lead them to assist or resist the dominant ideologies. The study adds to the field of knowledge by highlighting important issue of the present time i.e. the divide between the issue of blasphemy and freedom of expression. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page THESIS/DISSERTATION AND DEFENSE APPROVAL FORM………. ii CANDIDATE DECLARATION……………………………………………. iii ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS...………………………………………………….. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………. ix DEDICATION ………………………………………………………………. x I INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………… 1 1.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………... 1 1.2 Background of the Study……...….…………………………………… 3 1.3 Recent History of the Issue of Blasphemy. …..………………………. 4 1.3.1 Satanic Verses…...……………………………………………….…… 5 1.3.2 The Cartoon Controversy……….……………………………………. 6 1.3.3 Innocence of Muslims…………….…………………………………... 6 1.4 Problem Statement……………………………………………………. 7 1.5 Significance of the Study………………………………....…………... 8 1.6 Objectives of the Study……………...………………………………... 8 1.7 Research Questions………………….………………………………... 9 1.8 Organization of the Remainder of the Thesis ………………………… 9 II LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………………… 11 2.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………… 11 2.2 Historical Development of the Theory of Power……………………… 11 2.2.1 The concept of Bases of Power ……………………...………………... 12 2.2.2 Foucauldian concept of power ……………....………………………... 14 2.3 Theory of Discourse…………………………...………………………. 16 2.3.1 Discourse in Social Context………………………………………….... 18 2.3.2 Theory of Discourse and theory of Power …………………………….. 19 2.3.3 Power Relations and Discourse………………………………………… 21 2.3.4 Fairclough’s concept of Power and Discourse………………………..... 22 2.3.5 Ideologies and power structure …………………………………….….. 23 2.3.6 Ideology, Identity and Power Relations……………………...…….…... 24 2.4 Theory of Critical Discourse Analysis………………………………… 25 2.4.1 The concept of discourse in Critical Discourse Analysis…………….... 28 2.4.2 Approaches to Critical Discourse Analysis……………………………. 29 2.5 Political Discourse……………………………………………………… 31 2.5.1 Critical Discourse Analysis and Political Speeches…………………..... 33 vi 2.5.1.1 Some research studies on political speeches and CDA………………. 33 2.5.2 Critical Discourse Analysis and (Global) Politics…………………….. 35 2.6 Hegemony………………………………………….………………….. 35 2.6.1 Hegemony and Critical Discourse Analysis…………………………... 36 2.6.2 Hegemony in the Present Political World ……………………………. 36 2.6.3 Hegemony and Dominance…………………………………………… 37 2.6.4 Hegemonic Setup and Ideology……………………………………….. 39 2.6.5 Hegemony and Politics………………………………………………... 39 2.6.6 Hegemony and Political Discourse…………………………………… 40 2.6.7 Hegemony Politics and Critical Discourse Analysis…………………. 41 2.7 Intertextuality…………………………………………………………. 42 2.7.1 Intertextuality in Critical Discourse Analysis………………………… 42 2.7.2 Intertextuality Power and Hegemony…………………………………. 44 2.8 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………. 45 III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY…………………………………………… 46 3.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………… 46 3.1.1 Context………………………………………………………………... 46 3.1.2 Setting………………………………………………………………… 47 3.1.3 Nature of the Study…………………………………………………… 47 3.2 Critical Discourse Analysis and the Present Study…………………… 49 3.3 Research Method……………………………………………………… 51 3.4 Rationale for Intertextuality as Method………………………………. 54 3.5 Theoretical Framework……………………..………………………… 55 3.6 Data Collection……………………………………………………….. 56 3.6.1 Sample………………………………………………………………... 57 3.6.2 Delimitation…………………………………………………………... 57 3.7 Definitions of the Terms as used in the Study……………………...… 57 3.7.1 Manifest Intertextuality………………………………………………. 57 3.7.1a Discourse representations………………………………………….... 58 3.7.1b Presuppositions………………………………...…………………….. 58 3.7.1c Negation…………………………………………………………….... 58 3.7.1d Metadiscourse………………………………………………………... 59 3.7.1e Irony………………………………………………………………….. 59 3.7.2 Interdiscursivity……………………………………………………… 59 3.7.2a Intertexts/Intertextual references…………….……….......................... 59 3.7.3 Video……………………………….….……..………......................... 59 3.7.4 Discursive Practices……………………………………………..…… 60 IV DATA ANALYSIS …………………………..…............................................. 61 4.1 Intertextual Analysis of the Political Discourse from the West……. 61 4.1.1 Manifest Intertextuality ………….………………..…………...…… 62 4.1.1.1 Discourse Representations...……………………………………….. 62 4.1.1.1a Direct quotations………………………………………………….. 62 4.1.1.1b Free indirect speech...………………………...…………………… 67 4.1.1.2 Presuppositions.………………………………....………………... 71 4.1.1.3 Negation …………………………………..…..…...…………….. 83 vii 4.1.1.4 Metadiscourse………………..………………………………......... 91 4.1.1.5 Irony…….…………………………………………………………. 100 4.1.2 Interdiscursivity ………………………………………………..…. 102 4.2 Intertextual Analysis of the Political Discourse from the U.N…….. 128 4.2.1 Manifest Intertextuality………………….…………………….…… 128 4.2.1.1 Discourse Representations…………….…………………………… 128 4.2.1.1a Direct quotations…………………………………………………… 128 4.2.1.1b Free indirect discourse…………………………………………….. 129 4.2.1.2 Presuppositions ……………………………………………………. 130 4.2.1.3 Negation ……………………………………………………………. 131 4.2.1.4 Metadiscourse ……………………………….................................... 132 4.2.1.5 Irony…………………………….………………………………….. 1 33 4.2.2 Interdiscursivity……………….…………………………….……… 134 4.3 Intertextual Analysis of the Political Discourse from the Muslims World ………………………………………………………………. 136 4.3.1 Intertextual Analysis of the Speech