LEGITIMATE VS ILLEGITIMATE: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF DISCURSIVE CONSTRUCTION OF AFGHAN GOVERNANCE IN GLOBAL MEDIA

Abstract

In politically contested contexts where question of legitimacy is central, media often reinforce and challenge underlying power relations. This study intends to investigate the discursive construction of legitimacy and illegitimacy of Afghan governance, examining how authority is represented in media narratives. This study aims to examine how global media construct legitimacy through political and ideological discourse. The data for this study is collected from the articles published in Pakistani (Dawn & The News) and Western (The New York Times & The Guardian) media during 2024 to 2025. The study uses Fairclough’s three- dimensional model to examines how media shapes public perception about legitimacy of Afghan governance. This study uses qualitative approach to investigate how linguistic and discursive strategies are used to shape discursive construction of Afghan governance. The study analyzes 12 articles from four prominent newspapers (3 from each), at three levels: textual analysis, discursive practice, and social practice. The findings suggest that western media construct illegitimacy of Afghan governance by aligning it with international norms and democratic values, while Pakistani media emphasize on regional stability. The study further highlights that different discourses reflect divergent representation of Afghan governance, which reinforce geopolitical perspectives and shape public perception about legitimacy.