This study investigates the relation between democracy and conflict journalism through a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) of eight Swedish journalistic articles about Turkey ́s incursion into the Autonomous Administration of Northern Syria (NES) in 2018 called “Operation Olive Branch”. The theoretical framework includes journalism ́s role in democracy through a ​social contract​, ​framing theory​ and ​critique of ideology,​ which can be seen as the foundation of the CDA method.

It is the author's view that the social and political implications of “Operation Olive Branch” were not salient in the Swedish reporting. Two research questions were formulated from this notion: How is the conflict construed in Swedish daily press? ​and ​What are the possible factors that enables this reporting?.

The results shows three themes in the analysed articles: the conflict was construed 1) as a strategic game​ that gave agency first and foremost to ​states​, 2) through a ​terrorist narrative which constructs the Turkish action as a counter-terrorism operation and 3) as essentially an ethnic​ conflict. These themes are traced back to four theoretical factors: ​methodological nationalism, the clean war, the state of exception a​ nd ​ethnification​.

In analogy with framing theory these factors are seen to obscure certain aspects of the conflict and have implications for journalisms democratic function. The reporting is seen to be lacking in information ​depth ​and ​width​ and alienates the conflict and its actors from a Swedish context.

Lastly alternative ways of reporting, which would better honour journalism's role in the ​social contract​, are discussed through the concept of ​Peace Journalism​ and a possible ​global​ outlook as opposed to journalism’s current ​national​ outlook.