Discourse on sexual violence in armed conflict: An analysis of U.S. policy rhetoric on sexual violence in the Darfur conflict

This study examines United States policy rhetoric surrounding sexual violence in Darfur, using discourse analysis and critical theory. At the U.S. national level, how important is the use of certain rhetoric for its responses to the sexual violence in the Darfur conflict? The U.S. has used strong language to denounce sexual violence against Darfuri civilians, but its rhetoric is often loaded with false assumptions, skewed perceptions, and misplaced emphasis, which can be not only detrimental to a full understanding of the phenomenon of sexual violence and of the survivors' experiences, but to the formation of proper and effective policy as well. In this study I reviewed all U.S. publications in which both Darfur and any form of sexual violence were mentioned between 2003 and 2008. I then used a combination of discourse analysis and critical theory to dissect the rhetoric and analyze it for its connotations and possible policy implications.