Abstrict

This research paper seeks to examine and analyze the political discourse of Hina Rabbani Khar as the foreign minister of Pakistan. The paper will try to figure out her ideological conception by closely studying the language. The focus will be laid on exploring things such as gender, power, language, and political ideology. Further, this paper is an effort to understand her political discourse on media to maintain peaceful relations with India. Data collection is based on the following research questions. The Discourse Historical Approach, a famous model for discourse analysis by Ruth Wodak, is applied to all the used references in the paper. The study concludes that her choice of words is constructive and positive. Her discourse is directed to create a balanced relationship between power and agency. Her words depict a peaceful, negotiable, and positive approach to foreign policy. The text of her speeches shows the effort of her government (PPP) to represent a good foreign policy. 

Keywords

Discourse Historical Approach, Political Discourse, Power, Gender, Politics, Foreign Policy, Peace

Introduction

Politics is complex. This multifaceted and multilayered term is prone to various explanations and interpretations. But it is quite conspicuous that it always ideology-driven and has a different set of norms and values. The deep and insightful study of the political discourse remains the only way to better understand the political ideologies and motives behind them. Each political actor represents some form of theory in their political discourse, which helps contextualize their political direction. This paper seeks to probe the political discourse of Hina Rabbani Khar as a foreign minister of Pakistan and argues that her political discourse exhibits an effort to maintain peaceful and cordial relations with neighbors. 

When Shah Mahmood Qureshi resigned in February 2011 in the wake of the Raymond Davis saga, Hina Rabbani Khar was given the portfolio of the foreign ministry. This step was appreciated since it showed the approach of the ruling People Party for women empowerment. Her soft demeanor also showed the approach of government to have cordial and peaceful relations with neighbors. It became especially pronounced when she visited China, India, and other neighboring countries and held peace talks with her counterparts. It is pertinent to mention that she also held meetings with the separatist leaders of Kashmir. The meticulous study of her speeches out there shows her forward-looking, positive, and peaceful approach.

Before analyzing her speeches, it is important to study how political discourse is tacitly conveyed through speeches. Mostly, the political discourse is interspersed among the linguistic expressions. 

Fowler (1991) states:

"It is the main concern of critical linguists to study the minute details of linguistic structure in the light of the social and historical situation of the text, to display to consciousness the patterns of belief and value which are encoded in the language …" (p.76). 

(Kress and Hodge 1979) the authors of Language and Ideology, say:

"All social interactions involve displays of power’. Any discourse, therefore, has to be studied in the context of ideologies and relations of power and inequality".

It means in order to fully understand political discourse, it is necessary to take into consideration all the aspects of Hina Rabbani Khar's political discourse. The main objective of the analysis of her speeches is to figure out the political discourse and relate it with the socio-economic and political landscapes. The study concludes that her discourse shows a peaceful and positive political ideology. The research paper first discusses the relevant research papers followed by the theoretical framework, which explains Critical Discourse Analysis and ends with the detailed and meticulous study of the speeches of Hina Rabbani Khar.

Literature Review

There is a unique relationship between politics, gender, and language since they have always influenced each other. Language-led political ideologies drive the social, economic, and political policies and processes. Political debates which evolve into fine-tuned ideologies also show the relationship between language and politics. Moreover, these ideologies influence our mindset, beliefs, and outlook towards things such as gender. It means language and politics collectively leave indelible marks on the cognitive development of humans. Based on these definitions, different ideological groups and approaches come to the surface. One such approach is feminism which argues that politics, like other walks of life, is male-centered and patriarchal. Males occupy dominant and powerful positions who often subjugate women and do not take substantive actions to actualize the dream of women's empowerment.

Koliba (2016) presented the propensity of interpersonal relationships in political discourses. In every political discourse, there is always a demonstration of "us" and the opposition "them". How these relations are controlled always depends upon the intentions of the speaker. Koliba did the CDA of the political discourse of Nick Griffin, who belongs to the British National Party. Through this analysis, it has been shown how power relations and social inequality is maintained in politics. He examined clusivity in the political speeches of Griffin, which means how the aspects of inclusion and exclusion are evident in discourse i.e. same pronouns can be used for different purposes. Griffin spoke against Muslim immigration in the British, and he said that politicians are responsible for this. Although he himself is a politician by pointing towards them, he attacked two types of "them," one is the opposing party of politicians, and the second is "immigrants." Very clearly, he distinguished himself from the “other” party by not identifying himself with those politicians. Griffin also highlighted the nationalist-critical problems in order to gain the attention of the public. 

