• No results found

The Power of Words : A Critical Discourse Analysis of Governmental Media Releases from Australia and Nauru

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "The Power of Words : A Critical Discourse Analysis of Governmental Media Releases from Australia and Nauru"

Copied!
58
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

The Power of Words

A Critical Discourse Analysis of Governmental Media Releases from Australia

and Nauru

Talita Mollerup-Degn

Malmö University

Department of Global Political Studies Peace and Conflict Studies

Bachelor Dissertation, 12 credits PACS III Spring Semester 2020

(2)

Page 1 of 57

Abstract

Australia has been severely criticised for their offshore processing of refugees and asylum seekers on Nauru. Their policies of deterrence have caused conflict and insecurity, not only for the refugees and asylum seekers, but also for the locals on Nauru. Nauru is a former Australian colony, still in a position of dependency on Australian aid. This research focus on how postcolonial structures and notions of identity are influencing the constructions of Nauru’s and Australia’s relationship, and political corporation on offshore processing. Governmental media releases from both the Nauruan and Australian government has been analysed, using Norman Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis in a combination with postcolonial theory, to provide an understanding of these constructions. Media releases from governmental figures create a powerful image, which can influence our understanding of ‘reality’ and social practices. This paper finds that postcolonial identity is still linguistically constituted in the political discourse, consequently creating a process of othering on several levels: Australia as the modern civilised coloniser, Nauru as friendly people but used as a tool by Australia in relation to security politics, and refugees and asylum seekers as illegal or criminals. Thus, (re)producing postcolonial discourse and structures of unequal power relations, influencing political action.

Key words: Postcolonialism, Critical Discourse Analysis, Offshore Processing, Australia,

(3)

Page 2 of 57

Table of Contents

List of Abbreviations ... 4

1. Introduction ... 5

1.1 Research Problem ... 6

1.2 Aim and Research Question ... 7

1.3 Relevance to the field of Peace and Conflict ... 8

1.4 Delimitations ... 8

1.5 Thesis Outline ... 9

2. Background ... 10

2.1 Australia’s offshore processing ... 10

3. Method and Analytical Framework ... 14

3.1 Discourse, Knowledge and Power ... 14

3.2 A Critical Discourse Analysis ... 16

3.3 Reflection on choice of method and the role of the researcher ... 17

3.4 The operationalisation of CDA ... 18

3.5 Material ... 20

3.6 Postcolonialism ... 22

4. Analysis: An In-Depth Analysis of Text ... 24

4.1 The Textual Dimension of CDA ... 24

4.1.1 Australia: The Textual Construction of Australia, Nauru and Their Relationship 24 4.1.2 Australia: The Textual Construction of Refugees and Asylum Seekers ... 27

4.1.3 Nauru: The Textual Construction of Nauru, Australia and Their Relationship . 29 4.1.4 Nauru: The Textual Construction of Refugees and Asylum Seekers ... 32

5. Analysis: Text and Society ... 35

(4)

Page 3 of 57

5.1.1 Intertextuality ... 35

5.1.2 Interdiscursivity ... 37

5.2 Sociocultural Practices ... 38

6. Concluding Discussion ... 41

6.1 Considerations for Further Research ... 43

7. Bibliography ... 44

7.1 Media Releases: Primary Sources ... 50

7.1.1 Australia Media Releases ... 50

7.1.2 Nauru Media Releases ... 52

Appendix 1: Framework for Linguistic Analysis ... 56

(5)

Page 4 of 57

List of Abbreviations

CDA Critical Discourse Analysis

EU European Union

HRW Human Rights Watch

ICC International Criminal Court

MSF Médecins Sans Frontiéres (Doctors Without Borders)

NGO Non-governmental Organisation

PNG Papua New Guinea

RPC Regional Processing Centre

(6)

Page 5 of 57

1. Introduction

In 2018, I was working for Human Rights Watch (HRW) in Sydney. While I was sitting in the office, people were running to the streets protesting Australia’s offshore processing of refugees and asylum seekers. I was shocked, that the work and critique executed by HRW and other non- political or political institution had such little effect on Australian politicians. It is argued, that the political discourse is moving towards a more politicized practice of sovereign exceptionalisms leading to the externalisation of refugees (Hyndman & Mountz, 2008), not only in Australia but also Europe, emphasising the importance in investigating the political discourse and practice.

Australia’s treatment of refugees and asylum seekers is strongly criticised. Operation Sovereign Borders is a military-led border security operation aimed at stopping asylum seekers and refugees travelling by boat towards Australia (Parliament of Australia, 2014). Those arriving by boat have been transferred to offshore processing centres in Papua New Guinea (PNG) and Nauru. The opening of the offshore processing centres in 2012 was in fact a reopening of previous Australian offshore arrangements that had run from 2001-2008 (Parliament of Australia, 2012). The primary critiques of these processing centres are, among other concerns, the use of violent means and violations of the international declaration on human rights and the Convention against Torture (Human Rights Law Centre, 2015).

The processing centre on Nauru is called the Regional Processing Centre (RPC). It has been argued to be highly militarised and with inhumane, harsh conditions (Chasing Asylum, 2016). In 2016, a documentary revealing the conditions of refugees and asylum seekers in Nauru was recorded in secrecy, as it was impossible to get media permission to Nauru (ibid.). Since, Nauru had become a black spot, from where only little information about conditions in RPC had been released, this documentary increased national and international awareness on the matter. During August 2018, the Australian government experienced increased pressure on changing its offshore policy from both Australians, NGOs and United Nations (UN) bodies (UN News, 2018).

Even though the International Criminal Court (ICC) offices in 2020 declared that the treatment of refugees does not warrant a prosecution of crimes against humanity (Mochochoko, 2020), international concerns are still widely expressed.

(7)

Page 6 of 57

1.1 Research Problem

In 2016, The Guardian Australia released more than 2.000 leaked incident reports from the RPC on Nauru, including documentation of direct violence and abusive behaviour towards refugees and asylum seekers (The Guardian, 2016). It became clear that these camps had led to violent means as well as local conflict. Violence can have both direct and/or structural character (Galtung, 1969:169f). The refugees and asylum seekers are therefore not only subjected to direct violence, but also structural violence, constituted in the structures of the processing system. Australia has made similar refugee resettlement agreements with other third countries, but this thesis will focus on the agreement with Nauru, where most families were detained and therefore had significant implications for men, women and children.

Nauru has a history of being administered by four colonial powers. It is a very isolated island (Viviani, 1970) with a small population of approximately 10.000 including non-Nauruan population of approximately 1.000 (The Government of the Republic of Nauru, 2020). Nauru achieved independence in 1968 and is still one of the smallest independent states in the world (Connell, 2006). With the first European contact Nauru was named “Pleasant Island” (Connell, 2006; Viviani, 1970). The mining of phosphate on Nauru began in 1907 and has through history been exploited by Australian and British authorities (ibid.). During the first two decades of independence Nauru’s development was concentrated around the environmentally draining mining industry, but with no planning for a phosphate free future (Connell, 2006). This left Nauru dependent on external aid. In 2012, when the RPC on Nauru reopened, it became the second largest employer of the country (The Commonwealth, 2014). Australia assists Nauru every year with large amounts of aid, where part of it is given as ‘assistance to refugees’ and running the RPC, argued to be a misapplication of Australian aid, spent on funding detention of refugees (Duxfield & Wheen, 2007).

Nauru faces national challenges to the extent that some scholars have argued Nauru to be a failed state (Connell, 2006). Although Nauru does not exhibit the high level of internal violence, identified as a defining feature of failed statehood (ibid.), the RPC has contributed to local and internal conflict between the population of Nauru and the people in processing.

(8)

Page 7 of 57

1.2 Aim and Research Question

This thesis aims at investigating the power relation between Australia and Nauru, as it is presented by both governments, seen through the lens of offshore processing and treatment of refugees and asylum seekers. The research aspires to disclose discursive constructions and practices of the relationship itself, produced through governmental media releases concerning the offshore centres and those being interned in them.

The research question is as follows:

How is the relationship between Australia and Nauru constructed by Australian and Nauruan governmental media releases concerning the offshore processing centres, and the discursive construction of ‘refugees’ and ‘asylum seekers’?

The research process will be guided by the following operational questions:

• How is the relationship between Australia and Nauru constructed in Australian governmental media releases?

• How is the relationship between Nauru and Australia constructed in Nauruan governmental media releases?

• How are ‘refugees’ and ‘asylum seekers’ constructed in Australian governmental media releases?

• How are ‘refugees’ and ‘asylum seekers’ constructed in Nauruan governmental media releases?

• What are these constructions suggesting about the underlying discursive practices? • What wider sociocultural processes are these constructions part of and what are the

likely effects of these constructions?

The material will be analysed using Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) of a selection of governmental media releases from both the Nauruan and Australian governments.

(9)

Page 8 of 57

1.3 Relevance to the field of Peace and Conflict

This study is relevant to the field of Peace and Conflict since it gives an understanding of a conflict rising at the intersection of increased global voluntary and involuntary migration, and third country processing of refugees and asylum seekers. This study provides insights into underlying discourses within a conflict of direct and structural violence elucidated by the Australian offshore processing centres. The refugees and asylum seekers who have suffered great consequences in RPC are people with pre-existing traumas of discrimination, violence and persecution (Chasing Asylum, 2016). It is not only the refugees and asylum seekers who are affected by the RPC, but also the host country Nauru, where the locals experience insecurity which is materialised in the conflicts between the local Nauruans and refugees. How to reveal and critically assess unequal power relations in communication (Fairclough, 2015), processes of othering (Said, 2003) and structural violence (Galtung, 1969) are all important in understanding current political discourses of externalisation of refugees and asylum seekers. Thus, contribute to an understanding of how to diminish violence of both direct and structural character. This study should be seen as a contribution to understanding the past, and as such, contribute to preventing similar future conflicts. The media is part of shaping and constructing the social world (Fairclough, 2015), but as some constructions may be understood as harmful, they are important to study to be able to challenge.

1.4 Delimitations

Due to the scope of this study I have selected only one of the Australian cases of offshore processing and focused on Nauru and media releases, published by these two governments. It is therefore important to be aware that this research only offer insights to the selected material. Thus, this study does not offer explanations of any other similar agreements between Australia and other countries. Australia’s hard stand on maritime arrivals is the focus of this research, therefore factors in other parts of the Australian immigration laws will be left out. It is also important to acknowledge that the material analysed, only consists of political media releases from the time of the offshore arrangement between 2012 and 2019, and only published by the governments in office. Therefore, there is not presented any perspectives from a possible opposition.

(10)

Page 9 of 57

1.5 Thesis Outline

This first chapter of the thesis has outlined the problem field and placed it in relevance to the study of Peace and Conflict. The research question as well as the operational questions have been introduced along with the aim of the thesis and the delimitations of this study. The second chapter will provide background information on Australia’s policy of offshore processing on Nauru. Previous research on these matters will be outlined as well as a short reflection on the current research gap. In the third chapter the methodological and analytical framework of this research will be presented alongside an introduction of the selected material. The analysis will be divided into two chapters reflecting the chosen method, CDA, whereas chapter four will consist of an in-depth textual analysis and chapter five will broaden the findings and relate them to social practices. The last chapter six, will be a concluding discussion, and outline ideas for further research.

(11)

Page 10 of 57

2. Background

Building upon the historical framework as introduced in chapter 1, I will outline the political relationship made between Australia and Nauru, to set the context in which, the analysis will be placed. A reflection on the current research and research gap will be presented.

2.1 Australia’s offshore processing

Australia’s offshore processing are an extraordinary aspect of Australian refugee and immigration laws, to ensure that “unauthorized boat arrivals” (Parliament of Australia, 2012) were processed outside Australia under the political strategy called the “Pacific Solution” (Parliament of Australia, 2002). The Pacific Solution included initiatives allowing the Australian Navy to turn back unauthorised boats in Australian waters (Opeskin & Ghezelbash, 2016:79f), or transfer those onboard to detention centres on PNG or Nauru. People identified as refugees, would not be resettled in Australia but in a third country (ibid.). This agreement was in use from 2001-2008 and reopened in 2012 (Parliament of Australia, 2012) despite concerns, raised by NGOs and humanitarian workers on the well-being of the refugees and asylum seekers. Alongside the reopening of the RPC and a campaign led to “stop the boats” (Chasing Asylum, 2016), Australia signed, in 2013, an agreement with Nauru, allowing refugees to be resettled there (Dastyari, 2015).

In 2018, Doctors Without Borders (MSF) were forced off Nauru, while expressing deep concern for the situation in the RPC (Médecins Sans Frontiers, 2018). This sparked national public attention and in August 2018, hundreds of Australians protested, calling for the transfer of all refugees and asylum seekers from Nauru to Australia (Human Rights Watch, 2019). In 2019 the Home Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Act 2019 (Home Affairs Legislation Amendment Act, 2019) was passed in the Australian Parliament, due to pressure from the opposition, allowing critically sick refugees and asylum seekers to be transferred from the RPC to medical assistance in Australia. As a reaction, the government announced a reopening of a previous processing centre on Christmas Island, referring to the Miscellaneous Bill as a weakening of border protection.

(12)

Page 11 of 57

“Nauru is a story of power, exploitation, and greed and the selling of the future for short term gain.” (McDaniel & Gowdy, 2000:10 cited in Connell, 2006:47). Australia and Nauru have a longstanding relationship, including two periods of Australian colonial rule over Nauru (Viviani, 1970) and a current partnership in processing people arriving by boat to seek refuge in Australia. In the 1960s the Australian government considered whether the entire population of Nauru should be relocated to Australia, due to the considerable environmental impact of phosphate mining (Tabucanon & Opeskin, 2011; McAdam, 2016). The Nauruans were not interested in being assimilated with ‘white Australia’ and lose their identity as a people (McAdam, 2016), so the discussion never became action.

