Peace and Collaborative Development Network
Building Bridges, Networks and Expertise Across Sectors
Scandal: Obama gets the "peace prize"
In his will, Alfred Nobel states the criteria for awarding the prize:
Two general expressions, for all the five prizes:
«during the preceding year»
«has conferred the greatest benefit on mankind»
and four expressions that apply particularly to the peace prize*:
- "brotherhood among nations"
- "abolition or reduction of standing armies"
- "for the holding and promotion of peace congresses"
- "champions of peace"
Even with a broad contemporary interpretation of Nobel's words from 1895, President Obama has done none of it - although he has spoken a lot of elegant, visionary words about doing it, about us all ("we") doing it.
He has not reduced wignificantly the U.S. military presence in Iraq, he has markedly stepped up the military presence in Afghanistan. His administration has not given up the Ballistic Missile Defence in Europe - so harmful to peace and enabling rather than deterring nuclear war - instead, his defence secretary has told us in so many words that the new one will be much better. The visionary elements of his Prague speech on a nuclear weapons-free world were almost absent in his UN speech recently.
Obama has taken no visible steps to reduce his army; instead the budget he took over from Bush has increased.
Has he contributed to the brotherhood among nations? Perhaps, but not half as much as so many others, including the broad-based peace movements and individuals around the globe. But he has talked a lot of nice words.
The Nobel Committee has once again failed to honour Alfred Nobel's will. It has once again, as a bunch of retired politicians, shown no awareness of what peace is. It has again rewarded one of their own kin - a politician and thereby a government (of the world's most militaristic country).
How politically foolish to give it to him now instead of waiting and seeing whether he will DO what he says!
So, just another scandal in the series. When will there be a serious debate about this bizarre institution? When will media and experts begin to raise questions? How long shall the world's peace people accept that they have been deprived of their peace prize?
*) Quoted from the best analysis so far of this prize, Norwegian lawyer Fredrik Heffermehl's "Nobel's Vilje" which is partly reproduced here.
Two general expressions, for all the five prizes:
«during the preceding year»
«has conferred the greatest benefit on mankind»
and four expressions that apply particularly to the peace prize*:
- "brotherhood among nations"
- "abolition or reduction of standing armies"
- "for the holding and promotion of peace congresses"
- "champions of peace"
Even with a broad contemporary interpretation of Nobel's words from 1895, President Obama has done none of it - although he has spoken a lot of elegant, visionary words about doing it, about us all ("we") doing it.
He has not reduced wignificantly the U.S. military presence in Iraq, he has markedly stepped up the military presence in Afghanistan. His administration has not given up the Ballistic Missile Defence in Europe - so harmful to peace and enabling rather than deterring nuclear war - instead, his defence secretary has told us in so many words that the new one will be much better. The visionary elements of his Prague speech on a nuclear weapons-free world were almost absent in his UN speech recently.
Obama has taken no visible steps to reduce his army; instead the budget he took over from Bush has increased.
Has he contributed to the brotherhood among nations? Perhaps, but not half as much as so many others, including the broad-based peace movements and individuals around the globe. But he has talked a lot of nice words.
The Nobel Committee has once again failed to honour Alfred Nobel's will. It has once again, as a bunch of retired politicians, shown no awareness of what peace is. It has again rewarded one of their own kin - a politician and thereby a government (of the world's most militaristic country).
How politically foolish to give it to him now instead of waiting and seeing whether he will DO what he says!
So, just another scandal in the series. When will there be a serious debate about this bizarre institution? When will media and experts begin to raise questions? How long shall the world's peace people accept that they have been deprived of their peace prize?
*) Quoted from the best analysis so far of this prize, Norwegian lawyer Fredrik Heffermehl's "Nobel's Vilje" which is partly reproduced here.
Comment
-
Comment by Dallea Amber Caldwell on October 10, 2009 at 5:02pm - I blogged about this too. I'd love to hear your thoughts on my blog entry on it as well. It might make you feel better about the choice, if not feel free to rip it apart. I agree with you 50%.
-
Comment by Jan Oberg on October 10, 2009 at 9:39am -
Thanks - but, sorry - my argument is that peace people around the world are being deprived of this important prize...Al Gore, Martti Ahtisaari and now President Obama. Read Nobel's will! There are so many people who deserve this prize for their anti-militarist and anti-war work - who are unsung heroes and made invisible. And there are visible peace-makers aroun the world. I am also vitally against a committee of former parliamentarians deciding what peace is - while we never let such a bunch decide what is brilliant medicine or literature.
I ask you to focus on the bizarre derailing of this Prize and not only on Obama. In that respect you've missed my argument about 100%.
-
Comment by Steve Fryburg on October 9, 2009 at 12:37pm -
I am pleased with Obama getting the prize, but I feel that Ian's points are correctly made. It seems that the prize was given more out of optimism than actual accomplishment.
As compared with the past executive the US had he is definitely a peace prize, but his efforts are often met with stiff resistance by legacy elements in the US. He is trying, but only time will tell if the prize will be peace.
-
Comment by Bimal on October 9, 2009 at 11:50am -
Sometimes such events should be taken as an encouragement to do something meaningful in future, therefore, now, Obama is in power, and in a position to make impact on global peace, therefore it is a boost for him to prove that he really deserved it.
Yes, your questions are meaningful, but it hardly explains anything about the solution, therefore, the grass root peace worker has nothing left other than to accept the hegemony.
SHARE THIS PAGE WITH OTHERS
By using this site you're agreeing to the terms of use as outlined in the community guidelines. Please note individual requests for funding or jobs are NOT permitted on the network.
CLICK BELOW TO SHARE SITE RESOURCES (you can email pages, and post directly to FACEBOOK, TWITTER and RELATED SITES)
FOLLOW US DIRECTLY ON TWITTER OR FACEBOOK
CLICK BELOW TO SHARE SITE RESOURCES (you can email pages, and post directly to FACEBOOK, TWITTER and RELATED SITES)
FOLLOW US DIRECTLY ON TWITTER OR FACEBOOK
Translation Tool
Events
-
Innovations in Student Leadership Conference: Building Peace in Practice
February 20, 2010 from 10:30am to 4pm – McCarthy Hall at Georgetown University
-
3rd International Conference on Conflict Resolution Education (CRE), Building Infrastructures for Change: Innovations in Conflict Resolution Education (CRE) and Justice Initiatives
March 24, 2010 to March 27, 2010 – Cuyahoga Community College, Western Campus
-
International Institute on Peace Education
-
Peacebuilding Peacelearning Intensive
August 1, 2010 at 12pm to August 7, 2010 at 12pm – Wilmington College
Latest Activity
noted we'd spread the word at Rotary meetings & bulletins Rtn Gbemi 09022010
Scholarships for Post Graduate Certificate in Conflict Resolution Skills – Centre for Peace and Reconciliation Studies, Coventry University, UK. July 2010
This course enables you to develop a range of practical and analytical skills that will incre…
Badge
About
© 2010 Created by Craig Zelizer
You need to be a member of Peace and Collaborative Development Network to add comments!
Join this Ning Network