Strategic Silence in Iraqi Political Discourse: A Rhetorical-Pragmatic Analysis

Abstract

Strategic silence in the Iraqi political discourse is not a personal communicative choice, but a structural practice, which is determined by the power-sharing system. This study aims to examine the rhetorical and pragmatic mechanisms by which such silence is systematically constructed. The study adopts a qualitative rhetorical–pragmatic framework. From a rhetorical perspective, it employs Bach et al.'s (2025) model of strategic ambiguity, while pragmatically it draws on Grice's (1975) Cooperative Principle, with particular emphasis on the flouting of conversational maxims. The data includes four interview extracts selected from four Iraqi political leaders representing different ethnic groups. The findings indicate that the chosen politicians rhetorically create silence with the help of polysemy, interpretive communities, and communicative advantage, which allow them to criticise indirectly without direct attribution. Pragmatically, silence is achieved by violating the maxims of quantity, quality, relation and manner of Grice where the underspecification, vagueness and indirectness create implicatures that convey meaning without making one directly accountable. The study reveals that silence in Iraqi political discourse is not merely a lack of speech, but a strategic communicative practice. Its recurrence across politicians of different sectarian, temporal, and institutional standpoints indicates that it is structurally determined by the Iraqi political system, rather than individual choice.