New Zealand Slavonic Journal

2021-2022, volume 55-56

CONTENTS

Svitlana Zhabotynska, Political Metaphors of War: Ukraine and the World

in Chinese Media.................................................................................. 1

Arnold McMillin, Nation-Building and Its One Opponent, as Reflected in

Contemporary Belarusian Poetry ....................................................... 25

Benjamin Sutcliffe, Losing Empire, Gaining Hope: Kyrgyz Migrants in Musa

Murataliev’s Guest Worker Trilogy ................................................... 51

Andrew McGregor, Robert Lagerberg, Dislocation and Liminality in Andrei

Zvyagintsev’s Leviathan and Loveless .............................................. 73

Henrietta Mondry, Авторская стратегия в статьях В. Г. Короленко об

“инородцах” ...................................................................................... 97

Review Essay

Sally Stocksdale, Forging Better Understandings of the History of the Volga

River Corridor .................................................................................. 113

Reviews

Alan Cockeril: Tolstoy, Leo. Tolstoy as Philosopher: Essential short

writings (1835 to 1910). Edited, Translated and Introduced by Inessa
Medzhibovskaya............................................................................... 121

Marko Pavlyshyn: Portnov, Andrii. Dnipro: An Entangled History of a

European City .................................................................................. 122
Anna Taitslin: Ende Sashalmi, Russian Notions of Power and State in a
European Perspective, 1462-1725: Assessing the Significance of
Peter’s Reign .................................................................................... 124

Henrietta Mondry: Maria Ciselska, The Doctors of the Warsaw Ghetto. 127

Henrietta Mondry: Katharina Friedla and Markus Nesselrodt (eds.), Polish

Jews in the Soviet Union (1939-1959): History and Memory of
Deportation, Exile, and Survival...................................................... 129

Robert Lagerberg: Thomas Rosén, Russian in the 1740s ........................ 131

Henrietta Mondry: Laura Piacentini and Elena Katz, The Virtual Reality of
Imprisonment in Russia (‘Preparing myself for prison’ in a Contested
Human Rights Landscape) ................................................................134

David Wells: Ingrid Kleespies & Lyudmila Parts, eds., Goncharov in the
Twenty-First Century ....................................................................... 135
 New Zealand Slavonic Journal, vol. 55-56 (2021-2022)

Svitlana Zhabotynska

POLITICAL METAPHORS OF WAR:

UKRAINE AND THE WORLD IN CHINESE MEDIA

Abstract
The focus of this article is the metaphorical expressions employed to feature the 2022
Russia-Ukraine war in the political narratives of Chinese media addressed to international
audience. The data come from the English edition of The Global Times, one of the
‘voices’ of Chinese official propaganda. Methodologically, the study is based on the
theory of conceptual metaphor (Lakoff and Johnson 1980). The analysed metaphorical
expressions are brought under conceptual metaphors exhibiting cross-mapping of the
target and source domains, with the target domains being thematically integrated into the
‘Russia-Ukraine war’ image crafted by the media narratives. It is argued that within the
verbal portrait of this image, some conceptual metaphors combine into interlocking
patterns that demonstrate the properties of a rhizome. The salience of targets, which is
defined by their metaphorical ranges and the number of metaphorical expressions with
which they are described, points to foregrounding the respective ideas by the narrator. As
a manipulative device, metaphorical portrayal of these ideas prescribes their emotional
interpretation which, being primed through multiple verbal iterations, creates the required
bias in the readers’ worldview. In the studied data, this bias resonates with that of Russia’s
anti-Ukrainian and anti-Western narratives.

Key words: Russia-Ukraine war, political narrative, conceptual metaphors, Chinese

media, verbal manipulation, emotional bias, propaganda.

1. Introduction

This article, written in the last days of the year 2022, is concerned with
its pivotal event – Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine. Launched
on February 24, 2022, the full-fledged war has been raging till present,
shattering not only Ukraine, but the entire world. While Ukraine is being
crushed by Russia’s military assaults, the other world regions are being
roiled by Russia’s aggressive narratives. Such narratives, as a part of hybrid
warfare, portray the war’s international context with the bias favorable for
Russia, and thus seek to obtain and rally its supporters via shaping their
worldview. This article discusses pro-Russia narratives addressed to the
international audience and tailored by the media of China, one of Russia’s
main international partners. In the information campaign as a part of hybrid
warfare, the media’s rhetoric becomes propagandistic and combative in
nature (Hutchinson, 2008, p. 35). According to Bartlett’s classical definition,
“Propaganda is an attempt to influence opinion and conduct – especially
social opinion and conduct – in such a manner that the persons who adopt
2 SVITLANA ZHABOTYNSKA

the opinions and behavior indicated do so without themselves making any

definite search for reasons” (Bartlett, 1940, pp. 6-7). In other words, “real
propaganda is the one we do not notice” (Babak et al., 2017, p. 47). An
efficient tool to shape one’s opinion covertly and without any appeal to
rationality is metaphor.

Metaphor offers a way of viewing, of seeing one item in terms of

another. In metaphor, the compared entities – the target and source – belong
to different conceptual categories (e.g., humans are compared with animals),
and are related by the link ‘is as if. The source is always more concrete than
the target, and thus applicable for its better understanding. Metaphor
provides a partial representation of a given phenomenon, with some of its
aspects being foregrounded and others being downplayed. As a result,
metaphor proves to be a very effective device in argumentation: that which
is at issue is not actually the truth or falsity of a metaphor but the perceptions
and inferences that follow from it and the actions that are sanctioned by it
(Lakoff & Johnson, 1980, p. 158; Hanne, 2014, p. 5; Bourse, 2019, p. 4).
Metaphor is primarily associated with language, where it is just one of the
many distinct kinds of figures discussed in classical rhetoric. Linguistic
metaphors are ubiquitous, since they abound not only in the figurative
language of the literary text, but also in varieties of language ranging from
everyday talk to scientific discourse and other domains of professional
communication (Bateman, 2014, p. 175).

At present, the theory of conceptual metaphor (Lakoff and Johnson,

1980; Lakoff and Turner, 1989; Lakoff 1993; Lakoff and Johnson, 1999
among others) maintains that linguistic metaphors exteriorize conceptual
metaphors that are inherently used by the mind to process information about
the experienced world. As Lakoff (1991) puts it:

Reality exists. So does the unconscious system of metaphors that

we use without awareness to comprehend reality. What metaphor
does is limit what we notice, highlight what we do see, and provide
part of the inferential structure that we reason with. Because of the
pervasiveness of metaphor in thought, we cannot always stick to
discussions of reality in purely literal terms (p. 32).