Hassan and Adam (2015) analyzed the political discourse of Hosni Mubarak, the then Egyptian president. In order to understand the underlying political discourse, the authors tried to make a fine-tuned analysis of the linguistic features of his discourse. They especially based their analysis on Michael Halliday's textual, interpersonal, and ideational functions of language. The authors study the concepts of lexicalization, nominalization, and pronnominalization with reference to the three abovementioned functions of language. They tried to understand his attitude and tone towards the others, such as opponents. They showed how Hosni Mubarak inculcated his political philosophy and approach in his speeches. For example, he would use the word "I" more than often. It was a way to express his centrality to power and importance in Egyptian politics. It also many he was authoritative and self-centered when it came to political decision makings. Moreover, they also revealed the tone of Hosni Mubarak was highly sympathetic in troubled times. Another interesting point was that his focus was mainly on politics: political agendas and out political reforms. In other words, his speeches, as well as politics, were politics-centered. He would also repeat the words that would portray Hosni as a highly loyal and devoted leader of Egypt. The author concluded

“that meanings which people convey by writer or speaker actually do not correspond to what they claim to be saying”

Sajjad (2015) also explored and analyzed a similar political discourse to find the difference between the surface and implied meanings in political discourse. She took a close look at the speeches Barack Obama made in Muslim countries and concluded that even though Obama's speeches were pro-Muslims on the surface, there were many threats and blame in them. The speeches made before the masses (Muslims) would always begin with a benign and affectionate greeting. Even he would offer a slam (a Muslim style of commencing a conversation). He would always substantiate his points with different quotes from the Qur'an and the words of Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him). Throughout, he would maintain a narrative that Islam is a beautiful and peaceful religion. He would do so in order to acculturate to the given community and reduce the cultural differences between him and the people. It would ultimately help him to form an image of a pro-Muslim leader who is suggesting an equitable solution. But the detailed and fine-tuned study of his speeches showed he would always employ an imperative and intimating tone. Between the polite sentences, he would convey a hard message, albeit in a clandestine manner. His political approach also showed his aggressive and hostile American policy towards the Muslim societies. He, on the one hand, pinpoints some of the weaknesses in the American system, and on the other hand, he would try to give a counter-narrative. His speeches would always champion the idea the United States had always stood for human rights and the promotion of education, quality-assured healthcare, and support for democracy.

Qadir and Riaz (2015) studied and analyzed the Pakistani TV political talk shows through a gender lens. They take into consideration different talk shows with women as a guest and their behavior as well as those talk shows with male guests. The main focus of the study was the identity and image construction of female and male politicians. Their main analysis took a close look at the treatment of the opponent by both male and female political leaders. The authors also studied the glaring contrasts between the political discourse of male political leaders and female political leaders. Their findings were astonishing since they substantiated the point that politics in Pakistan is male-centered and patriarchal, just like other walks of life. They showed female political leaders were far more courteous and less blunt. Female leaders would especially feel hesitant about controversial or badmouthing any other leader. In other words, they would be less direct and blunt when rebutting the points of the opponents and, in particular humiliating others. On the other, male political would not feel hesitant to humiliate other leaders, including female politicians. Also, male politicians were far more aggressive and imposing. They would get hyper in a matter of a few seconds. Similarly, male politicians were likely to utter ambiguous dialogues and statements, which was not the case with female politicians. 

Ali and Kazemian (2015) studied and analyzed "Pakistan and the Modern World," the collection of various speeches made by Liaqat Ali Khan. The authors used Van Dijk's Critical Discourse Analysis model to scrutinize his speeches. This socio-cognitive model was helpful in relating the socio-economic and political patterns of his time and Liaqat Ali Khan's philosophy as expressed in his speeches. They concluded Liaqat would mostly rely on Muslims' identity. He would often give a reference to Islam and idealize its system. Declaring Hindus as polytheists and comparing them with Islam was another notable feature of his speeches. Also, he always defended Two-Nation Theory. Further, the authors concluded he was inspired by the economic and political system of the United States. Based on this, he would hint at Pakistan's desire to build cordial relationships with the Western countries. 

