Archive for ‘Nobel Peace Prize’

October, 2013

The biggest losers and the biggest winners

MKGandhi

Today I want to look at those individuals who have missed out on being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Most prominently mentioned in this context is Mahatma Gandhi, whose non-violent struggle against British rule in India is practically synonymous with peaceful change. Gandhi was nominated several times, including in 1948, the year he was assassinated. While awards cannot be made posthumously, it is telling that that year the Nobel Committee made no award on the grounds that ‘there was no suitable living candidate’.

Where organizations are concerned – in my view- among the biggest losers is Greenpeace, which is rumoured to have been nominated twice. Since the early 1970s Greenpeace has worked to highlight the plight of the Earth’s ecosystems from human over-consumption and capitalism and campaigned for a peaceful, nuclear free world and disarmament. It resists corporate funding or funding by political bodies and draws its finances entirely from its 2.9 million supporters (as of January 2009) as well as sales from books, calendars and so on. Awarding Greenpeace would send a further strong signal to the world of the importance of the interconnection between peace, security and a well-functioning environment.

green peace artic sunrise

While Gandhi and Greenpeace are among the biggest losers, in some cases, nominees not receiving the award was to everyone’s benefit. Thus, the Nobel Peace Prize Nomination database reveals the astonishing facts that both Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler were nominated for the prize. In hindsight, both nominations seem utterly absurd, and indeed the person who nominated Hitler in 1939, E.G.C. Brant (a member of the Swedish parliament), intended his nomination as satirical criticism of the political debate in the Swedish parliament. When Brandt failed to meet his intended purpose he withdrew his nomination. Although it is doubtful that Hitler would have received the award, even considering him would make a mockery of the award. Moreover, although I am keen to stress the prize’s and the awarding committee’s ability to shape – in the case of Obama (see yesterday’s post) – even future political agendas, this has a hope of working only if the person/organisation in receipt of the award already shares the values of the Nobel Peace committee. To be clear, presenting the award to Hitler in 1939 would hardly have changed the behaviour of a mad-man.

Image sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi

http://www.flickr.com/photos/freddy/60840/

Further information:

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/themes/peace/gandhi/

http://metro.co.uk/2012/10/12/the-10-controversial-nobel-peace-prize-winners-3816957/

http://www.latimes.com/news/la-op-tookienobel4dec04,0,1410786.story

October, 2013

And the winner is…

OPCW

On Friday last week this year’s Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) ‘for its extensive efforts to eliminate chemical weapons’, and for rendering the use of chemical weapons a taboo under international law. The use of chemical weapons is prohibited under international law since the 1925 Geneva Convention, however, only since the 1992-93 Chemical Weapons Convention is the production and storage of such weapons prohibited. This convention came into force in 1997 and since then the OPCW, ‘through inspections, destruction and by other means, sought the implementation of the convention.’ To date 189 states have acceded to the convention, but not all – notably the USA and Russia- have met the April 2012 deadline for destroying their respective chemical weapons capabilities.

The 2013 Nobel Peace Prize was the ninety-fourth of its kind. Considering that the award can be made to more than one person at a time the Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to altogether 125 laureates, 100 individuals and 25 organizations. Past winners include Mother Theresa (1979), Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev (1990), Desmond Mpilo Tutu (1984), Willy Brant (1971) and Jimmy Carter (2002). Over the course of this week I want to tell you a little more about the prize and about past winners and losers. Specifically I want to examine: What role does the Nobel Peace Prize play in today’s world politics? To do this we need to begin by covering some basic facts first. (All factual information relating to the prize is taken from the official website of the Nobel Prize).

The Nobel Peace Prize was established in the third and last will (signed on the 27 of November 1895) of Alfred Nobel a wealthy Swedish industrialist and inventor. An excerpt of the will dictates that his entire remaining estate should be used to endow “prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit to mankind.” As specified in Nobel’s will the Peace Prize is awarded by the Norwegian Nobel Committee composed of five members of the Norwegian Parliament, assisted by specially selected expert advisors. Members are elected for a six-year term.

A nomination to the committee is valid only of it comes from an authoritative source including: members of national assemblies and governments of states; members of international courts, university rectors or professors of social sciences, history, philosophy, law and theology; directors of peace research institutes and foreign policy institutes; Persons who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize; Board members of organizations that have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize; Active and former members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee; and Former advisers to the Norwegian Nobel Committee. Self-nominations even from people with this background are not taken into account.

The Nobel Committee keeps secret the names of nominees received for 50 years, but it does release how many nominations it received in any given year. In 2012 it received 231 names, this year they received a record 259 nominations. Almost all speculations on who would win listed Malala Yousafzai, the 16 year-old Pakistani Girl who stood up against the Taliban’s ban on education and was shot in the head; at least none of the speculative lists I saw featured this year’s winner as a favourite. Notwithstanding Yousafzai’s courage, I am happier with the choice of the OPCW, because I believe the award should be given for a sustained effort to building peace that eschews the ephemeral nature of our celebrity obsessed culture.

Dr Rita Floyd is a Lecturer and Birmingham Fellow in Conflict and Security at the University of Birmingham.

Further links and information on this topic:

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/

http://world.time.com/2013/10/09/malala-marches-on-toward-the-nobel-peace-prize/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/ahead-of-nobel-peace-prize-a-list-of-possible-contenders/2013/10/09/367f0cf8-30f8-11e3-9c68-1cf643210300_story.html

http://www.theguardian.com/world/poll/2013/oct/07/nobel-peace-prize-2013-pick-winner-malala-yousafzai

http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/world-news/nobel-peace-prize-glory-also-hasdarker-side_966690.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24490925

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 672 other followers

%d bloggers like this: