Cover not available

In:Discourses of War and Peace: 21st century perspectives
Edited by Cornelia Ilie
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 355] 2026
► pp. 156–188

Vladimir Putin’s war rhetoric between cold reflection and furious hatred

 | University of Zurich
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
Abstract
The article aims at elucidating V. Putin’s war rhetoric by two of his nationwide broadcasted speeches delivered at the same location (the St. George’s Hall in the Kremlin Palace) to the same auditory (the two chambers of the Russian parliament) on two similar occasions: the annexation of the Crimea (18.3.2014) and the annexation of four partly occupied Ukrainian territories (30.9. 2022). Despite these commonalities, the contrast between the two speeches could not be more striking. The triumphant 2014 appearance took place during a rise of patriotic enthusiasm in Russian society. Putin’s verbal legitimation of the annexation was based on a host of pseudo-rational arguments (mostly historical analogies) related to the history of Crimea, Russia and NATO’s approaching Russia’s borders in space and time. By contrast, the 2022 speech was held after several defeats of the invaders’ army on the occupied Ukrainian territories and Putin’s announcement of partial mobilization. 77% of the whole speech is now dedicated to the West’s alleged crimes, including colonialism and US subjugation of its “vassals”, but also a moral degeneration culminating in Satanism. The Western threat is thus located on the ideological axis and described as an attack against traditional values, with “Russophobia” being a new manifestation of racism. The analysis is based on a mixed approach combining proximisation theory, argumentation theory and Neo-Gricean pragmatics.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The Crimea address (2014)
    • 2.1The selective look at history
    • 2.2“Historical”: An ambiguous term
      • 2.2.1Faulty historical analogies
    • 2.3Aggressiveness
    • Digression: Putin’s crisis communication during the COVID-19 pandemic
  • 3.The address of September 30, 2022
    • 3.1The shrinking importance of national history
    • 3.2The new construal of the enemy
      • 3.2.1Conflicting values
    • 3.3What does Russia stand for?
    • 3.4Heightened aggression
  • 3.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
  • Electronic resources (last retrieval on October 16, 2025)
References (52)
References
Bousfield, Derek. 2008. Impoliteness in interaction. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Breeze, Ruth, and María Fernanda Novoa-Jaso. 2026. “Divergent visions on the war in Ukraine: A corpus-assisted discourse study of speeches by Putin and Zelenskyy.” In Discourses of War and Peace: 21st Century Perspectives, ed. by Cornelia Ilie. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson. 1987. Politeness. Some universals in language use. Cambridge: University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. The Language of Fear: Communicating Threat in Public Discourse. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2014. Analysing political speeches: Rhetoric, discourse and metaphor. Basingstoke, 2014. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chilton, Paul. 2004. Analysing political discourse: theory and practice. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Darczewska, Jolanta. 2014. “The anatomy of Russian information warfare: The Crimean operation, a case study.” Point of View 42: 1–37.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drozdova, Oksana, and Paul Robinson. 2019. “A Study of Vladimir Putin’s Rhetoric.” Europe- Asia Studies 71 (5): 805–823.
 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Eemeren, Frans, and R. Grootendorst. 2004. A systematic theory of argumentation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fetzer, Anita, and Daniel Weiss (eds.) 2020. “Introduction”. How to do things with quotes. Special issue of Journal of Pragmatics 157, 84–88.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gorham, Michael. 2013. “Putin’s language.” In Putin as Celebrity and Cultural Icon, ed. by Helena Goscilo, 82–103. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gruber, Helmut. 2026. “Debating the Ukraine war in the German public. Three open letters, an op-ed, and their uptake in the German quality press.” In Discourses of War and Peace: 21st Century Perspectives, ed. by Cornelia Ilie. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guttke, M. 2014. “Wem gehört die Krim? Putins Rechtfertigung der Krim-Annexion.” Zeitschrift für Slawistik 60 (2): 312–327. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Herpen, Marcel H. 2015. Putin’s Propaganda Machine: Soft Power and Russian Foreign Policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ilie, Cornelia. 2026. “War-peace dialectic revisited: From neutrality to post-neutrality discourses in Sweden.” In Discourses of War and Peace: 21st Century Perspectives, ed. by Cornelia Ilie. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaltseis, Magdalena. 2022. Politische Meinungsmanipulation als Unterhaltung? Eine Analyse von Propagandastrategien in russischen TV- Talkshows während des Konflikts in der Ukraine (2014). Dissertation. Universität Klagenfurt.
Kappeler, Andreas. 2021. “Revisionismus und Drohungen. Vladimir Putins Text zur Einheit von Russen und Ukrainern.” Osteuropa 71 (7): 67–76. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kienpointer, Manfred. 2012. “When figurative analogies fail: fallacious uses of arguments from analogy”. In Topical Themes in Argumentation Theory: Twenty Exploratory Studies, ed. By Frans van Eemeren, and Bart Garssen (eds.), 111–125. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kimmage, Michael, and Notte, Hanna. 2023. “How Russia Globalized the War in Ukraine. The Kremlin’s Pressure-Point Strategy to Undermine the West”, in: Foreign Affairs, 1. September 2023. ([URL]
Kopytowska, Monika. 2015. “Covering Conflict: Between Universality and Cultural Specificity in News Discourse, Genre and Journalistic Style.” International Review of Pragmatics 7, 308–339, 2015b. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kragh, Martin, and Andreas Umland. 2023. Putinism beyond Putin: the political ideas of Nikolai Patrushev and Sergei Naryshkin in 2006–20, Post-Soviet Affairs, 39:5, 366–389. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuße, Holger. 2019. Aggression and Argumentation. Mit Beispielen aus dem russisch- ukrainischen Konflikt). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Menneke, Olga. 2024. “The groundwork of Putin’ s war. Mental models and ideological references in Vladimir Putin’s “Crimean” speech.” Journal of Language and Politics 23:2 (2024), pp. 197–218.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Musolff, Andreas. 2017. “Metaphor and persuasion in politics.” In The Routledge Handbook of Metaphor and Language, ed. by Elena Semino, and Zsófia Demján, 309–322. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nedashkivska, A. 2015. «“Ukraine is United” Campaign: Public Discourse on Languages in Ukraine at a Time of Political Turmoil.”» Zeitschrift für Slawistik 60 (2): 294–331. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nicolosi, Riccardo. 2022. “Erniedrigte und Beleidigte. Vladimir Putins Affektrhetorik.” Geschichte der Gegenwart 23.3.2022.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nicolosi, Ricardo. 2025. Putins Kriegsrhetorik. Konstanz: University Press Essay. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oates, Sarah. 2016. “Russian Media in the Digital Age: Propaganda Rewired.” Russian Politics 1(4): 398–417.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pasitselska, Olga. 2017. “Ukrainian Crisis through the Lens of Russian Media: Construction of Ideological Discourse.” Discourse & Communication 11 (6): 591–609.
 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rak, Joanna, Bäcker, Roman. 2020. “Theory behind Russian Quest for Totalitarianism. Analysis of Discursive Swing in Putin’s Speeches”. Communist and Post-Communist Studies 53:1, 13–26.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walton, Douglas N., C. Reed, andMacagno, F. 2008. Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge: University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walton, Douglas N. 2014. “Argumentation schemes for argument from analogy.” In: Ribeiro, Henrique (ed.), Systematic Approaches to Argument by Analogy, 23–40. Springer International Publishing Switzerland.
 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weiss, Daniel. 2017. “Implizite Argumentation im politischen Diskurs: Metaphern, Vergleiche, intertextuelle Verweise.” In: Mayer, Anna, Reinkowski, Lilijana (ed.), Im Rhythmus der Linguistik. Festschrift für S. Kempgen, 465–483. Bamberg: University of Bamberg Press, 2017.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. “Ukrainskij konflikt v zerkale korpusnoj lingvistiki.” In Velmezova, Ekaterina (ed.), Schweizerische Beiträge zum Belgrader Slavistenkongress, 321–348, Bern & Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019. “Threat scenarios in the Ukraine Conflict.” International Journal of Cross-cultural Studies and Environmental Communication (IJCCSEC) 6(2), 2019, 16–24.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2020a. “Der Ukraine-Konflikt im Spiegel einer kontrastiv-quantitativen Diskursanalyse: methodologische Grundlagen.” In: Scharlaj, Marina (ed.), Language and power in Discourses of conflict. Specimina philologiae Slavicae. Berlin-Bern etc. 2020, 15–48.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2020b. “The Ukrainian nation — Stepmother, younger sister or stillborn baby? Evidences from Russian TV debates and related political sources.” In: Knoblock, Natalia (ed.), Language of Conflict. Discourses of the Ukrainian Crisis, 117–135. London-Oxford: Bloomsbury. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2020c. “Analogical reasoning with quotations? A spotlight on Russian parliamentary discourse”. Fetzer, Anita, and Weiss, Daniel (eds.), How to do things with quotes. Special issue of Journal of Pragmatics 157, 101–110. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2022. “How autocrats cope with the corona challenge: Belarus vs. Russia.” In: Musolff, Andreas, Breeze, Ruth, et al. (eds.), Pandemic and crisis discourse, London: Bloomsbury, 2022, ch. 4, 61–78. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2023. COVID-19 “Vaccination policies in an autocratic context: Belarus vs. Russia.” In: Thielemann, Nadine, and Weiss, Daniel (eds.), Remedies against the pandemic. How politicians communicate crisis management. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 136–16. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Electronic resources (last retrieval on October 16, 2025)
Putin 1999. Rossija na rubeže tysjačeletija, [URL]
 2014. [URL]
 2021. [URL]
 2022a. [URL]
 2022b. [URL]
 2022c. [URL]
 2023. [URL]
 2024a. Interview mit Tucker Carlson, in: [URL]
 2024b. [URL]
Archangelski, Andrej. 2017. “Schau mich gefälligst an!” (Übersetzung: Ruth Altenhofer). [URL]
Levshina, Natalya. 2022. [URL]
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue