“What Syria Needs Now?” by David Miliband

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Background
Approach to Analysing the Text: CDA
CDA framework
Conclusion
Appendix A
Appendix B
References

Introduction

The present paper is devoted to an investigation of an article by David Miliband (2015), “What Syria Needs Now,” to be carried out with the help of critical discourse analysis (CDA) and aimed at determining the role of the media in the discussion of the conflict (see Appendix A). The article considers the crisis in Syria, including the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), the refugee issue and the problems of the Syrian population still residing in the country. Additionally, the author analyses the attitude of the world community to this complex concern and the related activities of various governments as well as the United Nations (UN). The author concludes by offering three interventions, which should be performed by the global community. In his view, they are the actions that “Syria needs now” (Miliband, 2015, para. 1).

Reflecting the specifics of the article, the present paper includes an overview of the political and social issues that the article considers and goes on to discuss the methodology that is then applied to the article. The methodology includes CDA at the micro-, meso- and macro-levels, and it is tailored to consider the distinctive features of the article in an objective way. In the end, the conclusions about the potential of transmitting particular ideologies through the meanings created by the article’s choices in images, transitivity, presuppositions and vocabulary are made.

Background

The current situation in Syria can be described as a crisis (Ziadeh, Hadar, Katz, & Heydemann, 2012), which Miliband (2015) discusses in detail. Large numbers of people have been killed, wounded, deprived of their homes and forced to leave their country (Dahi, 2014; Miliband, 2015). The ISIS threat is further escalating the tension both in Syria and the majority of other countries (Lewis, 2014); basically, ISIS is a significant challenge that causes terror on a global scale (Kaya, 2014). However, in the context of Syria, ISIS has an advantage because of that country’s crisis, which prevents Syria from successfully fighting for its land and contributing to the elimination of this global threat (Lewis, 2014). Thus, there is a notable urgency to the current situation in Syria, which makes the analysis of related discourses a worthwhile activity, as well.

Approach to Analysing the Text: CDA

Discourse is the language that exists in “real contexts of use” (Machin & Mayr, 2012, p. 20). In practice, it means that by creating text with the help of specific devices and tools, a writer places the topic of a text into a particular discourse, which triggers certain associations, perceptions and attitudes in the readers (Van Dijk, 1998). CDA is a well-established method of the investigation of discourses (Breeze, 2011).

CDA is a range of methods of discourse analysis that regards language as a “means of social construction” (Machin & Mayr, 2012, p. 4). The latter factor implies that the analysis of language can be used to determine the way in which power relationships and ideological views are reflected in texts (Anwar, Ullah, Ahmad, & Ali, 2015; Hyatt, 2013; Riasati & Rahimi, 2011). Paltridge (2013) highlights that CDA focuses on the explanation of the reasons for the use of discourse in ideological contexts rather than their description since it is a part of critical linguistics. CDA does not have to critique ideologies in a negative way, even though this approach is relatively typical (Breeze, 2011); rather, CDA is expected to be aimed at the investigation of the relationships between texts and ideologies (Bazzul, 2014, p. 422–423), which the present paper aspires to do.

CDA framework

Among the multiple approaches to CDA, the focus on the three levels of discourse (macro-, meso- and micro-) can be singled out (Van Dijk, 1998). In general, the subdivision of levels into the continuum between micro- and macro-levels is typically done to review phenomena of smaller and larger scopes (Horner & Bellamy, 2016). In particular, the analysis of the levels of individual text and its methods of creating meaning can be regarded as micro-level CDA (Talib & Fitzgerald, 2016).

The macro-level may be defined as the analysis of the text within its broad context, and the meso-level refers to the way the meanings are transferred from the micro to the macro level (Skerrett, 2016). This framework of CDA is employed in the present paper because of its convenient and structured approach that helps to determine the way in which ideology and beliefs are transmitted through text.

