Confrontational Diplomacy: Applying Impoliteness Strategies to Nasser’s 1960 UN Speech

Abstract

This study aims to test how impoliteness strategies operate in formal institutional diplomatic discourse; in order to introduce the concept of confrontational diplomacy this concept, identified by a form of expression proving that, in which structurally weaker actors employ impoliteness strategies against more powerful antagonists while simultaneously remaining alignment with host institution.

The study adopts a qualitative political discourse analysis approach. It applies Culpeper’s (1996, 20011) impoliteness frame work to the 15^th session of the United Nations General Assembly delivered by Gamal Abdel Nasser’s speech consisting of 8 paragraphs. The analysis incorporates systematic coding of impoliteness strategies (threat, accusation, sarcasm, and exclusion, with contextual explanation of their political function.  The findings of the study show a strategic absence of direct insults, with accusation arising as dominant strategy (56.4%), followed by exclusion (23.1%), threats remain the minimal (5.1%). Impoliteness towards colonial powers is balanced with positive politeness towards the UN institution. The Findings support confrontational diplomacy concept as a repeatable analytical framework testing strategic language use by Global South leaders in international political arena.