The current relationship between the two nations is furthermore associated with Australia’s aid and investment plan with Nauru. The aid investment plan between Australia and Nauru is described as a partnership, based on “Australia’s strategic interests” (Australian Government, 2016), both within security issues and diplomacy in the Pacific region. This partnership is claimed to be of developing benefit for Nauru. The investment plan includes the assertion that “Nauru will continue to be dependent on external assistance over the long term” (ibid.). This plan may be argued to consistently hold Nauru in a position of dependency, which create such pressure on the Nauruan government, that they are in no position to deny or challenge the RPC agreement with Australia even if they wanted to (Opeskin & Ghezelbash, 2016). The postcolonial history of exploiting Nauru’s resources can arguably have paved the way for offshore processing agreements (Vogl, 2017:2). The nature of the long historical link between Australia and Nauru, made it possible for Australia to place responsibility of processing refugees and asylum seekers on less well-equipped countries (Opeskin & Ghezelbash, 2016:86f). Postcolonial theory suggests that power imbalance and exploitative behaviour might have significant influence even after independency (Said, 2003), which in this case might have become embedded in the structures of the relationship between Australia and Nauru.

It is argued, that by naming the policy ‘offshore’ it refers to Australia as the mainland, undermining the sovereignty of Nauru (Vogl, 2017:3). Nauru may be described as ‘selling sovereignty’, since the offshore processing agreement allows Australia to introduce their national policy on foreign soil (Dastyari, 2015). Thinking about the RPC in the context of the postcolonial history, it is argued that:

[T]he regime is premised on the Australian Government’s willingness to exploit the postcolonial sovereignty of the ‘offshore’ island of Nauru, such that because of its remarkably recent sovereign status Nauru is responsible for Australia’s offshore processing. (Vogl, 2017:2)

(13)

Page 12 of 57

The former presumption or understanding of Australia seeing it as their right, or even their duty, to speak for other Pacific nations in the South Pacific, has been criticised (Fry, 1997). Australia’s determination to prevent asylum seekers and refugees from arriving by boat has not only created social impact and insecurity, due to tensions rising by placing large processing centres in small island communities, but also a social cost of resettling refugees among poor local populations (Opeskin & Ghezelbash, 2016). Many refugees and asylum seekers living in the RPC suffer from poor mental health due to, or exacerbated by, years of detention. Self-harm and suicide attempts are frequent. Violence against refugees and asylum seekers is continuously a serious issue on Nauru. These issues are argued to be consequences of prolonged detention and uncertainty (Boyd, 2016).

The political actions of Australian offshore policy rely on the “The Coalition’s Policy for a Regional Deterrence Framework to Combat People Smuggling” (Liberal and Nationals for Regional Australia, 2013), which was published by the Australian government in 2013, in which one might argue, refugees are treated as a threat and matter of border security.

The unlawfulness of the Australian offshore policies has been discussed in research of both Australian and Nauruan law (Dastyari, 2015). Many critics have emphasised that Australia cannot avoid responsibility to international law simply due to the circumstance that detention of refugees and asylum seekers is happening on foreign ground (ibid.). Australian offshore policies have been described as a deterrence strategy and a matter of concern, due to a practice of authority without responsibility (Weber, 2007). It is argued that a state-at-a-distance, as this case of Australian offshore policy, disguise Australian responsibility (Weber, 2007:88), even though, the political memorandum on the understanding of offshore processing clearly states, that it is a shared obligation (Australian & Nauruan Governments, 2013).

Throughout my reading it became clear to me, that the colonial influence of power is of significance when discussing this issue. Some scholars argue that ‘the coloniality of power’ illuminates the power relations that are dominant today and the knowledge that allows the reproduction of it (Tascón, 2004). The knowledge of race became part of the justification for the coloniality of power (ibid.). Refugees might be challenging this knowledge and notion of world order and fixed borders. Arguing that Australia’s offshore processing on Nauru is best understood through the lens of postcolonial theory and Australia’s colonial role in the Pacific (Vogl, 2017), this research will build upon and aim at expanding this understanding on the relationship between Australia and Nauru. There has been extensive research on the policies of Australian offshore processing and on the RPC, due to the severe criticism it has faced, both

(14)

Page 13 of 57

national and international. Furthermore, there has been a discussion of power relations between the Pacific Island states, as well as research on island identity of small remote states such as Nauru. However, most research tends to focus on either the Australian policies and practices or the Nauruan position in relation to Australia. Therefore, this thesis aims at connecting the two nations’ relationship and history with the contemporary practices on refugee policies. Furthermore, this allows investigation of language used to constitute or challenge the current structures, and by doing so, contribute to the existing research by including discourse analysis of both Nauruan and Australian perspectives.

(15)

Page 14 of 57

3. Method and Analytical Framework

Norman Fairclough has explained and developed critical discourse analysis (CDA) as a theoretical framework and method for analysis (Fairclough, 2015). When doing a study based in CDA, it is important to acknowledge that discourse analysis is not to be isolated from its theoretical foundation. As method and theory are intertwined (Jørgensen & Phillips, 2002:4), this chapter will consist of considerations on both and give an outline of the methodological and analytical framework of this research. Since CDA is not sufficient on its own to analyse wider social practices, cultural and/or social theory is a necessary complement for analysis (Jørgensen & Phillips, 2011:9). The following will therefore discuss postcolonial theory, as the chosen complementary theory. Additionally, the chapter will reflect on the role of the researcher and introduce the material chosen for analysis.

3.1 Discourse, Knowledge and Power

Discourse analysis has been widely used in social research and is commonly associated with Michel Foucault. The word discourse has sometimes been used in scientific text and debates indiscriminately. Therefore, the concept of discourse for some have become vague or used in a wide range of contexts without specific definition (Jørgensen & Phillips 2002:1). Thus, I will start by defining discourse as:

refer[ring] to groups of statements that structure the way a thing is thought, and the way we act on the basis of that thinking. [D]iscourse is a particular knowledge about the world which shapes how the world is understood and how things are done in it. (Rose, 2016:187)

This particular knowledge can be (re)produced through different medias (Rose, 2016). Discourses are not only shaped by social relations and structures but are part of the creation and reproduction of those structures. Discourse analysis has its roots within social constructionism (Jørgensen & Phillips 2002:4f), thus supporting the presumption that reality is socially constructed.

(16)

Page 15 of 57

Language can function as maintaining or changing power relations in contemporary society, hence disclosing this process might create awareness regarding changing or resisting possible unequal power relations (Fairclough, 2015:6). Understanding the discourses that define or construct social structures provide the option of challenging or even change them. Even though such changes take long to materialise, I argue that this is one of the reasons discourse analysis stays highly relevant within social and Peace and Conflict research.

Fairclough limits the term discourse to semiotic systems, e.g. the spoken or written language or imagery (Jørgensen & Phillips 2002:67). This is partly where he differs from other scholars, like Laclau and Mouffe who understands all social practices as discourse (ibid.).