Micro-Analysis

Images

The present micro-analysis investigates the notable features that offer insights into the discourse of the article. First, the gallery of the article will be discussed. In general, the use of images in newspapers is a common and powerful method of creating meaning, which has become a target for CDA analysis (Francis, 2014; Wang, 2014). Since the article by Miliband (2015) includes a gallery of 51 images, their analysis appears relevant to the current paper. Several pictures have been placed in Appendix B to illustrate the key patterns that can be found in the gallery.

As suggested by Machin and Mayr (2012), when considering the images from the point of view of CDA, it may be useful to consider the correlation between their denotation (direct meaning) and connotation (implicit meaning). The images used for Miliband’s (2015) article can be roughly subdivided into those that denote people and those that do not. The latter typically denote buildings, some of which are destroyed by the war.

However, these images are outnumbered: only five images, including the disclaimer, do not denote people. The images that denote people vary: some include individual people, others show crowds, and some demonstrate only a part of a human (for example, a wounded leg). The majority of pictures, however, show human faces, many of which express negative feelings (for example, anguish or fear). Finally, there are images that depict political action, including a protesters’ march and a UN meeting. The denotative purpose of the images appears to aim to document events from the people’s perspective, and this denotation is a powerful contribution to the article.

Apart from that, certain connotations can also be found in the gallery. It can be suggested that the emphasis on the presence of humans in the pictures highlights the author’s focus on the sufferings of human beings rather than on the complexity of the political events. The latter is barely represented, even though they still make an appearance. The picture representing a UN meeting is located roughly in the middle of the gallery, between a picture denoting human bodies and one denoting an explosion with people running away. The contrast between the calm of the UN meeting and the panic of people running for their lives may be a method of implicitly illustrating the author’s belief that the UN is failing to perform their responsibility to protect Syria. Thus, image analysis allows demonstrating the role played by the images in the creation of meaning in the article.

Transitivity analysis

The analysis of the verbs that are used by an author may reveal implicit meanings due to the specifics of this part of speech. In particular, verbs denote actions, and from the CDA perspective, the linguistic choices that are made to denote these actions can imply the author’s ideas about the people who perform them (Machin & Mayr, 2012). The actor is particularly visible in the case of transitivity analysis because, from a grammatical point of view, the concept of transitivity refers to the determination of active and passive positions (those of the subject and object). From this perspective, Miliband’s (2015) article is peculiar because it appears to avoid the use of passive voice.

Indeed, Miliband (2015) seems to make the agency of the actors explicit by using active voice for material processes (Hyatt, 2013). For example, the rise of ISIS is said to capture the world’s attention, which seems to be applicable to the way ISIS actively calls attention to its deeds. Similarly, the Geneva Conference of 2014 “yielded minimal results” (para. 5), and neither the members of the UN Security Council nor of other countries “have applied appropriate pressure on the warring parties” (para. 6). In other words, the author seems to connote that certain people or organisations are responsible for the events – or the lack of events – related to the Syrian crisis. To sum up, transitivity analysis can help in analysing the implicit agency-related meanings of the article.

Vocabulary

The analysis of lexical choices is central to CDA: a vocabulary is a primary tool that can introduce specific discourses due to carrying implicit meanings (Anwar et al., 2015; Francis, 2014; Machin & Mayr, 2012). As a result, an analysis of vocabulary choice appears to be necessary for the current paper.

Miliband (2015) employs a number of emotive words in the article: “dramatic, misery, urgently, appalling.” These words are used to persuade the audience of the significance of the issue (Francis, 2014). Apart from that, one metaphor can be found: the author suggests that the infrastructure of the affected countries is “shaking” (Miliband, 2015, para. 21). This literary device has a great potential for meaning-making (Anwar et al., 2015), and in this case, the idea of the instability of the infrastructure seems to be connoted.

It is also noteworthy that the author does not seem to use many informal words. No specialised language or professional slang is employed, but the author does use a choice of vocabulary that can be regarded as terminology in the field of politics and humanitarian efforts, including “political inertia, channels of communication, diplomatic cooperation, resolution, bombardment of densely populated areas, sanitation” and some others. None of these phrases can be called uncommon or unclear, but their area of use is rather specific. Moreover, the author also chooses to “explain” one of the terms: he states that certain governments are “maintaining open channels of communication through “consultations” – in essence, talks about talks” (Miliband, 2015, para. 6).