In this respect, metaphor shares the capacity of language in general, which

is not a mere reflection of a pre-existing objective reality, but a construction
of reality achieved through categorization which entails the selection of some
features as critical and others as not-critical. With this perspective being
 POLITICAL METAPHORS OF WAR 3

narrowed to ideology, “we need to concentrate on the ways in which

metaphors are used to construct reality as a means of maintaining or
challenging power relation in society” (Goatly, 1997, p. 155).

Given the necessity to reveal the role of metaphor in constructing the

intended ideological image, this study aims to expose the manipulative
capacity of metaphorical expressions (ME) used in the media narratives
depicting the Russia-Ukraine war from a pro-Russia perspective. The survey
below starts with the theoretical grounds regarding the role of metaphor in
politics. Then comes the description of the data and research methodology,
followed by the data analysis. The concluding discussion considers the
findings in their relation to manipulative technologies.

2. Theoretical grounds: Metaphor in politics

Metaphors perform naming and stylistic functions, and thus split into
conventional (stale, or worn) and unconventional (fresh, new, or poetic).
Conventional metaphors, employed in naming abstract entities via reference
to concrete ones, are omnipresent in any language, where they are deeply
entrenched and are actually no longer perceived as metaphors.
Unconventional metaphors serve as a stylistic device for creating a new
image and “changing the mental schema through which we gain new
knowledge” (Hanne 2014, p. 7–8).

Political narratives abound in conventional and unconventional ME. As

Thompson (1986) puts it, “Politics without metaphors is like a fish without
water”. Politics, with its abstract concepts, has to imagine and articulate them
metaphorically. Here, metaphors represent our embodied, experiential
conceptualization of abstract and complex knowledge of the world, and the
choice of such metaphors is crucial for our understanding of social and
political events (van Dijk, 2011, p. 39). When political metaphors become
conventional and no longer perceived as metaphors, they may be employed
for linguistic manipulations (Zhabotynskaya, 2016, p. 67), or communicative
practices, which involve domination and intend to control people against
their will (van Dijk 2006, p. 360–361).

In political narratives, metaphors perform different functions. On the

one hand, metaphors help clarify the political world. On the other hand,
metaphors may hide more truth than they reveal (Hanne, 2014, p. 2). By
using a metaphor, the speaker gets the audience to accept a conclusion for
which no evidence has been given. Alongside emotive reactions, political
4 SVITLANA ZHABOTYNSKA

metaphors create and filter our value premises. They highlight the benefits
that flow from a course of action and erase its unfortunate concomitants,
helping the speaker and the addressee to conceal disturbing implications
from themselves (ibid, p. 7–8). In such a way, political metaphors prime
audiences and frame issues; they organize communities and cooperation;
they stimulate division and conflict, they mobilize support and opposition
(Beer and Landtsbeer, 2004, p. x; Hanne, 2014, pp. 3–4). Metaphors guide
reasoning, focus normative reactions, and create or dissipate motivations.
Political metaphors contribute to the “struggle of meaning” among political
leaders, citizens, and the media (Hanne, 2014, pp. 3–4). This study
accentuates the ability of metaphors to frame issues and filter the addressee’s
value premises.

3. Data and methodology

The analyzed dataset includes 212 ME (conventional and

unconventional) obtained via continuous sampling from 31 articles
published in the English edition of The Global Times Chinese tabloid on
the 1st – 30th of June, 2022. The articles mention the Russia-Ukraine
conflict in their title and / or text body. The Global Times, one of the
Chinese state media outlets, comments on international issues from
a nationalistic perspective, and often reflects those views of party officials
which they cannot openly voice. Through its English edition, The Global
Times disseminates its narratives to over 8 million views per day, and thus
becomes a potentially powerful opinion-maker (Zhabotynska and Ryzhova
2022, p. 120). The newspaper is known for its hawkish, insulting editorials
with aggressive attacks that get it noticed and quoted by foreign media
around the world as the ‘voice’ of Beijing, even as the party’s official
statements are more circumspect (ibid., p. 120–121).

The data are analyzed from the standpoint of the theory of conceptual
metaphor (Lakoff and Johnson 1980; Lakoff 1993; Lakoff and Johnson
1999 among others) which argues that metaphorical expressions, pervasive
in language, represent cross-mapping of the source and the target which
are not only concepts exposed in a particular ME, but also conceptual
domains represented by thematically coherent sets of ME. The source,
which helps understand an abstract target, is more concrete, tangible and
perceptually rooted in bodily experience. The cross-mapping of the source
and target means that only certain characteristics of the source are mapped
on the certain characteristics of the target. Such mapping includes
entailments, or inferences: those constituents of the source domain which
 POLITICAL METAPHORS OF WAR 5

are not linguistically explicit may be inferred from the meaning of

linguistic forms (Lakoff, 1993, p. 245; Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 47;
Zhabotynska, 2018, p. 122). Cross-mapping of the source and target
domains may involve the regularly ‘used’ and the ‘unused’ parts, which
results in the emergence of conventional and unconventional metaphors
(Lakoff and Turner, 1989, p. 11). Therefore, in the conceptual metaphor,
subsuming a number of thematically homogeneous ME, the latter may be
both conventional and unconventional. Since cross-mapping of the source
and target provides only a partial representation of the latter,
conceptualizing of different properties of the target may require more than
one source. Several sources mapped on the same target form the range of
metaphor (Kövecses, 2002, p. 64; Zhabotynska 2018, p. 12).

In media communication, conceptual metaphors both shape the media

language per se and construct virtual realities (Kövecses, 2018, p. 138).
Metaphorically created virtual realities may be established intertextually,
because metaphors lend coherence to texts through space and time (ibid.,
p.128). In this study, the data exhibit intertextuality, since they have been
obtained from multiple media narratives. The data coherence is provided by
their reference to the thematically homogeneous media image of the Russia-
Ukraine war. The data analysis includes several steps compatible with those
defined in the theoretical framework for tracking conceptual metaphors in
multiple data (Zhabotynskaya, 2016; Zhabotynska, 2018 among others):
(a) identification of the metaphorical target domains; (b) establishment of the
metaphorical range for each target (the number of sources with which it is
described); (c) definition of the general formula for cross-mapping of the
source and target, and specification of this formula; (d) interpretation of the
salience exhibited by the targets and their conceptual metaphors. The
findings obtained at each step of the analysis are presented below.

