This study investigates the portrayal of the 2013 and 2017 chemical attacks in Syria by Al Jazeera English (AJE) and Russia Today (RT) through critical discourse analysis (CDA) methodology. Using a qualitative research approach, 46 news headlines from both networks are analyzed at a textual level based on Fairclough’s three-dimensional model. The study explores linguistic and discursive strategies such as lexicalization, modality, nominalization, passivation, and transitivity to uncover representational differences between AJE and RT. The headlines are categorized based on activity types, including the description of the event, the attacker, victims, reactions, and long-term consequences. Findings indicate that AJE tends to employ passivation and nominalization to obscure the identity of the attacker while emphasizing the severity of the attacks. In contrast, RT utilizes exaggeration and nominalization to highlight the scale of the attacks and construct a narrative implicating actors without explicit naming. These findings underscore differing ideological perspectives and narrative constructions by AJE and RT, revealing and highlighting the role of discourse in shaping public understanding of complex geopolitical events like the chemical attacks in Syria.