Nobel Peace Prize

There’s a lot of talk about the Nobel Prize going to Obama. One insight suddenly struck me: Nobel prizes are always given out early. Too early, some might say. No, I think the prizes are too precious to be given away when somebody’s work is done. Most people would think that Nobel Prizes are given to commemorate work that has been done. But Alfred Nobel himself said that the prize was to be given out to living people. I suppose the spirit was to encourage them to continue their efforts, and to show their efforts at peace in a positive light.

There were prizes that were meant to honour causes, even as the struggle was going on. Lech Walesa was given the prize in 1983 for his struggle against communism, when the communist Polish government was only starting to weaken. Desmond Tutu was given the prize while South Africa was still under Apartheid. Aung San Suu Kyii was given the prize, even though since 1991, when the prize was given, not much has improved in Myanmar. Closer to home, Archbishop Belo and Ramos Horta were given the prize while the East Timor struggle for independence was still going on, and before they gained independence.

There are prizes who were given to people whose moral character are seriously in question. They gave the prize to Kissinger. Even though it was for a worthy act – the beginning of the end of the Vietnam War, there are many people who consider him a mass murderer because of his conduct of the Vietnam War, and because he ordered Cambodia to be bombed – an act that helped bring Pol Pot to power.

There was also Menachim Begin and Anwar Sadat. The first was the Israeli President who, when he was a general, murdered thousands of Palestinians. The second was the Egyptian leader who was a dictator who oversaw the torture of many political enemies. But the fact remains that a large part of the Israeli conflict – the one with Egypt – was more or less resolved.

There was Yasser Arafat, Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres. They set in motion a roadmap for peace, but that was tragically derailed and if anything, the heightened expectations from that brief glimpse of peace worsened the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Seems like they gave the prize to a terrorist for nothing.

Then there was the Dalai Lama. I don’t really know the story very well, and there are always two sides to every story. This was definitely meant to highlight the Tibetian struggle for freedom, if not independence. But I don’t really know how much they contributed to the Tibetian freedom movement. On one hand it’s positive for him to put emphasis on non-violent struggle against China, and to spotlight the sufferings of the Tibetian under the PRC government. But I don’t know if it’s really peaceful when the knowledge that you have a government in exile incited a lot of riots and unrest leading up to the Olympics.

It is true that the Nobel Prize to the Dalai Lama is a rebuke to China. The one awarded to Aung San Suu Kyii is also one, but less so: Burma had close ties with China, but less so now. There were prizes awarded to some lady from Guatemala, and that can be seen as a rebuke to the US as well. I don’t really think that China is complaining that the prizes are unfair because lately, there are some prizes over the last few years that make very similar political points:

2002 – prize went to Jimmy Carter, former US president. Not an effective president while in office, but after his presidency was over, he did a lot of diplomatic work. Message to George Bush 2: look at him, and learn from him. He is a man of peace, unlike you.

2007 – prize went to Al Gore, George Bush’s opponent in the 2000 elections. OK, he did a lot of pushing for environmental issues, but he wasn’t the one who did the most work. In fact, some people accused him of undermining the Kyoto Protocol. Whether he deserves the prize is secondary. What is of greater importance is the message that Mother Earth is in deep shit. Message to George Bush 2: This is the guy that should have been president instead of you.

2005 - Prize went to IAEA and their director-general ElBaradei, who very vocally criticized the USA’s decision to go to war with Iraq. Message to George Bush 2: This guy said that Saddam Hussein had no WMD, and you should have bloody well listened to him instead of leading the US into war with Iraq.

2009 – prize went to Barack Obama, whose main foreign policy achievement in his as of now short stay in the White House was to repeal a lot of George Bush 2’s policies. Message to George Bush 2: we couldn’t wait for you to leave office soon enough and we gave the prize to your replacement at the earliest given opportunity.