As discourse contributes to the constructions of social identities, social relations and systems of knowledge and meaning (Jørgensen & Phillips 2011:7), it is adjacent to understand discourse as production and claims of knowledge, that are socially constituted and constructed.

Our knowledge of the world should not be treated as objective truth. Reality is only accessible to us through categories, so our knowledge and representations of the world are not reflections of the reality ‘out there’, but rather are products of our ways of categorising the world […] (Jørgensen & Phillips 2002:5).

What we understand as knowledge or the ‘truth’ can therefore be argued to be systems of discourses. Foucault argues that power exists everywhere (Foucault, 1978:92f). Thus, power is a flow of actions and reactions. Power is partly exercised through discourse (Foucault, 1978), and is not necessarily only understood as negative or of domination. Fairclough’s understanding of power is a bit more traditional than Foucault’s, as he expresses power as relations that define the existing social order (Fairclough, 2015:26). Thus, it becomes important to distinguish between ‘power to’ and ‘power over’ (ibid.). Another important distinction to make is between ‘power in discourse’ and ‘power behind discourse’ (Fairclough, 2015:27), which constitutes and shape orders of discourse. The theoretical and philosophical understandings of discourse, power and knowledge are often understood as intertwined. The exercise of power through discourse, hence what is understood as knowledge, is central throughout the analysis and in understanding the postcolonial relationship between Australia and Nauru.

(17)

Page 16 of 57

3.2 A Critical Discourse Analysis

CDA is not seeking to explain what happened at particular occasions, but how elements of systems are related to each other, which helps us make sense of practices within for instance institutions or societies (Fairclough, 2015:11). Thus, the relations between elements are central. Fairclough introduces CDA and his three-dimensional framework of analysis, from within which I take my methodological departure (Fairclough, 1995). This will be discussed in more detail in the next part of the chapter, where the operationalisation of the method is outlined. Fairclough’s three-dimensional framework is rooted in a deep understanding of language and linguistics as revealing possible unequal power relations and identity (Fairclough, 2015). CDA aims at contributing to societal change and more equal power relations in social structures of the world and in communication (Jørgensen & Phillips, 2011). Social and cultural reproduction takes place through discursive practices in everyday life (ibid.). Fairclough stresses the need not only for systematic linguistic analysis but also analysis of the relationship between texts and the institutional and discoursal practices within which the texts are embedded (Fairclough, 1995), and argues for an interdisciplinary model of analysis since neither text nor social analysis is sufficient in itself (Jørgensen & Phillips, 2011). This highlights the discourse present in the language and the way it is reflected in society.

Theorists argue that discourse practices are not only reflecting unequal power relations but also contributing to the reproduction or creation of such (Jørgensen & Phillips, 2011:4). Examples are unequal power relation between social classes, different nationalities, or countries like Australia and Nauru. This concept within CDA is called the ideological effect of discourse (ibid.), thus, understanding ideology as a theorised concept explaining one social group’s domination of another.

Fairclough distinguishes between non-discursive and discursive practices. Discourse is one kind of mechanism, working in combination with other mechanisms, such as economical, physical, or psychological non-discursive practices, to constitute a social practice (Jørgensen & Phillips, 2002:71). Every moment of social practice is in a dialectical relationship with each other (ibid.). Hence, to understand what kind of institutional or economic conditions discourses are a subject of; one must investigate the relationship between discursive and non-discursive practices. For this research not only to analyse the discourses within Australian and Nauruan media releases, but also relating them to an understanding of practices which do not have exclusive discursive

(18)

Page 17 of 57

character (Jørgensen & Phillips, 2011:3), such as the structure of the political system by using sociocultural theory.

As CDA takes a critical approach to power relations, it is not to be understood as politically neutral (Jørgensen & Phillips, 2011). The critical aspect of CDA is related to the focus on critique of discourse and explanation of the relationship between discourse and other social practices (Fairclough, 2015:7). However, CDA is not only identifying relations or discourses which are open for criticism, but also raising the question: “why is the discourse like this?” (Fairclough, 2015:7). Thus, being critical as in looking for explanations. In this sense it also becomes important to historicise the analysis, to understand the power dominance and historical conditions of which the discourses in question are product of.

3.3 Reflection on choice of method and the role of the researcher

A qualitative explanatory approach is well suited for this type of research, as it does not aim at generalisation but rather an understanding of a specific social phenomenon, and intend to explain causes and effects of this phenomenon (Chambliss & Schutt, 2019: 52f, 35). As generalisation is not a goal, or possible within this research, it is important to acknowledge that this thesis only provides insights on the specific media releases studied and does not qualify to make broader conclusions about general political agendas in Australia and Nauru. Rather, this study will provide in-depth analysis, for understanding the (re)production of certain discourses presented to the media by the governments. The thesis is based on inductive thinking (Chambliss & Schutt, 2019:51), which has allowed me to let the theory and direction of research emerge from the material or social situation itself. This has guided my research process, scrutinising reality with the objective of understanding how power forms the social relationship between the two governments.

Fairclough developed his conceptual framework CDA, to analyse in particular the effect of media and political institutions and how unequal power relations come into play for both the producer and consumer (Fairclough, 2015:30). Taking a critical point of departure in investigating unequal power relations is central to this thesis. As I am particularly interested in the differences in power relations and political discourses between Nauru and Australia expressed in governmental media releases, I argue that CDA is the most suitable approach for this particular research.

(19)

Page 18 of 57

When conducting a discourse analysis, much relies on interpretation. Therefore, it becomes important to reflect on the role of the researcher. In discourse research it is not a goal to define which statements are right or wrong, but to explore the patterns within and across statements, and by that identify social consequences of the different discursive representations of reality (Jørgensen & Phillips, 2002:21). Thus, my own understanding of meaning-patterns and identity will influence my work. I am from a Western country and have a background within Peace and Conflict studies, which has influenced my perspective of the world, and my understanding on notions of violence and postcolonial theory. As I additionally lived and worked for HRW in Australia, when local pressure towards changing offshore processing was rising, it might impact my understanding of the data too, as I have a critical perspective on the offshore arrangements. It is important to differentiate oneself from the material under investigation, which is helped through acknowledging and describing one’s own point of departure. I acknowledge my own position in relation to the particular discourses. Understanding that reality is socially constructed or created (which is the base of this research’s conceptual framework) puts an importance in dealing with the researcher’s role reflexively (Jørgensen & Phillips, 2002:21f), guiding my research process, and arguably done hereby.