Liaqat Ali Khan (1950) said,

"It is an undeniable fact that the emerging states like Pakistan are looking forward to West for their progress and prosperity in the field of science and technology."

Rehman et al. (2015) analyzed the important daily newspapers during the 2013 elections. They studied the presentation of male politicians and female politicians. Their study was directed to find the stark contrast between male and female politicians' treatments. They tried to figure out how women were depicted in newspapers as compared to male politicians. The authors made the startling revelation that female politicians were more often discussed because of their getup, dressing, physical appearance, or any behavior. It again supported the thesis that Pakistani media is highly biased and patriarchal. The authors showed women were not given equal voices in newspapers even though they were more proactive and vibrant than male politicians. They also showed women were shown as considerably weaker and less capable political leaders as compared to male politicians. Newspapers were more likely to make a negative interpretation of female politicians' statements. Further, women were unlikely to be in the headlines of newspapers. The nerve-wracking fact is that Urdu dailies especially were biased about women, and they would not take women "seriously." However, English dailies gave equal importance to female politicians, especially in KPK.

Van Dijk (2006) stated,

“In order to be able to compete, political groups need to be ideologically conscious and organized. It is largely through discourse that political ideologies are acquired, expressed, learned, propagated, and contested.”

Methodology

This section covers various points, such as the data

collection process model of research and the research questions.




Process of Data Collection

This section comprises different speeches made by Hina Rabbani Khar on various occasions. The focus of the study will be to analyze the linguistic expressions and structures in her speeches. Moreover, the aspects of gender, politics, and foreign policy will be especially noteworthy. It is since her speeches cover vast fields, and some of them do not directly relate to the concerned point. Therefore, I took different made by her on different platforms and took some important excerpts from the speeches that I could relate to the topic.




Research Model for the Study

Having selected various speeches of Khar and relevant excerpts, it is important to have a discourse analysis model, which in this case is Ruth Wodak's Discourse Historical Approach. This is a highly accurate and to-the-point model when it comes to analyzing a political discourse. The main point this model makes is "History constructs discourse." It means any political discourse is constructed by history, and therefore, it must be studied with respect to historical background. It tries to understand any written and spoken language in relation to its social context. The focus of this analysis when analyzing a speech is to find the social context, the purpose of the speech, and the use of different linguistic forms and tropes to convey meanings.

The multi-level model we propose embraces the notions of text, genre, and discourse as paramount to understanding both discourse and social practice. It examines the historical, cultural, social, and ideological expressions through the analysis of specific linguistic, paralinguistic, and pragmatic features (Boyd, 2009; Fairclough, 2003; Wodak & Meyer, 2009). As already mentioned, Discourse Historical Approach employs the social context and historical knowledge to understand the discourse. Mostly, there are four layers to understand the social context: linguistic level, intertextual and interdiscursive level, extralinguistic, and socio-cultural and historical level. Further, to identify the ideology in the political discourse, there are six strategies. Firstly, there is a Nomination where a seemingly relevant and hypothetical theory is nominated. In the second strategy, there is Prediction which is based on guess-based contextual awareness. The third strategy is Argumentation which is based on figuring out the arguments to understand the particular ideology. Fourthly, there is Perspectivation which is a way to put ideas and arguments in perspective. Intensification is another strategy that is based on opting hardline stance on the ideology of the writer. Lastly, there is Mitigation, which is a way to understand ideology by looking at a simple explanation and a bigger social picture.

Timeframe for Data Collection

Most of the data (her speeches and talk show talks) is taken during her tenure as foreign minister of Pakistan. But some of included talk shows and speeches are after her resignation.




Research Questions

1. How does Hina Rabbani Khar stand for and represent cooperation, negotiation, international peace, and security through her political discourse?