4. Analysis

The study of 212 ME describing the Russia-Ukraine war reveals nine

target domains – WAR, UKRAINE, RUSSIA, US, NATO, EUROPE, WEST, NON-
WESTERN WORLD, and WORLD, which represent the war proper, its
belligerents, its international actors taking the sides of the warring parties,
and the world in general, as the international setting of the event. All ME are
brought under 34 conceptual metaphors (see below) indicated with the
formulae (in bold) that demonstrate the sources mapped upon the targets,
with the number of sources defining the target’s metaphorical range. Where
appropriate, the formulae are extended to show the source’s composite
6 SVITLANA ZHABOTYNSKA

entities, and their overlaps with those in the target. The formulae are further
specified in metaphorical narratives (in italics), whose constituents are
supplied with notations showing the constituents’ emotive assessment –
negative /-/, positive /+/ or neutral /0/. The metaphorical narratives that
specify the formulae of conceptual metaphors are generalizations abstracted
from the content of empirical ME obtained from the media texts. The latter
are referred to with the number in round brackets that points to the article
where the ME is used (see the list of data sources at the end of this study).
The exponential number added to the number of the article (e.g., 18 2) shows
that in it the respective ME was employed more than once. The quantity of
emotively loaded ME subsumed by a conceptual metaphor demonstrates the
degree of its salience. The quantity of emotively loaded ME that portray the
target domain, and the scope of its metaphorical range (the number of sources
mapped upon the target) display the degree of salience and the emotive bias
of the target.

Target domain RUSSIAN-UKRAINE WAR [41 ME: 2/0/; 39 /-/]

WAR is A BONFIRE [18 ME/-/]. The ones who add fuel to the fire = WEST. US,
NATO. The ones who fan up the flames = US, WEST, WESTERN MEDIA. Fuel
= WEAPONS). → /-/ The fire {WAR} is raging (16). /-/ There are those {WEST,
US, NATO} who are adding fuel {WEAPONS} to the fire {WAR} (12, 9, 17, 27,
28) /-/ and those {US, WEST, WESTERN MEDIA} who are fanning up the flames
(132, 15, 27). /-/ The fuel {WEAPONS} is coming in a flow (93). /-/ After the
fire {WAR} ends, an unregulated torrent of this fuel {ILLEGAL WEAPONS} may
flow to those {CRIMINALS} who are able to set fires all over the world (94).

WAR is A THEATRICAL STAGE [13 ME /-/]. Playwright = NATO. Actors =

WESTERN COUNTRIES AND THEIR LEADERS. Onlooker = US). → /-/ On the
theatrical stage {WAR} set by the playwright {NATO} (27), /-/ there are bad-
faith actors {WESTERN COUNTRIES} waving the false banners {FREEDOM,
DEMOCRACY and HUMAN RIGHTS} (27), /-/ actors {LEADERS OF EUROPEAN
COUNTRIES} making a show (182), /-/ actors {EUROPEAN COUNTRIES} who,
playing a vicious role, are not independent (9, 13), /-/ since they are
controlled by the onlooker {US} from behind the scenes (42). /-/ The events
on the stage {WAR} are not going according the playwright’s {NATO’s} script
(23, 26, 30), /-/ and the playwright {NATO} is going to create its new chapter
{A CONFLICT IN ASIA} (27, 28).

WAR is A CHESS GAME [4 ME: 2/-/; 2/0/]. Chess player = NATO. Chess board
= RUSSIA, UKRAINE, and EUROPE. → /-/ The chess game {WAR} has a
 POLITICAL METAPHORS OF WAR 7

stalemate on the chess board /in RUSIA, UKRAINE, and EUROPE/ (6, 13).
/0/ The chess player {WEST, NATO} debates the question of the endgame
{WAR’s END} (302).

WAR is A PUZZLE [3 ME /-/]. The one who solves the puzzle = US.→ /-/ The
one {US}, who pieces the puzzle {WAR PLAN} together (9), /-/ has the key to
its solution (4, 18).

WAR is A PLANT [1 ME /-/]. Root of the plant = CAUSE OF THE WAR. Soil
where the root grows = US. → /-/ The root {CAUSE} of the plant {WAR} sits in
the soil {US} (18).

WAR is A BOTTOMLESS PIT [1 ME /-/]. → /-/ The bottomless pit {WAR} which
keeps requesting more input while giving nothing back (16).

WAR is A HUNGRY BEAST [1 ME /-/]. The one who feeds the beast = WEST.
Food = WEAPONS. → /-/ The one {WEST} feeds the beast {WAR} with food
{WEAPONS} (9).

WAR is TURBULENT WATERS [1 ME /-/]. Water influxes = REFUGEES. → The

turbulent waters {WAR} have influxes {REFUGEES} (9).

Target domain UKRAINE [8 ME: 7/-/; 1/0/]

UKRAINE is A SICK PERSON [4 ME /-/]. Disease (cancer) = FAR-RIGHT

FASCIST FORCES. Wound = CONFRONTATION OF PRO-EUROPE AND PRO-
RUSSIA FACTIONS. Torn flesh = WAR DAMAGES. → /-/ The person {UKRAINE}
has cancer {FAR-RIGHT FASCIST FORCES} (13), /-/ an unhealing wound
{CONFRONTATION OF PRO-EUROPE AND PRO-RUSSIA FACTIONS} (29), /-/ and
torn flesh {WAR DAMAGES} (22). The person {UKRAINE} sounds an alarm bell
to those who believe that peace, wealth and fraternity can last forever (13).

UKRAINE is A PERSON EAGER TO JOIN THE FAMILY [4 ME: 1/0/); 3 /-/].

Family = EUROPEAN UNION. → /-/ The family {EU} has no choice but to open
arms to its potential member {UKRAINE} (22) /0/ as a brother who is to be
saved him from an old ‘friend’ {RUSSIA} (29). /-/ Meanwhile, the path to the
family {EU} is long (18), /-/ and it has thresholds (18).
8 SVITLANA ZHABOTYNSKA

Target domain RUSSIA [1 ME /-/]

RUSSIA is A PERSON TREATED WITH A BITTER FRUIT [1 ME /-/]. Bitter

fruit = NATO’s EXPANSION. → /-/ The person {RUISSIA} has to swallow a
bitter fruit {NATO’s EXPANSION} (31).

Target domain UNITED STATES [45 ME/-/]

US is A POLICEMAN [22 ME /-/]. Policeman’s banner = SO CALLED ‘VALUES’.

Those whom the policeman controls = WORLD COUNTRIES. Tool of control
= NATO. The one whom policeman punishes = RUSSIA. Tool of punishment
= SANCTIONS. Police dog = RUSSOPHOBIA. → /-/ The policeman {US} (42)
/-/ acting under the banner {SO CALLED ‘VALUES’} (6, 28), /-/ and using the
tool of control {NATO} (28), /-/ dictates the world order (4), /-/ makes the
public {WORLD COUNRIES} stand on the right side, and toe the prescribed
line (152). /-/ The policeman {US} uses his tool of control {NATO} to enhance
his hegemony and manipulative capacity (27, 282, 30, 31). /-/ In the
policeman’s {US’s} hands, this tool {NATO} is the spear (31). /-/ The
policeman {US} punishes those {WORLD COUNTRIES} who are disloyal (14).
/-/ To punish the one who disobeys {RUSSIA}, the policeman {US} re-awakes
the sleeping police dog {RUSSOPHOBIA} (9), /-/ and uses the disciplinary tool
{SANCTIONS} (15, 17) /-/ to which the policeman {US} has become addicted
like a five-year old is addicted to candy (15). /-/ The tool {SANCTONS} is used
to hurt the troublemaker {RUSSIA} (152) /-/ and to drive others {RUSSIA’S
PARTNERS} from him (15).

US is A VILLAIN [23 ME /-/]. Those whom the villain subdues and terrorizes
= WORLD COUNTRIES, EUROPE, CHINA AND RUSSIA. The villain’s cohesive
tools = US DIPLOMACY. → /-/ The villain {US} scatters guns (9), /-/ wages
economic wars (6, 15), /-/ takes economic hostages {OTHER COUNTRIES}
(15), /-/ and strangles his competitors {OTHER COUNTRIES} (15). /-/ He has
highjacked and subdued a victim {EUROPE} (9, 17, 22), /-/ whom he has
kneecapped (15), /-/ and whom he is dragging into an abyss {ECONOMIC
CRISIS} (17), /-/ while laughing behind the victim’s {EUROPE’s} back (9). /-/
The villain {US} wants to crush those {RUSSIA and CHINA} who challenge his
hegemony (153, 283). /-/ To subdue others {WORLD COUNTRIES}, the villain
{US} pushes forward his cohesive tool {FOREIGN POLICY} (4, 6, 15).
 POLITICAL METAPHORS OF WAR 9

Target domain NATO [44 ME: 2/0/; 1/+/; 41/-/]

NATO is A PERSON STRIVING TO SURVIVE [8 ME /-/]. Person’s elusive soul

= US. Self-resurrection device = HUMANITARIAN SLOGANS. Life-saving
straw = FINLAND and SWEDEN. → /-/ The person {NATO} has a dangerous
Cold War mentality (27, 28), /-/ which is the inherent property engraved in
his bones and which cannot be changed (27). /-/ The person {NATO} is brain-
dead (23): /-/ his body exists, but his soul {US} has become elusive (262). /-/
The person {NATO} has found a self-resurrection device {HUMANITARIAN
SLOGANS} (28), /-/ and a life-saving straw {FINLAND and SWEDEN} to
prolong his life (31).

NATO is A VILLAIN [10 ME /-/]. Villain’s dark hand = MILITARY

INTERVENTION. Those whom the villain terrorizes = WORLD COUNTRIES. →
/-/ The villain {NATO}, who previously built the Iron Curtain (27), /-/ is
leading others {WORLD COUNTRIES} to the arms race (31). /-/ The villain
{NATO} poisons the environment {PEACE and STABILITY} (273, 28), /-/ and
extends his dark hand {MILITARY INTERVENTION} to grab someone else’s
{NON-WESTERN COUNTRIES’} property (273, 28).

NATO is A VASSAL [7 ME /-/]. Vassal’s master = US. Master’s handle to

control the vassal = NATO’S EXPANSION. → /-/ The vassal {NATO}, who is at
the beck and call of his master {US} (282), /-/ sows seeds {ENMITY}, so as the
master {US} could reap the crop {BENEFITS} for nothing (4, 31), /-/ and
changes the landscape {WORLD POLITICS}, so as the master {US} could draw
his own lines there (21, 31). /-/ The master {US} uses a handle {EXPANSION}
to control the vassal {NATO} and enhance his own hegemony through
manipulations (28).

NATO is A MILITARY TOOL [6 ME /-/]. Tool’s owners = US and WEST. → /-/

The tool {NATO} is used by its owners {US and WEST} to wage wars (203, 28),
and to establish their dominance in Europe and the world (27, 28).

NATO is AN OCTOPUS [4 ME /-/]. Space to which the octopus moves = ASIA-

PASIFIC REGION. → /-/ The octopus {NATO} extends its tentacles to the new
space {ASIA-PACIFIC} (232, 26, 30).

NATO is AN OMINOUS SHAKY BUILDING [3 ME /-/]. Territory of building’s

shadow = WORLD. → /-/ The building {NATO}, which is casting a shadow over
the multipolar world (27), /-/ is built on sand and, being in a chronic decay,
will ultimately collapse (26, 27).
10 SVITLANA ZHABOTYNSKA

NATO is AN INSURANCE COMPANY [3 ME: 2/0/; 1 /-/]. Those who are insured
= EUROPEAN COUNTRIES. → /0/ Those, who are insured {EUROPEAN
COUNTRIES} are psychologically comfortable (31), /0/ but they hope their
insurance will not come in handy (31). /-/ Meanwhile, they can be exhorted
by the insurance company {NATO} (31).

NATO is A BOAT [2 ME: 1 /+; 1/-/]. Boat’s captain = US. Members of the
captain’s team = REPUBLICAN PARTY. → /-/ The boat {NATO} has a wrong
captain {US} (30). /+/ Members of the captain’s team {REPUBLICAN PARTY}
want to leave the boat (26).

NATO is A TRAPPED BEAST [1 ME /-/]. Trap = RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR. → /-/

The beast {NATO} has fallen into the trap {RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR} which is
difficult to escape (23).

Target domain EUROPE [18 ME: 2/0/; 2/+/; 14/-/]

EUROPE is A REJUVENATING PERSON [1 ME /0/]. → /0/ The old person

{EUROPE} rejuvenates (28).

EUROPEAN ECONOMY is A RECOVERING PERSON [4 ME: 2/+/; 2 /-/]. → /-/

After being hurt by a blow {SANCTIONS IMPOSED ON RUSSIA} (16, 30), /+/ the
person {EUROPEAN ECONOMY} is recovering (102).

EUROPEAN ECONOMY is AN INSECURE TERRITOTY [11 ME /-/]. Monsters

causing insecurity = INFLATION, PRICES. A big dark cloud looming over the
territory = RISK. → /-/ The territory {EUROPE} has monsters {INFLATION,
PRICES} who are jumping, hiking, skyrocketing, soaring (173, 21, 222, 23),
/-/ exerting pressure (17), /-/ fueling social disorder (17), /-/ and
undermining stability (17). /-/ Over the territory {EUROPE}, there is a
looming silhouette of a big dark cloud {RISK} (17).

EUROPE is A BOAT ON THE WRONG COURSE [1 ME/-/]. → /-/ The boat

{EUROPE} is drifting away from its destination {INDEPENDENCE} (17).