Machin and Mayr (2012) suggest that the employment of formal and specialised vocabulary together with the elements of an informal discussion (for example, the explanation of the term) is often used in media to build rapport with the reader while also demonstrating one’s competence in the field (pp. 44-46). This supposition can be confirmed by the author’s use of his personal experience in the description of events: “My own organisation saw seven of our beneficiaries killed in a bombing raid on Idlib last week” (Miliband, 2015, para. 8). Thus, the author may be found to prove his expertise with the aim of justifying his authority to discuss the issue and provide advice (Machin & Mayr, 2012). As a result, the vocabulary analysis suggests that the choice of words of the article creates additional meanings.

Presupposition

A presupposition occurs when certain meanings are translated as obvious by the author (Machin & Mayr, 2012; Hyatt, 2013). Presupposition analysis should be employed in the present paper because Miliband (2015) makes extensive use of presupposition. A major presupposition of the author is that the community should and intends to react to the crisis and assist the countries that are caught in it, including Syria. Here, it may be suggested that the UN meetings could be viewed as a form of the declaration of the intent to react, but Miliband (2015) explicitly states that the intent to “minimize the impact of the fighting on civilians” has ebbed to its “lowest levels so far” (para. 4, 6), thus contradicting the previous presupposition to an extent.

However, Miliband’s (2015) idea of UN efforts can also be viewed as a presupposition. For example, Miliband (2015) assumes that there exists an “appropriate” pressure that can be exerted upon the warring parties, which the governments of countries are failing to provide (para. 8). Apart from that, Miliband (2015) finishes the article with a substantial amount of advice on the management of the situation, which consists of presuppositions, including the idea that certain countries and the UN Security Council hold some amount of power over the warring parties. The author also makes an attempt to point out the limitations of the presuppositions by introducing new presuppositions: for instance, his idea that the conflict can be resolved only through “political and diplomatic drive and imagination” appears to be a presupposition that is rather vague and unsupported (Miliband, 2015, para. 22).

In summary, the presupposition analysis demonstrates the implied meanings that can be found in the article and also indicates that many of Miliband’s (2015) statements are presuppositions that are not sufficiently justified to be termed objective.

Headline analysis

The headline is an important part of any newspaper article: it serves to summarise the text and capture the reader’s attention (Van Dijk, 1998). The headline of Miliband’s (2015) article has a sense of urgency that is inferred through the author’s choice of vocabulary: the words “now” and “needs” imply that the topic is of great significance. Apart from that, the headline presupposes that the article is capable of responding to the question of what Syria needs now. However, the headline does not specify the issues that are going to be resolved, apparently reflecting the presupposition that the reader would be expected to know which topic is to be discussed. As a result, the headline is not perfectly effective in summarising the text, but it does capture the attention of the readers. To sum up, the CDA of the headline requires an analysis of its vocabulary and presuppositions.

Meso-Analysis

After the definition of the discourse, it can be useful to review the mechanisms through which it is disseminated. The web-distribution of electronic newspapers is typically specific for every newspaper, but the features that can be of interest include the presentation of the text: for example, the page layout and the use of hyperlinks (Bateman, Delin, & Henschel, 2013). When viewing Miliband’s (2015) article, a reader is presented with the entire text at once, making it more convenient to read. The images are located before the text and after the headline, suggesting that they are intended to be viewed before reading to immerse the reader in the context and the discourse. Standard CNN fonts are used to highlight the headline of the article, which is meant to attract the reader’s attention (Van Dijk, 1998).

The text includes multiple hyperlinks that can be used to verify the provided information. Among other things, there are links to the CNNOpinion social media pages, but other than that, the article is not labelled as an opinion piece despite a large number of the author’s presuppositions. In other words, there is no attempt to highlight the fact that the article may be subjective; rather, its objectivity is emphasised through the use of links for the purpose of verifying the information. It is also noteworthy that the reader is provided with the opportunity to further disseminate the article with the help of social media; this is a typical feature for CNN, but it demonstrates that the article can be disseminated through various channels, and the discourse can be further promoted by the people who share it.