2. How does Khar employ foreign policy as a way to advance the vested interest of Pakistan?

3. How does Khar's political discourse advance the vision of a peaceful, stable, and prosperous Pakistan?

4. To what extent Khar try to bust the myths and stereotypes about women and improve the image of women in Asia especially in terms of peace and stability in the region?

Data Analysis

The following are excerpts from one of the speeches of Hina Rabbani Khar on Indian television. A fine-tuned study of her speech unveils the ideological conception of her (PPP) government.

Peace talks with India at NDTV (New Delhi Television Limited)

Date: May 27, 2014

“Peace should be irreversible, and a single incident should not derail peace talks. Trade is the way forward. When we invest in each other's countries, it strengthens peace”. 

The quote shows Hina Rabbani Khar is using very positive and constructive words with a forward-looking approach. Firstly, she is talking about the peace that is sustainable and long-lasting to make sure their relationship improves like other countries. Secondly, her tone is very reconciliatory since she is urging the Indian government to overlook if some untoward incident takes place. It means she is trying to establish a relationship based on trust and mutual understanding, which shoe her convincing and conciliatory approach to ease the tensions between the warring neighbors (India and Pakistan). She is not only indicative but also very suggestive. 

The meanings become especially pronounced when one seeks to examine them from the perspective of intertextuality. The word "irreversible" means she wants a relationship that is not detailed by some untoward incident such as the 2008 Mumbai Attack. Also, she uses the words "peace talks," which is another way to suggest her counterpart and even the Indian prime minister make sure more peace talks and negotiations continue taking place in the future. "Single incident" means she wants a deeper relationship, especially in terms of trade which should continue despite having minor issues. Japan and China are an example as both countries have a huge trade volume despite having troubled relations.

Topic: Attempt to reinforce ceasefire agreement with her Indian counterpart. Date: January 17, 2013

"We have invested hugely in the dialogue process and have worked energetically to keep the dialogue process moving forward in a sustained and constructive manner.  Pakistan has gone out of its way to building constructive relationships with India.

Instead of issuing belligerent statements by the military and political leaders from across the border and ratcheting up the tension, it is advisable for the two countries to discuss all concerns related to Line of Control (LoC) with a view to reinforcing respect for the ceasefire, maybe at the level of the Foreign Ministers to sort out things.  Continued tension along the LoC is not in the interest of peace and stability in the region". 

Historically and contextually, in January 2013, there was a series of disputes along with the line of control at the India-Pakistan Border. According to Pakistani reports, the Indian military crossed the border and killed one Pakistani soldier. After two days, news came from Indian forces that the Pakistani army crossed the LoC and killed two Indian soldiers. These sort of heated disputes were going on when Khar gave this statement. At the intertextual level, her mood is suggestive, and she focused on peace talks through dialogues. She intensified adverbs like "hugely" and "energetically" in order to focus on the importance of dialogues rather than issuing aggressive statements continuously. She tried to mitigate the tensions concerning LoC by using the phrase "build constructive relationships" that Pakistan is ready to go at any point to solve these issues with India. Lexical choices like "advisable" and "reinforcing respect" are being used to convey her point of view to deal with the matter. At a broader socio-political and historical level, khar is again promoting the ideological conception of her political party that peace and stability is possible through peaceful dialogues. Her use of "maybe" is showing uncertainty and some hope to solve the issues as she offered to talk with her Indian counterpart at a broader level.  From her point of view, issues at the socio-political level can be resolved by foreign ministers. 




Speech at LUMS

Topic: Foreign Policy and Young Democracy. Date: April 30, 2012

"Pakistan needs to be conduct trade with other countries and send investors to other countries in order to build the capital for long-term prosperity. Foreign policy is how we talk to other countries and what we talk other countries about"

This speech at the University of Management Sciences (LUMS) almost carries a similar theme. While addressing the young generation of Pakistan, she is insinuating a positive and progressive mindset. The first important point here is, unlike speeches of many other politicians, she is not talking about security challenges or tense relations with India, her focus is trade, investment, and prosperity. She again regards trade and invests the single most important need of the hour. Intertextually, she is stressing about trade and the subsequent prosperity. Extra linguistically, she is reminding students that Pakistan has always been faced with serious economic challenges. It means Pakistan has been doing something wrong and the political and economic policies must change. Further, she gives clarity on her statement of expanding trade and investment, which implicitly means increasing trade with India. She assertively says the foreign policy is to protect the vested of the people. What she is saying is that a shrewd politician will make a wise decision without compromising national interests. "How we talk and what we talk" means she is suggesting better and shrewd foreign policy, which is based on economic interests above anything.

