The Dialectical Argumentation in Political Diplomatic Narratives: An analysis of the Monologues by Donald Trump, Mark Carney and King Charles III

Abstract

Objectives: The intersection of diplomatic discourse and argumentation theory, conceptualizing political monologues as strategic, game-theoretic decision matrices driven by power, localized assets, and expected utility. This study aims to: (1) model the strategic structures, payoffs, and equilibrium outcomes of high-level diplomatic arguments; (2) evaluate how speakers leverage these patterns based on power and expected utility; (3) integrate argument structures with knowledge typologies and interpersonal dynamics; and (4) quantify the distribution of specific rhetorical moves across a comparative corpus.

Methods: Employing a triadic comparative paradigm, the study analyzes three key addresses: Donald Trump (Windsor Castle, 2025), King Charles III (US Congress, 2026), and Mark Carney (Davos, 2026). The data were evaluated using a dual-space analytical framework that synthesizes dialectical moves (Ryu & Sandoval, 2015) with the SEE-SEP framework (Christenson et al., 2012).

Conclusion: The analysis reveals that these leaders engage in strategic role-play akin to multi-adversarial political games rather than delivering simple monologues. Furthermore, the SEE-SEP framework effectively maps complex, knowledge-based argumentation structures, successfully capturing the distinct epistemic profiles and strategic variances among the political actors