3.4 The operationalisation of CDA

Because of the limited scope of this thesis, I have made choices in relation to how the comprehensive method of CDA (Fairclough, 2015) is best used to answer my research aim. This analysis will be focused around Fairclough’s three-dimensional framework of analysis (Fairclough, 2015:129). The first dimension of analysis is the description of the text (ibid.). This is a linguistic analysis of the text presented. I make use of Fairclough’s question as described in his book Language and Power, as tool and guide for the linguistic analysis (2015:129f). As Fairclough himself declares that his questions only are posed as guidelines for understanding and not as a “holy writ” (Fairclough, 2015:129), I have decided to focus on each question in relation to the relevance of this study (see Appendix 1). Using these tools as guidance for my analysis I will examine the framing of the relation between Australia and Nauru through media releases posted by both governments. In addition, the framing of offshore processing and the situation regarding refugees and asylum seekers will be assessed. I have chosen to focus on the experiential, relational and expressive values of the texts. The

(20)

Page 19 of 57

experiential values of words place the text within an ideological framework (Fairclough, 2015:131f), and investigates how vocabulary implies which underlying discourse type is present. The relational modality refers to how grammatical choices can constitute the authority of the speaker or writer or places the writer in relation to others (Fairclough, 2015:142f). The notion of expressive values or expressive modality is claims of knowledge or authenticity linked to the modality form (Fairclough, 2015:144f). The analysis will be completed by sociocultural theory, hence, specifically oriented at wording in relation to postcolonial understandings of othering and identity. Furthermore, there will be a focus on the expression of unequal power relations through language.

A critical discourse analysis is sensitive to both what is included and excluded in a text. The second stage of the analysis is referred to as the interpretation of the relationship between text and interaction (Fairclough, 2015:128). This part of analysis will focus on the interdiscursivity and intertextuality of the texts. The intertextuality of a text is concerned with how text is influenced by history and might draw on words or phrases that others have used before, or ways certain elements are/have been discussed (Jørgensen & Phillips, 2002:73f). Understanding the relationship between the text and social practices is important since textual features only become real and socially effective when they are embedded in social interactions. Thus, where the text production and consumption are interpreted through a background of common-sense assumptions and values (Fairclough, 2015:154). In this part of the analysis, I will draw on an understanding of the postcolonial history between the two nations and how that has influenced the wording and language used in the media releases.

It is possible from an understanding of intertextuality not only to investigate the reproduction of discourses through text, but also discourse changes through new combinations of discourse (Jørgensen & Phillips, 2002:7). The interdiscursivity of text is investigation of which discourses the texts rely on and what assumptions of the world are underlying. Hence, I will examine what discourses the texts are product of and whether those discourses are changing or being reproduced.

The third stage of analysis is intertwined with the second stage and is the explanation of the text. The discourses’, identified through the second stage of analysis, relationship to power relations and the processes of struggle, will be determined throughout this third element of analysis (Fairclough, 2015:154f). The objective is a focus on a wider societal perspective where the media releases are understood as an expression of social processes and practice and as being part of the construction of social identity, systems of knowledge or influential to political

(21)

Page 20 of 57

actions. Analysing the reproductive effects these discourses may have on those structures, either changing or sustaining them (Fairclough, 2015:172). The analysis will draw on the understanding of the political field which these media releases are produced within, as depicted throughout chapter 2, as well as postcolonial and discourse theory. The three dimensions of analysis is illustrated in figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Fairclough’s three-dimensional framework of Critical Discourse Analysis

(Fairclough, 2015: 58)

3.5 Material

The empirical material used for this study are media releases from the Australian and Nauruan governments. These media releases include publications of messages, transcripts of interviews and speeches from the respective government or ministers, published by the governments in question and accessible through their official websites. The medium through which text is published or produced can be argued to be a crucial element in the shaping of meaning and must therefore be considered when conducting a CDA (Schneider, 2013). As these media releases are published for both international and national consumption, analysing them may be argued not only to investigate a certain discourse within the political agenda but also give understanding to the political influence on popular discourse within society as well as an understanding of the messages and possibly ‘hidden’ relations of power they might be (re)producing or distributing.

(22)

Page 21 of 57

As no Australian website was able to grant me access to all media releases across ministries I decided to characterise key figures or politicians who had been active in the last 7 years (since 2013) in promoting offshore processing, and still sitting in parliament. I ended up with three key ministries or politicians1, all members of the Liberal Party, which has a strong stand on

border security and immigration policy (Liberal Party of Australia, 2020). I went to the webpage for each of the identified ministries and the individual webpage for the Prime Minister. I searched for the key words Nauru and offshore processing or refugees and ended up with a total of 116 media releases across all three websites. As Fairclough argues for detailed reading in linguistic analysis (Fairclough, 2015), I decided to downscale the amount of media releases, by finding those that entailed both offshore processing or refugees and the mention of Nauru. This left me with 41 media releases in total for the government of Australia.

Purposefully selecting data as done here, is argued to be beneficial in a qualitative study, as the research question calls for intensive investigation of a small area of research (Chambliss &

Schutt, 2019:131). Furthermore, a completely random sampling would not have been possible

or relevant for this study, as certain elements are required to be within the data selected. Being left with 41 media releases, I conducted the same process of sampling on the media releases published by Nauru, with a few modifications. As the processing of refugees would not be referred to as offshore, I decided on the key words processing centre, refugees and Australia. This sampling left me with 33 media releases from Nauru.

As a total of 74 media releases still are too much data, I conducted another sampling of those in question. The purposive sampling was afterwards complemented with a stratified random sampling (Chambliss & Schutt, 2019:129f) of these media releases, allowing for a division into smaller groups or strata of certain criteria and then randomly selecting those to be analysed. Using this method of sampling was done to fit the aim of the study. To cover the timeframe best possible, I divided each nations’ releases into three time slots covering the beginning, middle and end of the publications. I used random.org, to randomly sample 5 media releases within each time slot. This left me with 15 media releases from each country (see in bibliography). For an illustration of the sampling process, see appendix 2.

In handling the data, I have highlighted words in italics, when they are words of importance that are used by the two governments directly in the media releases.

(23)

Page 22 of 57

3.6 Postcolonialism

Nauru is discussed as lying within the framework of colonial cartographies, still entangled in their colonial linage (Morris, 2019). Thus, postcolonial theory and identity is relevant to consider when analysing the discursive practices and relationship between Australia and Nauru. A defining element of colonialism in the Pacific has been the ‘We’ Australian managers and ‘You’ failed islanders (Fry, 1997). This conception has arguably been part of knowledge making throughout the postcolonial period, thus already has a status of knowledge within Australian policymaking, Australian media and academia (ibid.). Edward Said has argued that Western identity is strengthened by setting itself off against the Orient (2003). The Orient becomes a kind of subversive and understudy-self in relation to the Occident (Said, 2003:3):

Orientalism can be discussed and analyzed as the corporate institution for dealing with the Orient—[…] by making statements about it, authorizing views of it, describing it, by teaching it, settling it, ruling over it: in short, Orientalism as a Western style for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient.