An interview in Washington with associated press

Topic: Pakistan needs confidential talks about counter-terrorism with US and Afghanistan. Date: September 21, 2012

“We are willing to work with anyone against any forces which are a threat to peace and stability”.

"We would be happy to send each one of them back and live in peace in Afghanistan" (talking about the Haqqani network)

"He did not know who he was working for or what he was trying to achieve, so this 'great man' who was helping the world by assisting us to capture Osama bin Laden is a myth. He was up for hire by anyone who was paying him, accusing him of links to an Islamist militant group and significantly setting back Pakistani efforts against polio. For us, he is no hero, believe me. He is somebody whose activity has endangered our children." (Talking about Shakil Afridi)

This speech shows Hina Rabbani Khar's political acumen and situational awareness as she busts the myths of Pakistan protecting some militants. She begins her discourse with "we," which shows she is collectively representing Pakistan. It looks especially relevant knowing there are some political pundits who claim Pakistan stands divided on the issue of Islamic terrorism. Khar argues that Pakistan is willing to cooperate with "anyone" and fight against "any forces" to eliminate terrorism and extremism. Her tone becomes more blunt and conspicuous when referring to Haqqani Network (a terrorist offshoot in Afghanistan); she assures them Pakistan will be happy to send them back to Afghanistan. It means either Pakistan lacks resources or they do not exist in Pakistan in the first. Both situations vindicate Pakistan. 

Contextually, she is presenting a positive image of Pakistan, a country that fights against terrorism and is willing to work with anyone in this cause. Paralinguistically, her words show Pakistan is not a terrorist country but a victim. It is because she is not making any prevarication but openly telling the world that Pakistan is offering full cooperation to eliminate terrorism. This is a way to dismantle the American slogan that Pakistan is not serious in the fight against terrorists or a general myth that Muslims are so-called terrorists. 

Historically, she refers to the Shakeel Afridi issue, which Americans claim helped them kill Osama bin Laden. She sardonically rejects this narrative by saying he is not a "great man" as some Americans think. As a matter of fact, he is a criminal person who colludes with conservative forces to endanger "our children." This shows she is one the hand is rejecting their vociferous demand to hand over Shakeel Afridi, and on the other hand, she is portraying a positive image of Pakistan.

Speech at UN General Assembly

Topic: Peace talk. Date: September 27, 2011

"We can do more together than we can apart. We can solve complex problems by consensus rather than by unilateralism. Multilateral cooperation can help us deal with the spectrum of global challenges, old and new, in our interdependent world......It is the United Nations and multilateralism that will safeguard this future." 

In United Nations General Assembly, she is reiterating Pakistan's stance on terrorism to collectively and wisely fight. It is since no single country alone is capable of winning the war on terror. In the linguistic co-text of her speech, she is defending Pakistan's foreign policy as well as its stance on issues of security. She became more vibrant as she said:

“Collective Wisdom is more important than the mind of a single person”.

At the interdiscursive level, she represents the ideas of collective collaboration by mentioning the two different belief systems, "unilateralism" and "multilateralism". She connected these ideas with the problems solving of this world. She associated high importance with "multilateral cooperation" and regarded it as a principle of UN assembly. 

Moreover, the socio-political level analysis shows Hina Rabbani Khar's perspective is global rather than myopic. In the global age, she is realizing the global community that, like trade and commerce, challenges such as terrorism have become global. In other words, she is telling the world terrorism is a global challenge and Pakistan alone cannot win this battle. Her call for a collective response from the world community against terrorism also reveals the local socio-economic and political challenges in Pakistan, such as the Afghan Refugee crisis at a time when Pakistan is fighting against terrorism. Other challenges such as poverty are also hampering Pakistan's efforts to eliminate terrorism. Another notable point is that she is while standing in UN General Assembly is urging the United Nations to accept Pakistan's perspective.

