A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF MILITARY COUPS IN PAKISTAN: POWER, IDEOLOGY AND TRANSGRESSION

Abstract

Military takeovers have been pivotal and frequent in political history of Pakistan having a significant effect on the democratic development, institutional integrity, and governance frameworks of a country. In the context of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), this study uses Ruth Wodak's Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA) to investigate the rhetorical and linguistic tactics used by military regimes to justify their political interventions.Finding out how beliefs of authority, control, the national interest are deliberately created and spread in order to influence public opinion and political legitimacy is the goal of the study. To find recurrent themes and discursive patterns, historical records, political speeches, press releases, and media narratives were examined.  According to the findings, Pakistan's military regimes have continuously used tactics like positive self-representation, nationalism and ethical guardianship appeals, invoking political stability and national security, and disparaging civilian leadership as dishonest or inept. In addition to legitimizing military involvement, these rhetorical strategies strengthened hegemonic power structures, accepted undemocratic behavior, and shaped the public's sociopolitical consciousness.  The study sheds light on the relationship between language, ideology, also political legitimacy in Pakistan's civil-military dynamics and advances knowledge of how speech serves as a tool of power in authoritarian settings.