Colonial discourse examines how discourses and representations of the Other functions as an instrument of power (Said, 2003; Ashcroft et al., 2013). Defining an Other may be done through historical generalisations or racialisation. The Other can be understood as someone separated from one’s self, and in this case refer to the coloniser’s identification of others as different from themselves (Ashcroft et al., 2013:186f). Defining ‘Us’ and ‘Them’ is a way of categorising the world and constituting one’s own ‘reality’, thus also defining what is perceived as ‘normal’. The relationship between the Orient and the Occident, is a relationship of power and domination, (Said, 2003), which may be evident through representations of the colonised as ‘primitive’ and the coloniser as ‘civilised’ and superior; hegemonic cultures, both in terms of the hegemonic West and hegemonic ideas about the Orient, restating European superiority (ibid.), and in naturalisations of right of dominance. Collective notions of identifying ‘Us’ vs. ‘Them’ might consequently lead to an othering (Ashcroft et al. 2013:188ff). Defining a significant Other or othering, can be understood as a psychological process of stereotyping and marginalising one group from another (Ashcroft et al., 2013). The primitive Orient is not to be understood as primitive or simple only within cultural aspects but also in practices of politics and knowledge.

(24)

Page 23 of 57

In studies of postcolonial discourse it is argued, that there is a tendency by former colonisers to exclude negative influence imposed on the colonised, such as exploitation of resources (Ashcroft et al., 2013), but include discourses of political support and development, which serves as importance for reinforcing the ties between former colonised nations and the colonisers. The South Pacific has through literature and Western contact been widely described as the romantic conception of a sexual and environmental paradise (Keown, 2007). European discourse of the South Pacific has been describing locals as “noble savage” (Keown, 2007:19) and as a land of free love and Western desires, which furthermore have been evident and reproduced trough literature and art such as e.g. Paul Gauguin’s work (Keown, 2007). Colonial discourse may also become the discourse within which the colonised see themselves and define their own identity, which consequently might lead to themselves as contributors to the reproduction of those discourses. Processes of decolonisation may be part of challenging this self-perception, as it is a process of dismantling and revealing colonial power in all its forms (Ashcroft et al., 2013). Postcolonial theorists have furthermore described the rupture of Pacific culture, initiated by colonialism, introduction of Christianity, and mining, which has compounded in complex political ways (Tabucanon & Opeskin, 2011). A stereotypical understanding of the simple life or rupture of identity might still be traceable in the wording and descriptions of Nauru in for instance political media releases.

Scholars have suggested that refugees and asylum seekers have been subjects of othering (Smyczyńska, 2018; Bailey & Harindranath, 2005), which in some cases lead to political actions of exceptionalism on the argumentation and justification of security issues (Devetak, 2004; Hyndman, & Mountz, 2008). Consequently, persisting structures of postcolonial power relations and the marginalisation of a significant Other, may lead to conflict and violence, of either structural or cultural character (Galtung, 1969)2, and have significant human implications. Analysing colonial discourse, I will look for signs or processes of othering as well as descriptions of Nauruans or refugees as inferior or in contrast to characteristics of modernity (Ashcroft et al., 2013:51) associated with the Western culture of Australia.

2 Johan Galtung’s violence triangle (1969) is relevant to a postcolonial reading of current geopoltical and regional power relations, as it can help disclose and understand the various forms of violence present in these conflict.

(25)

Page 24 of 57

4. Analysis: An In-Depth Analysis of Text

This chapter will consist of the textual part of Fairclough’s three-dimensional framework. This first part of the analysis focuses on the textual construction of ‘refugees’ and ‘asylum seekers’ as well as an insight to the textual choices framing the relationship between Australia and Nauru.

4.1 The Textual Dimension of CDA

As previously mentioned, I have chosen to focus on the experiential, relational and expressive values of the texts (Fairclough, 2015:129f). As they may be relatively different according to the state in question, I have decided to divide this section further into the analysis of first Australian and then Nauruan media releases. The analysis will be focused on the construction of the relationship between the two states and their respective construction of ‘refugees’ and ‘asylum seekers’. As outlined in the previous chapter, the linguistic analysis of the media releases will follow the questions posed by Fairclough (2015), and available in appendix 1. Exercising linguistic analysis, all media releases have been encoded in relation to the questions from the appendix.

4.1.1 Australia: The Textual Construction of Australia, Nauru and Their

Relationship

The media releases published by Australia differ from the ones published by Nauru. They are generally longer, with transcriptions of journalists’ questions and press conferences. This contrasts with the Nauruan media releases, which did not include possible questions from e.g. news reporters. Arguably, by allowing a debate in the Australian media releases, the Australian government have a chance to answer to possible differences in opinion or critiques, which might reinforce their own arguments. Whereas the Nauruan media releases, and a few Australian publications, have the character of a direct message to the people from the governmental authority. The Australian media releases often include several different areas of the political

(26)

Page 25 of 57

agenda and are not only specified talks or opinions on Nauru, offshore processing and refugees. Therefore, this will be an analysis of the linguistic choices relevant for this research aim, e.g. every instance when the ministers are referring to the problem in question or avoiding it on purpose.

In the media releases published by the Australian government, Nauru’s voice or opinion is never raised. Nauru is mainly portrayed a silence partner that work with Australia, on the question of regional stability and refugees (AU1, 13.02.2014; AU2, 26.11.2015). The relational values of the words used to describe Nauru, can be argued to place Nauru in an unequal relation to Australia. In several places it is highlighted that Australia is of great support to Nauru and that they have “a close and long-standing relationship” (AU1, 13.02.2014). Furthermore, it is the understanding that “Australia is Nauru's largest trade, investment and development partner. Our aid program is continuing to make progress on key development priorities” (AU2, 26.11.2015) and ”to advanc[e] Australia's interests in Nauru” (AU2, 26.11.2015). Portraying Australia as the significant development can be an expression of orientalism, teaching and governing Nauru, even after they have achieved independence. Through the relational value of words, placing Australia and its interest before Nauru’s, constitutes the authority of Australia and Australian policy. Highlighting an expression of the relationship as being on Australian terms, is building into a postcolonial discourse, reinforcing Nauru’s dependency on Australia.

When referring to Nauru, Australian ministers name them neighbours, partner and Pacific

family (AU8, 30.10.2018; AU13, 11.02.2019). The relational value of these words reflects a

friendly understanding of their relationship. The Australian ministers are expressing being on understanding terms with the Nauruan government, even calling local Australians and journalists “potentially racist” (AU10, 06.12.2018), when they describe Nauru as an unpleasant place to live for refugees and asylum seekers. The Australian ministers argue that refugees and asylum seekers live on similar terms as locals, and by that leaves the impression of having respect for Nauru as a nation, but also of their partnership. Expression of respect towards Nauru is in a postcolonial perspective beneficial to the Australian government, as it reinforces their relationship and evidently serves as argumentation for offshore processing. Transferring blame either to Australian locals (being racist), or refugees and asylum seekers (being illegal), enhances the legitimacy of and contributes to justification of offshore processing policies. The ministers’ way of redirecting responsibility is furthermore strategical in determining their relational authority over others. In this example “We have worked with Nauru […] to provide support for their Regional Processing Centres” (AU5, 28.04.2016, added emphasis), it is clear

(27)

Page 26 of 57

that Australia think of RPC as Nauruan responsibility, which indicates the blurred responsibility created by an at-a-distance state.