"We must demonstrate complete unity in ranks, avoid any recrimination, build greater trust, and more importantly bring about the requisite operational coordination in combating this menace. Otherwise, only the terrorists will gain........We believe that without prioritizing development and creating win-win scenarios in terms of mutually beneficial joint ventures in connectivity, infrastructure, energy, and trade, we cannot succeed in changing the picture. We need to give hope and provide a silver lining to those who have not seen peace for three generations and have only taken mercenaries and guns as a means of livelihood"

The intertextual level analysis of the abovementioned speech shows she is using the word "we," which refers to her overall representation of Pakistan in the UN General Assembly. Contextually, she is suggesting ways Pakistan can win the war against terrorism. It can become a reality when the global community cooperates and coordinate with Pakistan. She uses the word "trust," which shows she is urging the world to trust the narrative presented by Pakistan. From the global political and historical level analysis, she talks about "changing the picture," which refers to the changing world's opinion on terrorism. Earlier the global community would blame Pakistan for having a soft corner for the terrorist, but now that concept is fading. It is since (as Hina Rabbani Khar notes) Pakistan has been a victim of terrorism for well over three centuries. What makes her speech impressive is that she is not merely representing Pakistan but all the war-torn regions such as Afghanistan, Palestine, Kashmir, etc. In short, she reiterates Pakistan's narrative that terrorism is a global challenge and can only be defeated by a collective response based on mutual cooperation.

“We will remain unflinchingly democratic. We will defeat those that seek to terrorize us. We will empower women. We will protect the weak and the vulnerable in our midst, especially minorities. We will stand up for the weak and vulnerable abroad. We will support the human rights of Kashmiris. We will speak in support of the Palestinians. We will educate our children. We will protect our children. We will face any and all challenges with determination and faith. Most of all, we will be a peaceful and prosperous society. There will be challenges, but Insha’Allah. We will overcome them."

This chunk of her speech is exhibiting the policies of her government. Contextually, she is talking about the main responsibilities of a government on a huge platform which must be observed by a government carefully. She talked on many subject matters, including democracy, fight with terrorism, empowerment of women, protection of weak minorities, issues of Kashmir, support for Palestinians, education, protection of faith, and development of a peaceful society. 

At the intertextual level, she used a highly formal and impressing vocabulary to impress and impart her policies in a better way. The use of adverb "unflinchingly" demonstrates the aim of her government. Parallel structure "we will" is being used in a whole chunk which is showing the enthusiasm and passion for the improvement of the country and world around. Special importance is being given to the minorities. Use of the pronoun "we" shows the solidarity for a common cause. The poor-conditioned countries and areas like Palestine and Kashmir are being focused by her in order to gain appreciation from the audience and maintain her good image. 

At a broader sociopolitical level, she is addressing at UN assembly, through this platform she wants to convey the ideologies of her government to worldwide. She is ready to accept challenges and deal with the other socio cultural groups for the sake of a peaceful and flourishing society. 

An interview with American news magazine “TIMES”

Topic: Talk about Pak Vs US relations. Date: February 01, 2012

“TIME: What about US requests for assistance in fighting the militant groups in the tribal areas?

HRK: This whole approach of having a to do list with each other is completely flawed. It is that which has led us to where we are today. It is that along with cutting deals on the side that has led us to where we are today.

I look at this as a huge opportunity for not only Pakistan, but for the strengthening of democracy in Pakistan, and the strengthening of this particular relationship between the US and Pakistan. It has to be more reality based, more according to the aspirations of the people of Pakistan. It is not a confrontationist approach, it is just an approach which says that this is the definition of our national interest, this relationship has to fall within this ambit, and if it does, we would be much more worthy partners. So I look at this as a huge opportunity for the US -Pakistan track"

When the interviewer asked from Khar about the offer which America has made to Pakistan for assistance in order to deal with the terrorism in the tribal areas of Pakistan, Khar replied discontentedly. Historically, she is referring to the incident when America offered to sort out all the issues prevailing in the tribal areas of Pakistan and talked about proper boundary lines, Pakistan did not sign this deal due to some political issues. Khar regarded it a flawed system. She asserted that it is the flawed system that is responsible for our present condition. She used parallelism when she said repeatedly “it is that”. This phrase “it is that” refers to our imperfect system. Khar clearly negated it. 

