A Critical Discourse Analysis of Waters War in Social Media

Abstract

Water is a crucial resource for life; however, its uneven distribution and increasing demand have led to significant conflicts among nations, often referred to as 'water wars'. The study aims to investigate the types of transitivity processes most frequently used in the politicians' utterances regarding the water war between Iraq and Turkey. Additionally, it seeks to analyze how positive self-representation and negative other-representation are uncovered at the micro level in these utterances. Employing a qualitative descriptive approach, the study analyses two purposefully selected reports from Al Arabiya News and Reuters through critical discourse analysis. It adopts an eclectic model, combining Fairclough's (1995) three-dimensional framework with Van Dijk's (2000) ideological square to explore how political discourse shapes ideological narratives. The findings highlight a predominant focus on material processes, indicating a strong emphasis on actions and decisions related to water management. Furthermore, the findings showed that Iraqi and Turkish politicians construct ideological representations by emphasizing the positive aspects of their group while minimizing their flaws and highlighting the negative aspects of the opposing group. These insights highlight the crucial role of discourse in shaping public perceptions and political narratives, underscoring the importance of more equitable and transparent communication in managing water conflicts. Future research should incorporate a multimodal discourse analysis, including visual and multimedia elements, to examine their role in the ideological framing.