EUROPE is THE TRAIN DRIVEN BY A LOCOMOTIVE [1 ME /0/]. Locomotive

= GERMANY. → /0/ The train {EUROPE} is driven by a locomotive
{GERMANY} (18).
 POLITICAL METAPHORS OF WAR 11

Target domain WEST [38 ME: 2/+/; 36/-/]

WESTERN COUNTRIES are GANGSTERS [20 ME/-/]. Gangsters’ vassals /

minions = NATO. Gangsters’ weapon = SANCTIONS. Gangsters’ adversary =
RUSSIA. Those terrorized by gangsters = NON-WESTERN COUNTRIES. The
one who opposes gangsters = CHINA. → /-/ The gangsters {WESTERN
COUNTRIES}, who pretend to be gentlemen, drive around in their gunboats
and flex muscles (202). /-/ They encourage their minions {NATO} to bully
people and dominate the markets (20, 28). /-/ Together, they make trouble
(20), /-/ deliver blows (273), /-/ push others {NON-WESTERN COUNTRIES} to
the periphery (14), /-/ seize new territories and set fires (27), /-/ arrange
provocations (20), /-/ and trade people like commodities (19). /-/ To crush
the one {RUSSIA} who challenges them, the gangsters {WESTERN
COUNTRIES}, employ the weapon {SANCTIONS} (6, 26) which isolates the
adversary {RUSSIA} and hurts his partners (6, 15). /-/ The weapon
{SANCTIONS}, however, backfires (14). /+/ There is the one {CHINA} who is
ready to oppose the gangsters {WESTERN COUNTRIES} (203).

WESTERN HEGEMONY is A DISMANTLED CATHEDRAL [4 ME: 2/+/; 2/-/].

Basis of the cathedral = LIES and WAR. The one who sits on the altar = US.
Those who dismantle the cathedral = RUSSIAN MEDIA. → /+/ There are those
{RUSSIAN MEDIA} who dismantle the cathedral {WESTERN HEGEMONY} (13)
/-/ which has an insecure basis {LIES and WAR} (132). /+/ The one {US} who
placed himself on the altar is dragged down (4).

WESTERN AND UKRAINIAN MEDIA are INVADERS AND PERSECUTORS

[14 ME/-/]. Invaded territory = PUBLIC OPINION. Invaders’ false banners =
FREEDOM, DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS. Weapons of invasion = LIES,
DISINFORMATION and NEO-NAZISM. → /-/ The invaders {WESTERN MEDIA}
run rampant in the field {PUBLIC OPINION} (13), /-/ using weapons {LIES,
DISINFORMATION and NEO-NATSISM} (134) /-/ to which the invaders
{WESTERN MEDIA} have become addicted (13). /-/ The invaders {WESTERN
and UKRAINIAN MEDIA}, waving their false banners {FREEDOM, DEMOCRACY
AND HUMAN RIGHTS} (1/-/}, witch-hunt honest journalists and intellectuals
(132), /-/ lynching them (13), /-/ attacking them (132), /-/ launching crusades
against them (13), /-/ and assassinating their careers (13).

Target domain NON-WESTERN WORLD [1 ME/+/]

NON-WESTERN COUNTRIES are RECOVERING PEPLE [1 ME/+/]. → /+/ The
people {NON-WESTERN COUNTRIES} realize recovery (25).
12 SVITLANA ZHABOTYNSKA

Target domain WORLD [15 ME: 5/+/; 10 ME/-/]

WORLD is A PERSON IN SHOCK [1 ME/-/]. → /-/ The person {WORLD} has

suffered several shocks (6).

WORLD ECONOMY is AN UNDERMINED BUILDING [5 ME: 1/+/; 4/-/]. The

explosive weapons = US’s TRADE WAR WITH CHINA, WEST’S SANCTIONS
AGAINST RUSSIA. Those who safeguard the building = CHINA and INDIA. →
/-/ The building {WORLD ECONOMY} is being undermined with explosive
weapons {US’s TRADE WAR WITH CHINA, WEST’S SANCTIONS AGAINST RUSSIA}
(63, 21). /+/ There are those {CHINA and INDIA} who want to safeguard the
building {WORLD ECONOMY} (21).

WORLD SECURITY is AN UNDERMINED BUILDING [9 ME: 4/+/; 5/-/].

Destroyers of the building = WEST, US, NATO. A pillar of stability = BRICS.
→ /+/ The building {WORLD SECURITY} has pillars that buttress multipolarity
(14, 30). /-/ There are those {WEST, US, NATO} who destroy and undermine
the foundation of the building {WORLD SECURITY} (6, 17, 202, 30). /+/ The
building {WORLD SECURITY} has a new pillar of stability {BRICS} (142).

The summary of the analysis is given in Table 1 that, through the

quantity of ME, displays salience of targets and their conceptual metaphors.
The high salience of targets points to their importance for the narrator. The
high salience of conceptual metaphors identifies them as the narrator’s
dominant manipulative tool intended for entrenchment of the metaphorically
tailored image in the recipient’s mind.

Table 1. Russia-Ukraine war in conceptual metaphors of ‘The Global Time’s narratives

Emotivity ME in total
Conceptual metaphors
/0/ /+/ /-/ Quan- %
tity
Target RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR 2 - 40 42 19.8

WAR is A BONFIRE - - 18 18
WAR is A THEATRICAL STAGE - - 13 13
WAR is A CHESS GAME 2 - 2 4
WAR is A PUZZLE - - 3 3
WAR is A PLANT - - 1 1
WAR is A BOTTOMLESS PIT - - 1 1
WAR is A HUNGRY BEAST - - 1 1
WAR is TURBULENT WATERS - - 1 1
 POLITICAL METAPHORS OF WAR 13

Target UKRAINE 1 - 7 8 3.8

UKRAINE is A SICK PERSON - - 4 4
UKRAINE is A PERSON EAGER 1 - 3 4
TO JOIN THE FAMILY
Target RUSSIA - - 1 1 0.5
RUSSIA is A PERSON TREATED - - 1 1
TO A BITTER FRUIT
Target UNITED STATES - - 45 45 21.2
US is A POLICEMAN - - 22 22
US is A VILLAIN - - 23 23
Target NATO 2 1 41 44 20.7
NATO is A PERSON STRIVING TO SURVIVE - - 8 8
NATO IS A VILLAIN - - 10 10
NATO is a VASSAL - - 7 7
NATO is A MILITARY TOOL - - 6 6
NATO is AN OCTOPUS - - 4 4
NATO is AN OMINOUS SHAKY BUILDING - - 3 3
NATO is AN INSURANCE COMPANY 2 - 1 3
NATO is A BOAT - 1 1 2
NATO is A TRAPPED BEAST - - 1 1
Target EUROPE 2 2 14 18 8.5
EUROPE is A REJUVENATING PERSON 1 - - 1
EUROPEAN ECONOMY is - 2 2 4
A RECOVERING PERSON
EUROPEAN ECONOMY - - 11 11
is AN INSECURE TERRITOTY
EUROPE is A BOAT ON THE WRONG COURSE - - 1 1
EUROPE is THE TRAIN DRIVEN BY 1 - - 1
A LOCOMOTIVE
Target WEST - 2 36 38 17.9
WESTERN COUNTRIES are GANGSTERS - - 20 20
WESTERN HEGEMONY - 2 2 4
is A DISMANTLED CATHEDRAL
WESTERN AND UKRAINIAN MEDIA - - 14 14
are INVADERS AND PERSECUTORS
Target NON-WESTERN WORLD - 1 - 1 0.5
NON-WESTERN COUNTRIES - 1 - 1
are RECOVERING PEPLE
Target WORLD - 5 10 15 7.1
WORLD is A PERSON IN SHOCK - - 1 1
WORLD ECONOMY is AN UNDERMINED = 1 4 5
BUILDING
WORLD SECURITY is AN UNDERMINED 4 5 9
BUILDING
Total: 7 11 194 212 100
% 3.3 5.2 91.5 100
Source: Author’s Own
14 SVITLANA ZHABOTYNSKA