At broader socio-political level, she used the word "opportunity" that if America offers something good, we need to accept it and take it as a chance to strengthen the relations between Pakistan and US. We need to come out of confrontation. Repetition of phrase “huge opportunity” shows the importance of this idea.Khar seems much hopeful in seeing the good relations if such agreements would be accepted in future as she used an adjective “worthy” partners for both countries. Her language is polite and shows a lot of confidence. She intensified the maintenance of “democracy” in Pakistan as she also took into account the “aspirations of people of Pakistan” that while dealing with any project with US; public opinion should be given privilege as their conformity is also necessary. This interview shows that Khar has a very fine strategy for a foreign policy in which she always gave importance to peace talks.  

Show: India Today Global Roundtable

Topic: Gender stereotypes in South Asia 

Date: November 25, 2014 

“There are two types of women in South Asia, the privileged and the underprivileged. But doors open more easily for you if you are a successful and privileged woman," she said.

“Islam had given women more rights than they ever had, cultural norms have denied rights to women" (Talking about her country’s case)

“More laws need to be enacted to protect women's rights in South Asia, unlike in "sophisticated societies" such as the Scandinavian countries”

"Our party, the PPP, decided to empower women through legislation. In sophisticated societies such as Sweden, the society protects women, but in South Asia, you need laws to protect women, like the law against acid attacks," she said.

Referring to the American offer to help Pakistan fight against terrorism in the tribal areas, Khar discontentedly replied that the issue of tribal areas was far more complicated than the US think tank realized. Pakistan did not accept the offer because of the political issues at home. She also labeled the political system as flawed and ineffectual which breads serious security challenges as economic issues. When one analyzes her speech at a broader socio-political level, she twice uses the word "opportunity." She never seems to accept the American narrative of "Do more" and asking opting for an all-out confrontationist approach towards especially by giving the command to Americans. It was time when the United States was demanding a full-fledged operation against the militants from Pakistan, without taking into consideration the fact Pakistan was facing serious political, cultural as well as economic challenges at home. That was why she stressed a "more reality-based" and equitable solution. Further, Khar rejects the proactive and assertive American approach towards terrorism in Pakistan and reiterates that any solution for this will be based on the "aspirations of the people of Pakistan." In other words, she was telling the American administration to stop dictating Pakistan. This interview revealed that Pakistan had its own fine-tuned foreign policy which was in accordance with the aspirations of Pakistanis sans American dictations. 

Hina Rabbani Khar was more outspoken and assertive in the abovementioned speech at Khatmandu where she talked about the patriarchal societal patterns. Her speech conspicuously exhibited gender lenses to see the place of women in South Asian society. Khar's befitting division of two different categories of women: "Privileged" and "Unprivileged" women. She wanted to draw a stark contrast between the women of the elite class and the working class. The former always have the due respect and people give them social recognition. These women also enjoy some share in the decision-making process. But women in the working class (mostly housewives) live a different life since they neither have the privileged position in society nor they are expected to take part in politics. In other words, she was saying a privileged woman has recognition in society which makes it likely for her to succeed in life. But the work class women do not have this privileged and they continue to face socio-economic and cultural constraints. 

Apart from this, her main objective seemed to vindicate Islam and expose the socio-cultural suffocation in terms of gender disparity. Her words showed she was blaming patriarchal patterns of society which subjugated women. This was largely due to patriarchal stereotypes about women which made society a troubling space for women. Khar explicitly said in South Asia, women would always "need laws to protect them" to save them from challenges such as acid attacks. She also created a comparison between the "sophisticated societies" such as Sweden and the South Asian countries like Pakistan which proved she was acting as a feminist to champion women's inherent rights in society. From the socio-political level analysis, her reference to Scandinavian welfare regimes such as Sweden expressed PPP's model of governance. These countries have been regarded as very successful because of their pluralistic society, pro-people policies, and substantive improvements in women empowerment.

