A critical inquiry into the discourses of war and occupation in the wake of the wars in Ukraine and Gaza

The aim of this article is to use one central assumption of Wittgenstein’s philosophy – language games – to review some important aspects of communication and language issues that typically have arisen in the aftermath of the wars in Ukraine and Gaza. I draw specifically on a critical inquiry of purposefully selected samples of discursive and linguistic practices accompanying the war in Ukraine and the occupation of its territory by Russia, and the war in Gaza and the occupation of Palestinian territories by Israel. References will also be made to the types of language games used by mainstream western media to categorize other wars and occupations discursively and socially, such as those of Iraq, Yemen and Afghanistan. I argue that the use of language is crucial for the understanding and representation of these wars and occupations, and a cause of failure in intercultural interaction. The central argument is as follows: While language games have different senses and not all people attach the same meaning to them, in case of conflict and controversy, those with power attach additional or different interpretations to them in a way they think is reasonable to change or at least rearrange their meanings. According to Wittgenstein’s deliberations of language games, the meaning of each of the various linguistic utterances, like words, sentences or symbols, is defined in terms of its setting and use. To unravel how and why certain linguistic practices are reinforced, and others are thwarted, the article supplements Wittgenstein’s deliberations of language with Hollihan and Baaskes’ definition of rhetorical source credibility, Thomas Hobbes’ ‘Leviathan discourse’ and Foucault’s notion of discourse and power.