Macro-Analysis

Figure 1. Van Djik’s (1998) mental framework.

Van Djik (1998) can be viewed as one of the key figures in CDA development. Among other achievements in the field, he has developed a mental framework that can be used for the macro-analysis in this paper (see Figure 1). Basically, a mental framework depicts the formation of discourse on common cultural grounds, which includes the attitudes, knowledge and ideologies that are shared by a particular group. These features constitute the social mind or memory, which affects the development of personal models, resulting in “biased” views. It is these personal models that typically find their representations in the form of discourses, both consciously and unconsciously (Jóhannesson, 2010).

The figure demonstrates the complex relationships between the elements of the process. For example, it shows that personal models are also affected by personal memory or experience. Similarly, it indicates possible shortcuts, suggesting that some features (for example, propaganda texts) can skip certain elements of the process, resulting in ideological elements being expressed without personal interpretations.

From the point of view of this framework, Miliband’s (2015) personal experience plays an important part in his discourse. He directly refers to the fact that he is personally acquainted with the events, stating that his organisation is currently sending beneficiaries to the region (Miliband, 2015, para. 8). Thus, the author’s presuppositions could have been affected by his personal memory.

However, it can also be suggested that group knowledge, attitudes and memories could have influenced the discourse of the article as well. In particular, the organisational culture of an institution that offers humanitarian help is likely to uphold a specific position on the topic of the responsibilities of the community towards people caught in the civil war, as well as other types of crises. Such a position is likely to coincide with Miliband’s (2015) presuppositions. This collective experience and elements of social memory are likely to contribute to the development of the discourse. As a result, van Djik’s (1998) model can place the above-described discourse into context and demonstrate the mechanisms of its formation from social (group) and personal memories.

Conclusion

Having applied CDA to an article by Miliband (2015), the present paper can reach the following conclusions. At the macro-level, the discourse of the article is likely to have been formed by both the personal and group experiences of the author. The micro-level analysis indicates that the article contains multiple rather subjective presuppositions, which the author does not really support with facts. Instead, he uses micro-level elements like the vocabulary to assert his authority on the topic.

In addition, the vocabulary, transitivity, headline choices and images are also used to affect readers and persuade them to believe in the author’s presuppositions. Despite this lack of objectivity, the article is not labelled as an “opinion article” by the CNN, which was discovered during the meso-analysis. Regardless of whether the presuppositions of the article are valid, the CDA shows some of the mechanisms that the media can employ to disseminate a particular type of discourse, which can be powerfully promoted by the micro- and meso-level choices of its author despite being a part of a subjective ideology.

Appendix A

What Syria needs now

By David Miliband

Updated 1352 GMT (2152 HKT) May 29, 2015

Story highlights

David Miliband: ISIS advances are significant propaganda victories
Diplomatic cooperation on Syria on the U.N. Security Council is minimal, he says

David Miliband, president and CEO of the International Rescue Committee, is former secretary of state for foreign and Commonwealth affairs for the United Kingdom. The views expressed are his own.

(CNN)

Almost a year on from their dramatic seizure of Mosul, Iraq’s second city, the militants of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria continue to expand the frontiers of their stronghold in the Middle East.

The fall this month of Ramadi — the last remaining government-held city in Iraq’s largest province — and the taking, 400 miles west, of Syria’s Roman-era town of Palmyra, constitute not just important strategic gains for the group, but significant propaganda victories. Televised images of Palmyra’s ancient ruins now abound, their fate seemingly hanging in the balance.

The rapid rise of ISIS has thus captured the world’s attention, and we’ve seen a coalition of Western and Arab states make common cause with Iran to try to forcibly halt the jihadists’ advance. But such cooperation has not extended to securing an end to the war in Syria, where four years of conflict and chaos have cost more than 220,000 lives (though some estimates suggest the toll is far higher), left every second Syrian in need of aid and allowed ISIS to grow from an Iraqi al Qaeda franchise into a veritable transborder operation.

