“When Peace Speaks in the Language of War”: The Rhetoric of Moral Violence in Global Politics

This research investigates the moral paradox of using violence as a means to achieve peace, a recurring justification in modern political discourse. The study examines how political leaders and institutions frame violent interventions as ethically necessary for humanitarian or security reasons, despite the inherent contradiction between violence and peace. Through a qualitative comparative analysis of three cases—the NATO intervention in Kosovo (1999), the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq (2003), and the Afghanistan counterinsurgency campaign (2001–2021)—the research explores how moral narratives such as humanitarian duty, preventive necessity, and moral responsibility are constructed and deployed. Using critical discourse analysis and ethical theory, the findings reveal that such justifications often obscure political and strategic interests while producing unstable and morally ambiguous outcomes. The study concludes that the moral legitimacy of violence for peace remains deeply flawed, calling for the reevaluation of ethical frameworks guiding international interventions.