The aim of this article is to analyze communications from the presidential and security council websites on the interpretations and representations of the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War to understand how people, places, and events were interpreted and represented in terms of realism and constructivism in the geopolitics of the conflict to global audiences. Critical discourse analysis is used as a methodology for highlighting and making sense of texts in terms of the intangible elements of power relations, reputation and brand of the actors, relative balance of ethics and morality of the belligerents, value judgements, and predictions of the war’s outcome. There is a clear tendency to engage in what Sun Tsu and von Clausewitz characterize as the politics of war using brand and reputation management to global audiences of a good and virtuous self-image versus a projected ruthless opponent lacking virtue. This is an exploratory paper with an indicative result, and several apparent trends emerge. One observation suggests that the actor that is militarily weaker tends to communicate more often to shape the political variables that influence the conduct of war. The role of constructivist rhetoric is being used to justify and legitimize realist-oriented policy and practice in war.