In Table 1, the findings are primarily concerned with the number of ME

featuring the targets and contributing to the scope of their description in the
metaphorical ‘narratives’. Quantitatively, the analysed ME demonstrate
obvious negativity of the ‘Russia-Ukraine war’ media image (95.5% of the
ME have a negative bias), which is accounted for by negativity of the highly
salient targets. Among them are: UA (21.2% of the dataset), NATO (20.7%),
WAR (19.8%), and WEST (17. 9%), which shows that for the narrator the war
primarily associates with the US, NATO, and the collective WEST rather than
with UKRAINE (3.8%) or RUSSIA (0.5%). The US, NATO and WEST are
portrayed as international aggressors and contributors to the war in Ukraine.
Meanwhile, RUSSIA, the real aggressor, remains metaphorically ‘invisible’:
it has occasional references as the ‘injured party’, and not as the perpetrator
of the war crimes in Ukraine. A comparatively low salience of EUROPE
(8.5%) and its negativity related to the role of a ‘victim’ rather than an
‘aggressor’ sets EUROPE apart from NATO and the WEST. It may hint at
China’s attitude to Europe as a present and future economic partner who
should not be abused. A small portion of emotively neutral and positive ME
(3.3% and 5.2% respectively) portray the ‘Self’ (NON-WESTERN WORLD
with China and India as its part) who is opposed to the negative ‘Other’ (the
US, NATO, and the WEST, as well as UKRAINE whom they support).

The salience of targets is also defined by their metaphorical ranges, or

the number of sources employed for their description. This property
enhances salience of the targets NATO (9 sources), WAR (8 sources), and
EUROPE (5 sources). So, we may say that the US target demonstrates high
salience through the length of its metaphorical narratives, while the NATO
and the WAR targets are highly salient due to the diversity of their
metaphorical narratives.

The highly salient targets are portrayed with the highly salient
conceptual metaphors: US is A VILLAIN (23 ME), NATO is A VILLAIN (10 ME),
US is A POLICEMAN (22 ME), WESTERN CONTRIES are GANGSTERS (20 ME),
WESTERN AND UKRAINIAN MEDIA are INVADERS AND PERSECUTORS
(14 E), WAR is A BONFIRE (18 ME), WAR is A THEATRICAL STAGE (13 ME).
The conceptual metaphor’s salience, through multiple occurrences of the
subsumed ME that together shape a particular image, makes it entrenched
and thus primed (easily accessed) in the recipient’s mind. When entrenched
with a particular bias, the referent’s metaphorical image may triger the
further associations that reach beyond the available verbal representations.
 POLITICAL METAPHORS OF WAR 15

Within the ‘Russia-Ukraine war’ image, the metaphorical targets are

linked by different kinds of relations that bring together the conceptual
metaphors portraying them. The ensemble of conceptual metaphors
representing an interlocking pattern is known as a rhizome. In Ancient
Greek, ‘rhizome’ means ‘mass of roots’. This term is used in botany to
describe a root-like stem that grows underground but can generate
multiple new stems above the surface. Employed by Deleuze and Guattari,
the term ‘rhizome’ started to denote nonlinear and nonhierarchical thinking
– the way in which humans are thinking in general (Friesem, 2021).
Similarly, conceptual metaphors that exist in our thought do not operate in
isolation, but form an interacting web (Goatly, 1997, p. 59; for metaphor as
a rhizome see Schuh and Cunningham, 2004). Such web for the Russia-
Ukraine war conceptual metaphors is depicted in Figure 1.

Source: Author’s Own

16 SVITLANA ZHABOTYNSKA

The graphics of Figure 1 illustrates the density of relations exposed by the

key concepts of the ‘Russia-Ukraine war’ image. In conceptual metaphors,
the key concepts are used as the nucleus (target) or a satellite (target’s
composite part). The graphics shows that the high-density network of links
is possessed by the concepts US, NATO, and WEST, all of which, unlike the
concept RUSSIA, are variously linked to the concept of WAR.

5. Concluding discussion

The ‘portrait’ of the internationally contextualized Russia-Ukraine war

painted by The Global Times with metaphors obviously resonates with
Russia’s narrative, in which:

Ukraine is a failed state. It is a country of radicals. Ukraine has the

Nazi Ukrainian insurgent army. There is a crackdown on descent
and lack of freedom of speech in Ukraine. The West does not need
Ukraine. The West is an enemy who wants to destroy Russia. The
treacherous West threatened Russia with NATO expansion. Russia
is the betrayed victim. The West forced Russia to attack Ukraine.
Russia, without any other choice, had to attack first for the sake of
its own security. NATO fights in Ukraine. The US is waging a war
against Russia. Sanctions are part of this war. The collapse of
Western civilization is imminent (Babak et al., 2917; Kremlin’s anti-
sanction narratives…, 2022; Russia’s top five persistent
disinformation narratives, 2022; Study shows… , 2022;
Zhabotynska ans Ryzhova, 2022, p. 186).

In the analyzed data, the above narrative acquires a Chinese perspective: the
West (the US and NATO in particular) threatens not only Russia, but the non-
Western world in toto, including China. Supporting peace and talks, China
does its best to oppose the Wests’ aggressive politics.

Metaphorical representation of the pro-Russia narrative on the war in

Ukraine and its international setting empowers this narrative ontologically
and emotively. The familiar images of villains, gangsters, cruel policemen,
invaders and persecutors, the stage with bad actors, or the fire and arsonists
make the (ontologically intricate) image of a political situation familiarized,
emotionalized and conceptually appropriated. Besides, it is appropriated
without critical thinking, since everyone knows who gangsters or villains are,
what they are doing, and what is to be done with them. So, the metaphorical
source vests the target with ontology (what it is like), axiology (how it should
 POLITICAL METAPHORS OF WAR 17

be assessed), and pragmatic response (the attitudes and actions of the

recipient). In metaphor, the image of the source is restricted by its limited
traits relevant for the contextually constrained cross-mapping: while
particular traits are foregrounded, the other traits are downplayed.
Metaphor’s appropriation evokes these downplayed traits which, if not
mapped on the target additionally, amplify its emotive perception.

