Rhetorical Analysis for Jeffrey Brand's article

Well, here goes nothing. (There's no guarantee that any of this will make sense or be high quality)

1. Argument:

The United States should not restrict rule-of-law education funding to Cambodia.

2. Target audience:

The United States government (though the article is addressed to the everyday reader of the Washington Post).

3. Organization/execution of argument:

Though the author does not explicitly state his standing as a law professor at USF, he does show some grasp of Southeast Asian history. He presents several statistics and explanations thereof, and he also quotes at least one other source to support his claim. He shows the benefits so far of rule-of-law education funding in Cambodia and how such education will enable the Cambodian people to maintain their own democracy in the future.

Ethos- As previously stated, Brand consults other sources, such as an Asian Wall Street, which in turn used the words of a US government official. Through this effort, Brand attemps to formulate a formidable, informed, and influential argument. Despite the apparent breadth of his argument in favor of rule-of-law education funding, Brand devotes about one small paragraph to explaining the other side of the argument. Nonetheless, Brand is indeed working through a small medium and must make all of his intended points openly visible for the audience.

Pathos- Brand recalls the Khmer Rouge debacle involving 2 million murders of educated Cambodian citizens. Such a citation will evoke at least some feeling of social injustice and tragedy within the reader. Brand uses that massacre to show the greater need for rule-of-law education funding, almost in a way to "right the wrong" that the Communist regime committed and assist the current Cambodian masses.

Logos- Brand presents a relatively logical argument. He shows the numerous "benefits" of perpetuating education funding to Cambodia. He shows that whatever will educate the citizens regarding law and government will one day result in a stable democracy run by the Cambodian people and not one dictator.

4. Effectiveness of article-
Brand's effects are hard to gauge. Although the common newspaper reader might be persuaded by Brand's argument, there is no guarantee that the US government would/will react in the exact same way. In 2007 the United States did earmark $15 million to fund rule-of-law education in Cambodia. While Brand's goal may have been met, the probability that the US government adopted that policy solely because of the article is low.