We know exactly that the devastation of war cannot be kept away from our homes. And the war destroys most painfully precisely inside our homes. A few days before Christmas, I was in Transcarpathia, and just a few dozen kilometers from the Hungarian border I was confronted with human tragedies where a little boy was left an orphan for the rest of his life because of the war — his father was taken away to serve as a soldier and will never come back.
I also met a mother whose son had died, and now there will always be someone missing from the family dining table. These tragedies are not as far away from us as we sometimes like to believe. All it takes is a single moment, one bad decision, and everything can change.
I believe that throughout history, we women have always borne a great responsibility to speak with the voice of peace. And now as well, I would like to ask every girl, every woman, every mother — regardless of party politics — to support this petition, to support the idea that we must not be dragged into a war, and to support peace.
🎭 Central Narrative
“War is personal, close, and a female moral responsibility to stand for peace.”
The aim of the speech is not rational debate, but the forced creation of emotional identification, from which a political action (supporting a petition) is then derived.
1️⃣ Emotional legitimization through personal testimony
“A few days before Christmas, I was in Transcarpathia…”
🔹 Technique: eyewitness narrative
🔹 Effect:
- the speaker assumes moral superiority (“I have seen it”)
- opposing views implicitly appear insensitive
👉 Trick: individual experience → general political conclusion
2️⃣ Highlighting child and family tragedies
“a little boy became an orphan for the rest of his life”
“a mother whose son has died”
🔹 Technique: emotional shock (pathos)
🔹 Effect:
- debate is rendered impossible
- the complex causes of war disappear; only suffering remains
⚠️ Problem:
- no distinction is made between the fact of war and specific political decisions
3️⃣ Artificial amplification of perceived proximity
“they are not that far from us”
“as the result of one wrong choice”
🔹 Technique: proximity-of-threat narrative
🔹 Effect:
- urgency
- irrational fear (“if we don’t do this, it will reach us”)
👉 Logical leap:
no explanation is given as to which concrete decision leads to which concrete war involvement
4️⃣ “Female historical responsibility” – moral coercion
“We women have always had a great responsibility throughout history”
🔹 Technique: identity-based moral pressure
🔹 Effect:
- women who do not support it are framed as morally deficient
- political debate is reduced to a moral obligation
⚠️ Exclusionary effect:
- men
- women who think differently
5️⃣ “Independent of party politics” – pseudo-depoliticization
“independent of party politics”
🔹 Technique: false neutrality
🔹 Reality:
- a concrete political message
- a concrete political action (petition)
👉 Classic move: “this is not politics, just morality”
🎯 Conclusion
This statement:
- does not debate, but creates emotional closure
- does not present alternatives, but imposes moral obligation
- does not explain, but demands identification
📌 Core function:
to connect peace as an absolute moral value to a specific political petition, without allowing criticism.