The Australian ministers uses words such as ‘experts say’ in different areas (AU3, 09.02.2016). This leaves the impression the ministers are reliable. Relying on experts, providing numbers or referring to “medical advice” or “medical clearance” (AU5, 28.04.2016), contributes to the understanding of the government, as acting on the basis of facts, or expert knowledge. This way of arguing and using words with expressive value of transparency and fact reinforces credibility, trust and claims of knowledge. The Australian government uses a difference of pathos and logos in their argumentation, strategically shifting to legitimise their point and action. An example is within this quote, where phrases with high pathos value as worst policy failures is mixed with a more logical or scientific approach to the issue by introducing numbers:

This is the last piece of the work that we have had to do to clean up the chaos after Labor's failed border protection policies, which I suggest would be one of the worst policy failures in living memory. When there were 1200 deaths at sea, 50,000 people coming on 800 boats we had to act. (AU6, 01.11.2016)

Reading through the Australian media releases, agency is left strategically unclear, which is an experiential value of text. Leaving agents unclear is argued to be sensitive when placing responsibility (Fairclough, 2015:140). This is for instance the case when Julie Bishop answers a question regarding contact with UN bodies: “The Government is constantly in contact. […] I know that our Immigration Department and our Immigration Minister are constantly in contact with international agencies” (AU6, 01.11.2016). The agency of the Australian government is clear, and they are in this argumentation doing their part of the work. But the agency of the international bodies is left uncertain and unspecified. You wonder, in contact with who? Unspecified agents can be argued to be used to redirect responsibility and the reader is left without specific knowledge to the case in question, which additionally enhances Australia as authoritative in relation to the consumer/reader. The Australian government is usually portrayed as active. The experiential value of text, through active sentences is arguably signifying an understanding of the Australian government as proactive.

In the media releases the ministers use words as “the sovereign, elected Government” (AU12, 09.02.2019) and “we will be putting those obstacles in the way as you would expect me to do and the Australian people would expect me to do” (AU14, 06.03.2019). This way of creating a clear authority of the Australian government through, the expressive and relational value of

(28)

Page 27 of 57

words like elected and expected, can be argued to legitimise them as speaking on behalf of the whole population of Australia. This constitutes the government’s claim of knowledge. The government is furthermore linked to positive wording and descriptions such as compassionate,

fair and strong (AU11, 03.02.2019; AU13, 11.02.2019).

4.1.2 Australia: The Textual Construction of Refugees and Asylum

Seekers

The Australian policy of offshore processing is referred to as border security measures under the name Operation Sovereign Borders. As experiential value of a text has to do with how ideological differences between texts are coded in the vocabulary (Fairclough, 2015:130f), words describing Operation Sovereign Borders can be argued to reproduce the classification and discourse that refugees and asylum seekers are believed to be an external threat.

Throughout the Australian media releases, the ministers of Australia keep referring to refugees and asylum seekers as illegal, leaving the impression that they are criminals. This is furthermore constituted through the link made between refugees and people smugglers. E.g. “[w]hat we don’t want is a situation where people are self-harming to come to Australia, because understandably, and ultimately, what they want to do is settle in Australia. That’s what they’ve paid people smugglers to do and that’s the outcome they desire” (AU3, 09.02.2016); or “Consistent with other bans in the Migration Act that prevent a person from being able to apply for a visa, there will also be a provision that relates to those who have paid people smugglers to attempt to come to Australia” (AU6, 01.11.2016). This is occasionally expressed through a relational action, where the refugees and asylum seekers are seen as active threats. Or as victims that have been conned, e.g. “those who are subject to human trafficking or people smuggling”(AU6, 01.11.2016); or “I feel terribly for people that have been conned by people smugglers to pay thousands of dollars believing [they] were coming to Australia.” (AU5, 28.04.2016).

Refugees and asylum seekers are throughout the media releases referred to as Them or a group of people, with little distinction between individual cases. This way of systematically referring to a group as trouble, by building into a general notion concerning one specific group (Fairclough, 2015:79), may reinforce prejudice and stereotypes. Throughout the media releases refugees and asylum seekers are linked to words or acts with expressive negative connotations.

(29)

Page 28 of 57

This is not only when referring to their actions and choices, as for instance paying criminals, it is also when referring to their character and personality, e.g. “[t]here are 57 people […] for whom we have very serious character concerns. People who have posted radical extremist material online. People who have been accused of sexual assault, including against children” (AU14, 06.03.2019). Relational modalities such as Us and Them are frequently used, creating a clear distinction between Australians and refugees, but also between the Nauruans and refugees. Talking about boat refugees and asylum seekers as a group, not only distinguished from the local people of Australia and Nauru, but also distinguished from those who seek asylum the ‘right’ way (AU3, 09.02.2016), I will argue create a process of othering, which contributes to the marginalisation of refugees and asylum seekers arriving by boat.

In the postcolonial context, Australia’s self and identity is constituted as civil and superior, which stands in contrast to the refugees of bad character. Refugees and asylum seekers are even though sometimes distinguished from, also sided with the Nauruan local population, e.g.:

[T]hey [refugees’ and asylum seekers’ children] live in the community like Nauruan children do. Nauruan children live on Nauru […]. That is the home of Nauruans, their children live there, their families live there. They go to school there, they run businesses there, they work there. Their life is there. (AU8, 30.10.2018)

Comparing the refugees with the Nauruan local population is arguably also a way of stereotyping the local population. The above quote shows how Australian ministers through media releases also emphasises Them (Nauruans) as living There. This stands in contrast to the civilisation of Australia, the place where people are willing to ‘pay people smugglers’ to go. There is less contrast linguistically between Nauruans and refugees than there is between Australians and refugees, which I will argue is another process of othering. This creates a hierarchy of power, with Australia as the top-dog, Nauru as abiding Australian interests, and refugees and asylum seekers at the bottom, as uncivilised with an option of ‘settling’ with the Nauruan lifestyle. This can be grounded in a colonial history, whereby the Australian superiority is embedded in understandings of race. By equating refugees and the native population of Nauru, both are framed as ‘lesser’.

The wording used to describe Australian refugee policies are positive and gives the impression of right and wrong. The Australian ministers keep arguing for the success of the offshore processing policies and how these polices have saved lives at sea in contrasts to the European model (AU3, 09.02.2016; AU4, 11.03.2016). Speaking in contrasts is a way of creating a

(30)

Page 29 of 57

positive image of their own political discourse. Words such as right contrast wrong, and strong contrast weak emphasises a common-sense assumption of their policies as the ‘better solution’. This is furthermore stressed by the constant use of the word obviously which can be argued to be an expression of common-sense and truth, undermining possible oppositional opinions. The understanding of refugees as a security threat is consistent in the majority of the media releases. The expressive value of the words frequently used, such as combat and fight, creates associations between border protection policies and war, which consequently is used as legitimisation of political actions of exceptional character. The commander of Operation Sovereign Borders declares: “My mission remains to protect Australia's border from the threat of illegal maritime arrivals and prevent the needless loss of life at sea.” (AU14, 06.03.2019). Emphasising negative consequences of other policies, leaves an impression of ‘the only option’.

