Analysis of Pragmatic Terms in Western Political Discourse Intended to Convey a Message to Iraq: US Ambassador's Speech as a Case Study

This study aims to analyze the pragmatic terms used in the U.S. ambassador's speech to identify how these items function to convey particular messages and to assess their impact on shaping Iraqi perceptions of U.S. policies and intentions. Its importance rests in the fact that it can demystify how pragmatic terms mold political communication in the specific framework of Western discourse oriented toward Iraq. Since the fine-grained use of language is being focused on, it can reveal underlying goals and plans that can change public opinions and political results. This study includes some theoretical studies and comments regarding the topic of analysis of pragmatic terms in Western political discourse intended to convey a message for Iraq. This study is qualitative. It analyzes U.S. Ambassador Alina Romanowski's speech about the proposed amendments to Iraq's Personal Status Law. It uses thematic analysis as a method for analyzing qualitative information that includes reading through a set of data and trying to find patterns within the meaning of the information to discover topics. Austin's and Searle's Speech Act Theory is applied to this study. The results clarified the fact of the Eastern pragmatic terms and their functions in conveying certain messages to Iraqi people.