American Strategic Studies

American Strategic Studies

Critical Discourse Analysis of the U.S. Department of State Webpage on the Arab World Based on van Dijk’s Ideological Square

Document Type : Original Article

Author
Mohammad reza Anvari
Assistant Professor, Department of Social Communication, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Religions and Denominations, Qom, Iran.
Abstract
The Arab world, owing to its geopolitical position, energy resources, and connection to security developments, constitutes a significant domain of U.S. foreign policy. Given the role of official media in the selective representation of realities, examining how the Arab world is portrayed in diplomatic texts is of particular importance. Such representations can influence the production of meaning and shape audience perceptions of U.S.–Arab relations. The website of the U.S. Department of State is one such medium. Accordingly, the principal research question is: How does this website represent the Arab world and U.S. relations with it? This study employs both the theoretical foundations and methodological framework of van Dijk’s Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). The data consist of fifteen documents related to events in the Arab world, selected through purposive sampling from materials published in December 2024. The findings indicate that the website, through a variety of linguistic strategies, portrays the United States as a supporter of democracy, human rights, global peace, and regional stability, as well as a state possessing superior military capabilities. In contrast, the Arab world is predominantly represented in terms of a lack of democracy, internal crises, instability, extremism, and human rights violations. Furthermore, U.S. responsibility for unlawful interventions and their humanitarian consequences is marginalized or articulated through justificatory language. Positive characteristics of the Arab world are also frequently overlooked or are rendered meaningful primarily within the framework of cooperation with the United States. Categorization, polarization, and comparison within the binary opposition of “Us” versus “Them” constitute some of the most significant representational mechanisms. A key finding is that the representation of Arab countries is not uniform; states opposed to U.S. policies are generally described through negative attributes, whereas U.S. allies are portrayed in ways that largely avoid such characterizations.
Keywords
United States
Arab World
Department of State Webpage
Discourse Analysis
van Dijk&‌rsquo
s Ideological Square
Abbasi, M., & Demirchilo, F. (2024). US foreign and security policy in the Gaza crisis (2023–2024). American Strategic Studies, 15(4), 65–90. https://doi.org/10.47176/asr.2024.1259 [In Persian]
Aghagolzadeh, F. (2006). Critical Discourse Analysis. Tehran: Elmi va Farhangi. [In Persian]
Amnesty International. (2019). Arms transfers and human rights: The responsibility of states. London: Amnesty International.
Bahrami Komail, N. (2009). Media Theory (Sociology of Communication). Tehran: Kavir. [In Persian]
Brownlee, J. (2013). Democracy Prevention: The Politics of the U.S.-Sponsored Arab Reform. Oxford University Press.pp. 45–53.
Carothers, T., & Youngs, R. (2015). The Complexities of Promoting Democracy. Journal of Democracy, 26(1), 49–63
Eslami, M., & Karampouri, M. (2022). Analyzing the role of the United States in the arms race of West Asian countries (2000–2020). American Strategic Studies, 2(7), 11–47. https://doi.org/10.27834743/ASS.2206.1101 [In Persian]
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press
Fargani, M. M. (2003). The Long Way of Transition; Evolution of Political Development Discourse in Iran. Tehran: Farhang va Andisheh. [In Persian]
Gause, F. G. (2014). Beyond Sectarianism: The New Middle East Cold War. Brookings Doha Center Analysis Paper. pp. 3–7
Ghasemi, H., et al. (2021). Research Reference (1st ed.). Tehran: Andisheh Ara. [In Persian]
Human Rights Watch. (2018). “Nowhere Safe”: Civilians Under Siege in Yemen. Human Rights Watch Report.
Jørgensen, M. W., & Phillips, L. J. (2016). Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method (H. Jalili, Trans.). Tehran: Ney. [In Persian]
Kalantari Khandani, E., Farrokhi Barfeh, M. H., & Ghonchehpour, M. (2020). Critical discourse analysis of Donald Trump’s tweets based on Van Dijk’s model. Journal of Language Research, 12(34), 131–156. https://doi.org/10.22051/jlr.2019.20256.1545[In Persian]
Lesser, I. O., et al. (2019). Syria after the War: Options for Reconstruction and Reconciliation. RAND Corporation.
Lynch, M. (2016). The New Arab Wars: Uprisings and Anarchy in the Middle East. PublicAffairs pp. 12–18; 210–218.
Mearsheimer, J. J., & Walt, S. M. (2016). The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (Revised ed.).
Mirzaei Tabar, M. (2024). Geopolitical explanation of the United States’ presence in the Horn of Africa. American Strategic Studies, 4(13), 169–191. https://doi.org/10.47176/ASR.2024.1226[In Persian]
Mortad, A. (1998). Fi Nazariyyat al-Riwaya: Bahth fi Taqniyyat al-Sard [On Novel Theory: A Study of Narrative Techniques]. Kuwait: Alam al-Ma’rifah, National Council for Culture, Arts and Letters. [In Arabic]
Salehian, T., Gheytasi, S., & Ahmadi Nejad, H. (2024). The United States’ discursive logic in the conceptualization of terrorism: Representation of Hezbollah and Tahrir al-Sham. American Strategic Studies, 4(16), 137–159. https://doi.org/10.47176/ASR.2025.1276[In Persian]
Soltani, S. A. A. (2004). Discourse analysis as theory and method. Political Science Quarterly, 28, 153–180. [In Persian]
Vaezi, M. (2013). US behavioral pattern in dealing with developments in Arab countries. Foreign Relations Quarterly, 5(1), 35–72. https://doi.org/20.1001.1.20085419.1392.5.1.1.4[In Persian]
Van Dijk, T. A. (1977). Text and Context: Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse. London: Longman.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2016). Ideology and Discourse: A Multidisciplinary Introduction (M. Nobakht, Trans.). Tehran: Siayahrud. [In Persian]
Van Dijk, T.A (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. London: Sage Publications
Van Dijk, T.A (2000). News racism: a discourse analytical approach. In T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Ethnic minorities and the media (pp. 33-49). Philadelphia, USA: Open University Press.
Van Dijk, T.A.(2001). Ideology and discourse: A multidisciplinary introduction. Sage Publications.
Van Dijk, T.A.(2002), “Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis”, in Critical Discourse Analysis. (ed.) by Michael Toolan, Vol. 2, Routledge, 104-141.
Van Dijk, T.A.(2003). Ideology and discourse, multidisciplinary introduction. Barcelona: Ariel.
Van Dijk, T.A.(2006). Ideology and discourse analysis. Journal of Political Ideology, 11(2),115-140.
Van Dijk, T.A.(2006a). Discourse and manipulation. Discourse & Society, 17(2), 359–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926506060250 
Van Dijk, T.A.(2018). Sociocognitive discourse studies. In J. Flowerdew & J. E. Richardson (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies (pp. 26–43). Routledge.
Wehrey, F. (2018). Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Arab States: Internal and External Challenges. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
American Strategic Studies
Volume 6, Issue 2 - Serial Number 2
Serial number 22 - Summer 2026
Summer 2026

  • Receive Date 02 September 2025
  • Revise Date 11 August 2026
  • Accept Date 19 August 2026
  • Publish Date 23 July 2026