Remarkably, despite all this, diplomatic energies aimed at securing an end to the war — and minimizing the impact of the fighting on civilians — have ebbed to their lowest levels so far.

True, early Arab League proposals, former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s six-point plan, and the January 2014 Geneva II conference yielded minimal results, But there was at least a sense of commitment and grim determination back then.

Now, despite this week’s news that the United Kingdom and Russia are to resume discussions on the crisis, political inertia is so pervasive that U.N. Syria Envoy Staffan de Mistura’s focus is simply on maintaining open channels of communication through “consultations” — in essence, talks about talks.

Similarly, diplomatic cooperation on Syria in the U.N. Security Council is minimal, including in the area of securing compliance with the council’s own humanitarian resolutions.

Neither its members, nor states with sway in Syria, have applied appropriate pressure on the warring parties to halt the deliberate targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure, the indiscriminate bombardment of densely populated areas or the continuing disruption — by means ranging from bureaucracy to besiegement — of nearly five million people’s access to aid. My own organization saw seven of our beneficiaries killed in a bombing raid on Idlib last week.

Syrian civilians’ misery is also being compounded by a further, depressing trend: the increasing mismatch between their needs and the help the international community is providing.

One million people inside Syria required humanitarian assistance in 2011. That number now stands at 12.2 million, well over half of whom are internally displaced. Their needs — food, water, shelter, health care, sanitation — have increased at more than six times the rate of funding provided since the beginning of the conflict. Last year’s U.N. appeal to meet basic needs inside Syria was only 48% supported, down from 68% in 2013.

The discrepancy between needs and assistance is also growing amongst the four million people who have fled Syria. In exile for years now, their economic and personal assets long depleted, these refugees urgently require food, water, fuel, clothing and education.

At the same time, the countries sheltering them are buckling under the pressure of such a massive population influx.

Turkey, the biggest refugee-hosting country in the world, put the cost last fall of hosting Syrian refugees at $4.5 billion. Lebanon, where Syrians now constitute somewhere between a quarter and a third of the population, will need investment of up to $2.5 billion just to restore its basic infrastructure to precrisis levels, according to a 2013 report from the World Bank. Jordan, one of the most water-starved nations on the planet, hosts nearly 630,000 registered refugees — proportionally equivalent to the United States absorbing the population of the United Kingdom. It puts the cost of hosting Syrians in 2014 at $871 million.

In Iraqi Kurdistan, meanwhile, 250,000 Syrian refugees shelter alongside the well over one million Iraqis who have sought protection in the region since January last year. The Kurdish authorities simply cannot meet the spiraling demand for jobs and basic services in the territory, where the poverty rate has more than doubled over the past 17 months.

Yet despite such immense need, the U.N.’s Syrian refugee appeal for 2014 was just 64% funded, down from 73% in 2013, and global pledges to resettle the most vulnerable Syrian refugees in countries outside the region have failed to even approach a level appropriate to the scale of this crisis.

Such is the pressure upon their public services, economies, resources and social fabrics that Syria’s neighbors are now taking steps to restrict the flow of refugees into their territory; only the most vulnerable can enter at present, and there are reports of refugees being forcibly repatriated to Syria.

So, how should the international community respond? Even within the limits of a humanitarian perspective, there are clear, urgent priorities.

First, the U.N. Security Council and states with influence over Syria’s warring parties should take immediate steps to hold accountable all those who fail to honor their obligations under international humanitarian law. Pressure must be brought to bear upon all parties that restrict or undermine full, safe and unfettered humanitarian access to those in need.

Second, and with this appalling interference with access in mind, the Security Council’s permanent members, as well as key regional players such as Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, should each appoint senior diplomats or politicians as humanitarian envoys, resourcing and supporting them to focus attention on the human consequences of the Syrian conflict. They should also document and challenge restrictions on access, mediate and monitor ceasefires, support the efforts of the U.N. emergency relief coordinator and work through the detail of the relevant Security Council resolutions with all stakeholders — the warring parties, their backers, the United Nations and NGOs.