Besides, it is plausible to presume that the conventional linguistic form

of metaphor ‘X is Y’ which stands for the conceptual form ‘X is as if Y’
turns metaphor into metamorphosis. In metamorphosis, the source is a real,
not imagined incarnation of the target (like, in pagan beliefs, a magician
could really be / become a wolf, or the king could be / become the Sun as his
real embodiment). Thus, the linguistic form ‘X is Y’ may subconsciously
convert fiction into reality.

The use of metaphor as a manipulative device of political propaganda

brings us back to the Sapir -Whorf conception of linguistic relativity. In the
domain of politics, however, the original proposal that “the particular
language one speaks influences the way one thinks about reality” should be
rather modified to “the particular language one is exposed to influences the
way one thinks about the reality”. This formula perfectly agrees with today’s
socio-political trend of ‘post-truth’ – a “ situation in which people are more
likely to accept an argument based on their emotions and beliefs, rather than
one based on facts” (Post-Truth, N.D.). Or, in stronger terms, “post-truth is
the public burial of ‘objective facts’ by an avalanche of media ‘appeals to
emotion and personal belief’” (Hood, 2018). Post-truth, thereby, becomes
fertile ground for Russia’s and pro-Russa propaganda, were, according to
Pomerantsev (2014), “nothing is true and everything is possible”. This
definition agrees with the definition of metaphor. No wonder it has become
a convenient instrument to craft ideologies.

Ideological metaphors are both highly pervasive and latent. It is their

latency that makes them dangerous (Goatly, 1997, p. 157). Considering this
danger, Lakoff (1991) writes:

There is no way to avoid metaphorical thought, especially in

complex matters like foreign policy. I am therefore not objecting
to the use of metaphor in itself in foreign policy discourse. My
objections are, first, to the ignorance of the presence of metaphor
in foreign policy deliberations, second, to the failure to look
systematically at what our metaphors hide, and third, to the failure
18 SVITLANA ZHABOTYNSKA

to think imaginatively about what new metaphors might be more

benign. It is in the service of reality that we must pay more
attention to the mechanisms of metaphorical thought…. because,
as we are witnessing, metaphors backed up by bombs can kill
(p. 32).
.
For the case of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, Lakoff’s words
have become prophetic. The militant metaphors of Russia’s and pro-Russia
political narratives, backed by bombs, are really killing. They are killing
Russians who are driven to Ukraine by that, which “is not true but possible”.
They are killing Ukrainians who defend that which is true. They are also
killing the vigilance of international community which ceases to differentiate
between fact and fiction.

REFERENCES

Babak, A., Matychak, T., Moroz, V., Puhach, M., Minich, R., Rubak, V., and
Yermolenko, V. (2017). Words and Wars: Ukraine Facing Kremlin
Propaganda. Kyiv: KIS.
Bartlett, F. C. (1940), Political Propaganda. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Bateman, J. (2014) Text and Image: A Critical Introduction to the Visual-
Verbal Divide. London: Routledge.
Beer, F. A. and Landtsheer, C. D. (2004). Metaphorical World Politics:
Rhetoric and Public Affairs. Michigan: Michigan University Press.
Bourse, S. (2019). “Conjuring up terror and tears: The evocative and
persuasive power of loaded words in the political discourse on drug
reform”. Lexis: 4–13.
[http://journals.openedition.org/lexis/3182 ]
Friesem, E. (2021). “Rhizome as a metaphor for human thinking and the
Internet”.[https://www.elizavetafriesem.com/blog/rhizome-as-a-
metaphor-for-human-thinking-and-internet]
Goatly, A. (1997). The Language of Metaphors. London and New York:
Routledge.
Hanne, M. (2014). “An introduction to the ‘Warring with Words’ project”.
In M. Hanne, W. D. Crano and J .S. Mio (eds). Warring With Words:
Narrative and Metaphor in Politics. New York: Psychology Press: 1–50.
Hood, L. (2018). “Post-truth politics and why the antidote isn’t simply ‘fact-
checking’ and truth”. The Conversation, 23 March.
[https://theconversation.com/post-truth-politics-and-why-the-antidote-
isnt-simply-fact-checking-and-truth-87364]
 POLITICAL METAPHORS OF WAR 19

Hutchinson, W. (2008). “Media, government and manipulation: the cases of

the two Gulf Wars”. 9th Australian Information Warfare and Security
Conference. Edith Cowan University, Perth, Western Australia: 35-40.
[https://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1027&context=isw]
Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor. A Practical Introduction. Oxford–New
York: Oxford University Press.
Kövecses, Z. (2018). “Metaphor in media language and cognition: A
perspective from conceptual metaphor theory. Lege Artis, 1 (3): 124-
140.
“Kremlin’s anti-sanction narratives: What Russian propaganda in Europe
says” (2022). Centre for Strategic Communication, 15 August.
[https://spravdi.gov.ua/en/kremlins-anti-sanction-narratives-what-
russian-propaganda-in-europe-says/]
Lakoff G. (1993). “Contemporary theory of metaphor”. In A. Ortony (ed.).
Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 202–
251.
Lakoff, G. (1991). “Metaphor and war: The metaphor system used to justify
war in the Gulf”. Peace Research, 23: 25–32.
[https://www.arieverhagen.nl/cms/files/George-Lakoff-1991-
Metaphor-and-War.pdf ]
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied
Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books.
Lakoff, G. and Turner, M. (1989). More Than Cool Reason. A Field Guide
to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago
Press.
Pomerantsev, P. (2014). Nothing is True and Everything is possible: The
Surreal Heart of the New Russia. New York: Public Affairs.
“Post-truth” (N.D.). Cambridge Dictionary.
[https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/post-truth]
“Russia’s Top Five Persistent Disinformation Narratives” (2022). US
Department of State, 20 January, 2022 [https://www.state.gov/russias-top-
five-persistent-disinformation-narratives/]
Schuh, K.L. and Cunningham, D. J. (2004). “Rhizome and the mind:
Describing the metaphor”. Semiotica, 149(1/4): 325–342.
“Study shows most widespread propaganda narrative on Ru-Ua war” (2022).
Spiritual Front of Ukraine. [https://df.news/en/2022/09/02/study-shows-
most-widespread-propaganda-narrative-on-ru-ua-war/]
20 SVITLANA ZHABOTYNSKA

