Introduction. This article analyses media practices of euphemisation in diplomatic communications during Ukraine's War of Independence. The relevance of this research stems from the transformation of diplomatic and media communication in the context of full-scale war, when language becomes not only a tool for informing, but also a space for competing interpretations, legitimising decisions and shaping public opinion, where euphemisation acts as a means of preserving international solidarity, softening tragic realities and legitimising complex political decisions. Methods. The study uses discourse analysis of diplomatic speeches and media news reports, content analysis of quotations and their media presentation, comparative analysis of media texts and diplomatic sources, generalisation for the processing of theoretical sources, the method of contextual analysis to identify euphemisms and the process of euphemisation, as well as the method of classification to structure the most common techniques of euphemisation in diplomatic messages. Results and discussion. It has been established that the euphemisation of diplomatic messages during the War for Ukraine's Independence is a systematic linguistic-pragmatic strategy that functions at the intersection of diplomatic and media discourses and significantly influences the formation of public perceptions of the war. An analysis of the corpus of diplomatic statements, speeches by the President of Ukraine, Ukrainian diplomats and their media broadcasts revealed the dominance of lexical, syntactic and pragmatic euphemisation techniques aimed at softening, abstracting and neutralising direct references to war, violence and political responsibility. It has been found that diplomatic discourse consistently uses nominalisation, impersonal constructions and generalised formulas to reduce agency and avoid directly naming the aggressor, which is in line with the norms of institutional diplomatic communication and strategies of deliberate ambivalence. Ukrainian media, retransmitting these messages, mostly reproduce euphemistic formulas without change, thereby institutionalising them as a habitual model of speaking about war. Two levels of euphemisation have been identified: primary - in diplomatic speech, and secondary - in media representation, where euphemisms are reinforced through headlines, quotations and editorial interpretations.