Critical Discourse Analysis of Imran Khan’s
UNGA 2019 Speech
Submitted by: [Kashif Rawaiz]
Course: [Critical Discourse Analysis]
Instructor: [Uzma Arshad]
Semester: [22-05-2025]
1. Introduction
Political discourse plays a pivotal role in shaping ideologies, national identities, and international
perceptions. Speeches delivered at global platforms such as the United Nations General
Assembly are crafted not only to inform but to persuade, mobilize support, and frame national
narratives in a specific ideological light. This paper presents a Critical Discourse Analysis
(CDA) of Imran Khan’s speech at the 74th Session of the United Nations General Assembly
(UNGA) on 27 September 2019. The speech stands out for its unapologetic tone,
multidimensional thematic content, and its sharp critique of global injustice, Islamophobia, and
the situation in Indian-occupied Kashmir.
Drawing upon Norman Fairclough’s three-dimensional framework of CDA, the paper
deconstructs how Khan uses language as a strategic tool to construct Pakistan’s global identity,
contest dominant Western narratives, and project moral superiority. The key themes explored in
the speech are: (1) Climate Change and Global Responsibility, (2) Money Laundering and Elite
Corruption, (3) Islamophobia and the Misrepresentation of Muslims, and (4) Kashmir and Indian
Militarism. Each theme is loaded with linguistic cues, ideological references, and discursive
patterns that reveal the power dynamics and political intentions embedded in the speech.
2. Methodology: Norman Fairclough’s Three-Dimensional
Framework
The analysis is guided by Norman Fairclough’s model which offers a comprehensive approach
by connecting language (text), discursive practices (production and interpretation), and
social practices (context and power relations). The framework is broken down as follows:
a. Textual Analysis (Description):
Focuses on vocabulary, grammar, cohesion, and text structure to examine the linguistic choices
that reflect ideology and power.
b. Discursive Practice (Interpretation):
Examines how the speech is produced, disseminated, and interpreted by different audiences and
media platforms.
c. Social Practice (Explanation):
Situates the speech within the wider social and political context, revealing how it contributes to
power structures, resistance, and ideological formation.
3. Critical Analysis
A. Textual Analysis (Description)
Imran Khan’s rhetorical strategy is bold and emotionally charged, designed to challenge Western
hegemony while aligning with global South solidarities and Islamic narratives.
i. Lexical Choices:
Use of emotionally potent terms: “genocide,” “fascism,” “suffering,”
“oppression,” “radicalization.”
These terms create a moral binary between “oppressors” (India,
Western powers) and “victims” (Muslims, Kashmiris).
ii. Repetition and Emphasis:
Khan repeats words like “justice,” “humanity,” and “Islam” to
reinforce ethical and religious framing.
E.g., “What kind of justice is this?” emphasizes perceived hypocrisy in
international law.
iii. Sentence Structure and Tone:
Use of direct address (“You, the United Nations…”) assigns
responsibility.
Frequent rhetorical questions: “Has anyone thought of the
consequences?” These provoke moral reflection and invite alignment
with his viewpoint.
iv. Pronouns and Representation:
“We” and “our people” build collective Muslim identity.
“They” and “their policies” point to Western nations and India as
‘others’—a classic inclusion-exclusion strategy.
B. Discursive Practice (Interpretation)
The speech was not only an act of representation but a performance crafted for multiple
audiences:
i. Intended Audiences:
International community: Khan appeals to UN and Western powers
to intervene or rethink policies.
Domestic audience: Aims to bolster national pride and portray
himself as a fearless statesman.
Muslim Ummah: Presents himself as a representative of global
Muslims, especially on the issue of Islamophobia.
ii. Intertextuality:
Allusions to Islamic teachings, Western double standards, and
past wars help Khan place Pakistan’s narrative within a broader
historical and ideological struggle.
iii. Media Representation:
Pakistani media presented it as a “historic speech” that boldly
addressed global injustices.
Indian media denounced it as a “rant” full of “threats and theatrics.”
Western media focused selectively, often highlighting the
Islamophobia section while ignoring Kashmir.
C. Social Practice (Explanation)
The speech must be understood against the socio-political and geopolitical backdrop of 2019:
i. Revocation of Article 370 by India:
India’s unilateral decision to strip Jammu & Kashmir of its special status
sparked global controversy. Khan's speech directly responded to this
development, accusing India of violating international law and human
rights.
ii. Rise of Islamophobia:
Post-9/11 rhetoric, media portrayal, and discriminatory laws in Western
countries created a sense of siege among Muslims worldwide. Khan
uses this backdrop to challenge stereotypical representations of Islam
and Muslims.
iii. Climate Crisis and Economic Injustice:
His critique of elite-driven capitalism and the failure of rich countries to
support climate-vulnerable nations resonates with global South
discourses on neocolonialism.
iv. Power Struggles:
By portraying India as fascist and invoking the specter of nuclear war,
Khan disrupts traditional diplomatic language, aiming to shift the
global perception of South Asian politics.
4. Conclusion
Imran Khan’s 2019 UN speech is a multi-layered political discourse that blends emotional
appeal, moral arguments, and ideological assertions. Through a strategic use of language, he
constructs Pakistan as a victim of global injustice, a defender of Muslim identity, and a
responsible international actor. His speech is not just a diplomatic gesture—it is a challenge to
dominant narratives, a call for structural change, and a redefinition of global priorities. Critical
Discourse Analysis reveals how every rhetorical move in the speech is connected to larger social
structures, power dynamics, and ideological battles.
5. References
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of
Language. Longman.
Khan, I. (2019). Speech at the 74th United Nations General Assembly.
UN Web TV.
van Dijk, T.A. (1993). Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis. Discourse
& Society, 4(2), 249–283.
Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (Eds.). (2001). Methods of Critical Discourse
Analysis. SAGE Publications.
Media coverage from Al Jazeera, BBC, Dawn, and The Hindu (2019).