Finally, the United Nations’ 2015 appeal for Syria and the region must be funded.

Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey and Iraq should receive the direct financial assistance and long-term development investment they require to repair their shaking infrastructure, reboot their public services and start creating jobs for Syrians and the communities who host them. Support for these countries is an essential counterpart to the vital call on them to keep their borders open to those fleeing Syria.

None of these measures is a substitute for the political and diplomatic drive and imagination needed to bring this conflict — or series of conflicts — to a close. The spillover of Syria’s war into Iraq means that the options available to those in the international community keen to secure regional and global stability are far more limited than they were in 2011. As this crisis becomes more and more complex, those options are set to become even narrower, their consequences increasingly unpredictable.

But this is all the more reason for a renewed push to end the violence. Next month marks three years since the Geneva Communiqué, a now dormant road map for Syria’s political transition, was signed in Switzerland. Let that anniversary — as well as events in Ramadi and Palmyra — focus minds.

Appendix B

Some of the Images Used in the Article’s Gallery

References

Anwar, M. N., Ullah, R., Ahmad, N., & Ali, M. (2015). Critical discourse analysis of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s (11th August, 1947) speech in the first Constituent Assembly of Pakistan. South Asian Studies, 30(1), 149-159.

Bateman, J., Delin, J., & Henschel, R. (2013). Mapping the multimodal genres of traditional and electronic newspapers. In T. Royce & W. Bowcher (Eds.), New directions in the analysis of multimodal discourse (pp. 147-173). New Jersey, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Bazzul, J. (2014). Critical discourse analysis and science education texts: Employing Foucauldian notions of discourse and subjectivity. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 36(5), 422-437.

Breeze, R. (2011). Critical discourse analysis and its critics. Pragmatics, 21(4), 493-525.

Dahi, O. S. (2014) Syria in fragments: The politics of the refugee crisis. Dissent 61(1), 45-48.

Francis, B. (2014). Impacting policy discourse? An analysis of discourses and rhetorical devices deployed in the case of the Academies Commission. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 36(3), 437-451. Web.

Horner, K., & Bellamy, J. (2016). Beyond the micro–macro interface in language and identity research. In S. Preece (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Language and Identity (pp. 320-332). London, UK: Routledge.

Hyatt, D. (2013). The critical policy discourse analysis frame: helping doctoral students engage with the educational policy analysis. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(8), 833-845. Web.

Jóhannesson, I. (2010). The politics of historical discourse analysis: a qualitative research method?Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 31(2), 251-264. Web.

Kaya, K. (2014). The Syrian crisis from a neighbor’s perspective. Military Review, 94(2), 42-50.

Lewis, J. (2014). The Islamic State: A counter-strategy for a counter-state. Web.

Machin, D., & Mayr, A. (2012). How to do critical discourse analysis. London, UK: Sage.

Miliband, David. (2015, May 29). What Syria needs now. CNN. Web.

Paltridge, B. (2013). Critical discourse analysis. In K. Hyland (Ed.), Discourse Studies Reader (pp. 89-109). London, UK: A & C Black.

Riasati, M. J., & Rahimi, F. (2011). Critical discourse analysis: Scrutinizing ideologically-driven discourses. International journal of humanities and social science, 1(16), 107-112.

Skerrett, D. (2016). Moving the field forward: a micro–meso–macro model for critical language planning. The case of Estonia. Current Issues in Language Planning, 17(1), 106-130. Web.

Talib, N., & Fitzgerald, R. (2016). Micro–meso–macro movements; a multi-level critical discourse analysis framework to examine metaphors and the value of truth in policy texts. Critical Discourse Studies, 13(5), 531-547. Web.

Van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. London, UK: Sage.

Wang, J. (2014). Criticising images: critical discourse analysis of visual semiosis in picture news. Critical Arts, 28(2), 264-286. Web.

Ziadeh, R., Hadar, L., Katz, M., & Heydemann, S. (2012). Crisis in Syria: What are the U.S. options?Middle East Policy, 19(3), 1-24. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!