Conclusion

Media plays a pivotal role in constructing the political identity of a leader. This has become more pronounced in the wake of the info-tech revolution which has made information sharing a lot easier and hassle-free. Media not only helps to communicate with a larger audience, but it also builds a narrative through political campaigns. This information technology revolution has brought a tremendous transformation in the political and social fields. Many researchers even think it has made politics healthier and participative. Rep. Kriseman says. “This dynamic exchange of information and ideas makes for a healthier and more participative democracy.” 

This paper was an effort to explore, examine and analyze the speeches made by the foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar during her tenure. The focus of the research paper was to investigate the different linguistic patterns user by her in various speeches and talk shows on different occasions. The text analysis was based on Ruth Wodak's Discourse Historical Approach which relies heavily on the social and political context as well as historical background to understand the texts. 

The study concluded that Hina Rabbani Khar had a positive, constructive, and forward-looking approach. Her focus was on economic stability, mainly with the help of trade and investment. She also defended Pakistan's perspective on various points such as the issue of terrorism. She tried to portray a positive image of Pakistan by showing its efforts for the peace and stability of the world. Khar's narrative was global, especially in dealing with issues such as the war on terror. She urged other nations to collectively respond to the menace of terrorism. Further, she dismantled the stereotypical views on Haqqani Network that Pakistan had any link with them or had a soft corner for some militants. Kashmir, Palestine, and Afghanistan were also discussed by her on international platforms such as the United Nations. This sympathetic expression implied that Pakistan was a responsible country that cares about transborder issues relating to Muslims. 

Although I do not find her a strong feminist, her views on patriarchy and call for women's empowerment showed her progressive mindset. She never openly and strongly rejected the patriarchy but represented women in the pink of perfection. She seemed to think the South Asian culture was male-centered and patriarchal and it subjugated women. It was oppressive and the state needed to use legislation to protect women from heinous issues such as acid attacks. Hina Rabbani Khar would also draw a stark contrast between the patriarchal South Asian countries and the welfare Scandinavian regimes such as Sweden. Keeping the abovementioned points into consideration, it looks conspicuous Hina Rabbani Khar used polite, positive, and constructive language. She successfully defended Pakistan's perspective in a confident yet soft language. She always championed peaceful relations with neighbors that are sustainable and strong.

References

• Ali, R., & Batool, S. (2015). Stereotypical identities: Discourse analysis of media images of women in Pakistan. Multidisciplinary Journal of Gender Studies, 4(1), 690-717.
• Ali, S., & Kazemian, B. (2015). Critical discourse analysis of a reading text ‘Pakistan and the Modern World': A speech by Liaquat Ali Khan. Communication and Linguistic Studies, 1(3), 35-41
• Fowler, R. (1991). Language in the News. Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London and New York: Routledge
• Hassan, H. M. A., & Adam, A. M. A. (2015). Power discourse produced by Hosni Mubarak of Egypt during Arab spring. International Journal of Recent Scientific Research, 6(4), 3366- 3374
• Jost, J. T., Federico, C. M., & Napier, J. L. (2009). Political ideology: Its structure, functions, and elective affinities. Annual Review of Psychology, 60(1), 307-337.
• Kress, G., & Hodge, R. (1979). Language as Ideology. London and New York: Routledge
• Madsen, D. L. (2000). Feminist theory and literary practice. New York: Pluto Press.
• Qadir, S. A., & Riaz, F. (2015). Gendered political identity construction in Pakistani television talk shows. FWU Journal of Social Sciences, 9(1), 20-28.
• Rahman, B. H., Eijaz, A., & Ahmad, R. E. (2015). Framing of women in politics: A case of Pakistani elections 2013. Journal of Political Studies, 22(1), 335-350.
• Sajjad, F. (2015). A critical discourse analysis of Barack Hussein Obama's political speeches on the Middle East and the Muslim world. International Journal of Linguistics. 7(1), 1-41.
• Van Dijk, T. A. (2006). Politics, ideology and discourse. Elsevier Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Volume on Politics and Language, 728-740.
• Wirth-Koliba, V. (2016). The Diverse and Dynamic World of 'Us' and 'Them'in Political Discourse. Victoria, 8(1), 23-37.