4.1.3 Nauru: The Textual Construction of Nauru, Australia and Their

Relationship

The Nauruan government’s media releases are generally short and focus on one main message from the government, which can be argued to give emphasis and meanings to the linguistic choices. This results in one clear message within each release, instead of an introduction of contradictions or possible opposing opinions, which is contrary to the Australian media releases.

The Nauruan media releases generally depict Nauru as a safe and friendly place to live both for locals and refugees and asylum seekers. Some places the government of Nauru even argues that they are safer than other countries, like e.g. Australia.

[T]he minister, who believes that in some ways Nauru is safer than Australia. ‘There is no gun violence in Nauru, people are not dying from domestic violence and our police don't even have to be armed, so let's get some perspective into this discussion.’ (NAU11, 07.10.2015, added emphasis).

Using these words of describing one-self, is arguably a linked to the postcolonial identity, of framing locals of the South Pacific as friendly and accommodating (Keown, 2007). Their police force is not even armed, in contradiction to their former colonisers. This may also be an expression of identifying themselves with a postcolonial identity, which their former coloniser

(31)

Page 30 of 57

has ‘taught’ or framed Nauruans as. These linkages are sometimes seen in postcolonial states and challenging these could be seen as a process of decolonisation for Nauru.

“Nauru is peaceful with locals and refugees living, in the main, harmoniously” (NAU12: 28.10.2015), is written in one of the media releases, explaining the governmental perspective on the situation. The Nauruan government’s consistent emphasis on their friendliness and openness with words such as welcome, peaceful, harmoniously and heathier among others, might draw upon the discourse of Nauru as a pleasant island, originated in the first European descriptions of Nauru as paradisiacal, The Pleasant Island (Viviani, 1970). This is way of framing colonised states as a place of Western desires, the simple life of sexual freedom, stands in contrast to the ‘civilised’ Australia. These words also have the experiential value of categorising Nauru as a state of prosperity and peace. The wording used to describe Nauru as a nation, or its people are generally positive and places significance on fairness and credibility. Hence, wording that creates a positive and trustworthy image of the Nauruan government. By comparing Nauru and their safety with the Australian government, which is generally depicted as a secure place of prosperity, the Nauruan government places themselves in the same category of safety. Comparison with Australia is not only evident, when discussing safety measures, but also when referring to the actions of the Nauruan government or police: "Police in Nauru took action and arrested them [refugees and asylum seekers who protested in the streets] in the same way police in Sydney would if this happened in Pitt Street.” (NAU10, 05.03.2015). This way of comparison may be argued to give the Nauruan government legitimacy for their actions since they are perceived like other states, just protecting their citizens. It may also be understood as a strive for recognition of sovereignty and independence, despite aid dependency and close ties with Australia.

The authority of the Nauruan government can also be expressed in the investigation of the relational modality of the text, as for instance the government of Nauru in relation to their partners or the local population. In a quote it is expressed that Nauru “must look to wealthier nations to provide this practical support to the judiciary and people of a small but proud Pacific country.” (NAU4, 21.08.2013, added emphasis). This use of modality places Nauru in an economically submissive position, in relation to for instance Australia, usually constructed as

supportive, which is expressed with thanks and gratefulness from Nauru (NAU4, 21.08.2013;

NAU1, 25.02.2013). This relational value stands in contrast to the various places where Australia is referred to as a partner or friend and a more equal relationship is expressed (NAU7, 11.04.2014; NAU5, 10.10.2013). What furthermore is evident when reading the Nauruan media

(32)

Page 31 of 57

releases, is how the voice of the Australian government is expressed through quotes but also in messages directly from the Australian government. This gives Australia authority and a strong voice or influence on the media releases in Nauru. The vocabulary used by Australian ministers such as “illegal boat arrivals” (NAU5, 10.10.2013) and “people smugglers” (NAU5, 10.10.2013) is then in other press releases adopted by Nauruan ministers (NAU13, 01.02.2016). This is also interesting when looking at the wording of the RPC. In some media releases the Nauruan government refers to it as “Nauru Offshore Processing Centre” (NAU7, 11.04.2014) which is interesting, since it is local to them and not offshore. This represents an adoption of Australian wording. Additionally, this may be understood as an expression of the hegemonic Western discourse, being infiltrated in words of expression and political narratives, in former colonised states.

Another theme that becomes important when looking linguistically on the Nauruan media releases is the understanding of truth. This relates to the notion of expressive values, or expressive modality as claims of knowledge (Fairclough, 2015). The emphasis on truth and credibility throughout Nauruan media releases, always as linked to the government of Nauru, create a sense of knowledge and the discourse that the government is trustworthy. Political tactics of Nauru is similar to the ones of Australia, which might speak to the high political influence Australia has had, and still have, on the political agenda and institutions. In opposition to how the Government of Australia is depicted, the Australian media is framed trough negative sentences, and is in the words of Nauru “goading” (NAU10, 05.03.2015) refugees and asylum seekers into acting thoughtlessly in protest against the Nauruan government. In examples like the media release titled “Nauru is not Australia” (NAU12, 28.10.2015), the Nauruan government distinguishes themselves from the identity of Australia:

"The Australian media approaches us with great arrogance and an air of racial

superiority, which is highly offensive to us.

"They do not show us the respect of a sovereign nation and in return we have little respect for them." (NAU12: 28.10.2015).

Phrasing Nauru as not a state in Australia and with no obligations to Australian media, Nauru creates distance between Australia and themselves. As the quote above is an example of, Australian media is related to discourses of racial supremacy. To continuously refer to the Australian media as with lack of credibility, the Nauruan government does not only question the media’s legitimacy but reinforces their own. This might at first glance be argued as part of

Figure

Figure  1:  Fairclough’s  three-dimensional  framework  of  Critical  Discourse  Analysis  (Fairclough, 2015: 58)

References

Related documents

För att uppskatta den totala effekten av reformerna måste dock hänsyn tas till såväl samt- liga priseffekter som sammansättningseffekter, till följd av ökad försäljningsandel

The increasing availability of data and attention to services has increased the understanding of the contribution of services to innovation and productivity in

Syftet eller förväntan med denna rapport är inte heller att kunna ”mäta” effekter kvantita- tivt, utan att med huvudsakligt fokus på output och resultat i eller från

Generella styrmedel kan ha varit mindre verksamma än man har trott De generella styrmedlen, till skillnad från de specifika styrmedlen, har kommit att användas i större

Närmare 90 procent av de statliga medlen (intäkter och utgifter) för näringslivets klimatomställning går till generella styrmedel, det vill säga styrmedel som påverkar

• Utbildningsnivåerna i Sveriges FA-regioner varierar kraftigt. I Stockholm har 46 procent av de sysselsatta eftergymnasial utbildning, medan samma andel i Dorotea endast

Den förbättrade tillgängligheten berör framför allt boende i områden med en mycket hög eller hög tillgänglighet till tätorter, men även antalet personer med längre än

På många små orter i gles- och landsbygder, där varken några nya apotek eller försälj- ningsställen för receptfria läkemedel har tillkommit, är nätet av