Thompson, S. A. (1996). Politics without metaphors is like a fish without

water”. In J. S. Mio and N. A. Katz (eds). Metaphor: Implications and
Applications. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: 185–201.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2006). “Discourse and manipulation”. Discourse and
Society, 17(2): 359–383.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2011). “Discourse, knowledge, power and politics.
Towards critical epistemic discourse analysis”. In Ch. Hart (ed.).
Critical Discourse Studies in Context and Cognition. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins: 27–63.
Zhabotynskaya, S. A. (2016). “Kontseptualnyie metaforyi v rechah Baraka
Obamyi i Vladimira Putina (2014–2015)” (In Russian). [Conceptual
metaphors in the public speeches of Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin
(2014–2015)]. Cognition, Communication, Discourse, 13: 43–91.
Zhabotynska, S. (2018). “Images of Ukraine—EU relations in conceptual
metaphors of Ukrainian mass media”. Special issue "Ukraine—EU
Relations: Verbal Narratives, Images, and Perceptions" in Cognition,
Communication, Discourse, 17: 118–140.
Zhabotynska, S. and Ryzhova, O. (2022). “Ukraine and the West in pro-
Russia Chinese media: A methodology for the analysis of multimodal
political narratives”. Cognition, Communication, Discourse, 24: 115–
139.

Data sources
1. Global Times (2022, June 02). By Xinhua. US "adds fuel to fire" by
supplying weapons to Ukraine: Kremlin.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1267182.shtml
2. Global Times (2022, June 02). By Xinhua. US to send medium-range
rocket systems to Ukraine.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1267180.shtml
3. Global Times (2022, June 02). By Song Zhongping. HIMARS unlikely
to help Ukraine turn the tide on the battlefield.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1267202.shtml
4. Global Times (2022, June 06). By Global Times. US upgrading arms to
Ukraine reveals selfish foreign policy.
:https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1267428.shtml
5. Global Times (2022, June 07). By Global Times. Only cease-fire and
peace restoration can fundamentally avoid trauma for women and
children: Chinese envoy on Ukrainian conflict.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1267465.shtml
6. Global Times (2022, June 07). By Wu Xinbo. Where will the
international system head post Russia-Ukraine conflict?
 POLITICAL METAPHORS OF WAR 21

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1267498.shtml
7. Global Times (2022, June 07). By Xinhua. Chinese envoy warns against
providing weapons to Ukraine or imposing sanctions on Russia.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1267448.shtml
8. Global Times (2022, June 08). By Xinhua. Ukraine says in talks with UN
over humanitarian corridor for food exports
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1267545.shtml
9. Global Times (2022, June 09). By Fan Lingzhi and Lin Xiaoy. Weapons
sent by US and NATO may fall into dark net and even to terrorists,
leading widespread and unbearable cost. Feeding armed conflict.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1267729.shtml
10. Global Times (2022, June 09). By Xinhua. German industrial production
recovers after slump on Russia-Ukraine conflict.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1267650.shtml
11. Global Times (2022, June 11). By Xinhua. Russia-Ukraine conflict
could push 11-19 mln into hunger worldwide: FAO.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1267845.shtml
12. Global Times (2022, June 13). By Global Times. Zelensky’s Taiwan
remarks ‘used by some forces to create tension between China and
Ukraine’: Chinese FM
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1268010.shtml
13. Global Times (2022, June 14). By GT staff reporters. GT Investigates:
Western freelance journalists expose NATO propaganda fomenting
Ukraine crisis, suffer merciless attacks by ‘civilized’ West.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1268125.shtml
14. Global Times (2022, June 16). By Oleg Ivanov. BRICS a global pillar
of stability for non-Western countries
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1268328.shtml
15. Global Times (2022, June 16). By Xin Ping. The US has become
addicted to coercive diplomacy.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1268286.shtml
16. Global Times (2022, June 20). By Global Times. NATO chief predicts
protracted Ukraine war, mirrors divided bloc.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1268583.shtml
17. Global Times (2022, June 20). By GT staff reporters. US reaps windfalls
as Europe sinks into deeper economic distress, sees strategic autonomy
weakened.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1268579.shtml

18. Global Times (2022, June 20). By Lü Xiang. Major EU countries strive
to comfort Ukraine amid contradicting demands.
22 SVITLANA ZHABOTYNSKA

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1268582.shtml
19. Global Times (2022, June 20). By Lin Xiaoyi. Global refugee
population hits 100m amid regional conflicts sown by West.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1268580.shtml
20. Global Times (2022, June 22). By Ding Gang. ‘Economic Article V’ a
blatant incitement to undermine security order of others.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1268780.shtml
21. Global Times (2022, June 22). By Global Times. GT Voice: Double
standards on Russian oil show ugliness of US policy.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1268804.shtml
22. Global Times (2022, June 22). By GT staff reporters. NATO, US put
Ukraine’s EU membership in dilemma.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1268813.shtml
23. Global Times (2022, June 23). By Lu Xue. Wild ambition of NATO
against public’s will.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1268821.shtml
24. Global Times (2022, June 24). By GT staff reporters. EU grants
Ukraine candidate status, aims at 'prolonged military conflict' to drag
down Russia.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1268962.shtml
25. Global Times (2022, June 24). By GT staff reporters. EU grants Ukraine
candidate status in show of solidarity, as US rallies allies to target
adversaries.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1268969.shtml
26. Global Times (2022, June 26). By Lü Xiang. ‘Body’ of NATO continues,
but ‘soul’ elusive.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1269046.shtml
27. Global Times (2022, June 28). By Zhang Hao. How NATO began with
confrontation and ends with poisoning world peace? Western war
machine.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1269264.shtml
28. Global Times (2022, June 29). By Ding Gang. NATO expansionist
agenda a threat to global security, a US tool to control EU and enhance
hegemonic manipulation capacity. Bloody and tragic legacy.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1269357.shtml
29. Global Times (2022, June 30). By Ding Gang. EU’s ‘moral support’ for
Ukraine masks a country beset by problems.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1269399.shtml
30. Global Times (2022, June 30). By Global Times. NATO’s steering
wheel in the wrong hands of Washington.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1269388.shtml
 POLITICAL METAPHORS OF WAR 23

31. Global Times (2022, June 30). By Global Times. ‘Unity of NATO’ a
disguise of its existential crisis.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202206/1269395.shtml

Svitlana Zhabotynska is Doctor of Philology (Linguistics), Professor of the

Department of English Philology and Methods of Teaching English at
Bohdan Khmelnitsky National University in Cherkasy, Ukraine. She is one
of leading Ukrainian linguists closely integrated into international scholarly
community. In the 1990s, she initiated cognitive linguistic studies in
Ukraine, and since then, she has been shifting focus to their applied
interdisciplinary aspects. Among them is cognitive linguistics research of
political issues: political narratives that are crafting images and perceptions
employed in IR; propaganda technologies used in the war on consciousness;
verbal and multimodal instruments employed by political propaganda.
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9841-6335