Over time, the Nobel Peace Prize has become more a tool for political criticism than an actual acknowledgment of respectable work. The Nobel Peace Prize was originally intended to be given to an individual who “... shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”
Unfortunately, the idea of an individual receiving the Nobel Peace Prize as a result of their work towards inter- or intra-national peace appears to be of little consequence in the present day.
The 2010 Nobel Peace Prize went to Liu Xiaobo, an imprisoned democracy activist in the People’s Republic of China. Liu has been part of a multitude of peaceful movements calling for change in his authoritarian nation. He was an active participant in the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and has been actively pursuing his goal of democratic elections, accountability and other forms of reform. He has been jailed four times under trumped-up criminal charges, the latest of which placed him in prison until 2020. The Chinese government’s actions against Liu are deplorable. For such writings as Charter 08, a manifesto calling for democratization and reform in China, he has been charged with “inciting subversion of state power.” This is clearly another action in the long trend of human rights abuses the Chinese government has committed against anyone they suspect as posing the smallest threat to one-party rule.
That being said, this is not the reason the Nobel Prize Committee awarded Liu this year’s prize. Soon after the award, the Chinese government criticized the organization, saying “relations [with Norway] would suffer” as a result of the award.
In reaction to this criticism, the Noble prize committee has written various letters to the press, including one in The New York Times by Thorbjorn Jagland, the chair of the committee. There also was an interview with Geir Lundestad, a member of the committee, in the Guardian. From these statements, it is easily gleaned that the Nobel committee picked the country they wanted to criticize, and then looked for an individual in that country to award the prize to.
Jagland’s reaction to Chinese criticism was that Chinese criminal law does not respect the protection of human rights in their constitution.
First of all, there is no mechanism of enforcement of the Chinese Constitution. It is not enforced in any way that can be compared with that of western democracies. It is not Chinese criminal law that is not in line with its constitution — it is the entire government itself. When the Chinese government’s actions are in line with their constitution, it’s because the reality of the situation necessitates that kind of action, not because such action is constitutional.
The only other reasons that Jagland gave as to why they granted Liu the award was because he is a “jailed political activist,” and that he had “expressed his opinion.” These are valid reasons, but a letter by the chair of the Noble Peace Prize committee should have had much more convincing reasons than these simple lay person justifications. Clearly it was more about the message than the work of the individual.
Geir Lundestad proves my point with his own words when he said, “If we had given a prize to a dissident from Cuba or Vietnam, fine, there are difficult situations in those countries ... But the question would then be: why don’t you address China?” Then he went on to say, “The next question was who should we give the prize to?”
Clearly the country, China, was chosen to be criticized and then Liu was chosen as the most likely candidate.
This is despicable. It’s not within the Norwegian committee’s power to use the Nobel Peace Prize as a form of political criticism. It is not the committee’s role to, every year, pick a country that is not living up to Norwegian standards.
There are countless activists in China, including Liu, who deserve the Nobel Peace Prize for their political work within China.
Liu in every way represents the struggle of reform and democratization movements within China. He should be honored by receiving the award for the right reasons though. The committee must stop making a mockery of this distinguished award.
The Oklahoma Daily is pleased to provide you the opportunity to share your thoughts about this article. We encourage lively debate on the issues of the day, but we ask you refrain from using profanity or other offensive speech, engaging in personal attacks or name-calling, posting advertising, or straying from the topic at hand. To comment, you must be a registered user of OUDaily.com. Thanks for taking the time to offer your thoughts.
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register
SgtB 1 year, 6 months ago
Congratulations! You figured out that the Nobel prizes are politically charged trinkets.
I do rather like what you have to say about the Chinese gov't. They are the worst kind of human beings. Anyone who has spent time researching chairman Mao and the Tienamen Square massacre will know what I mean. I'll just say this, Chinese officials have killed over 60 MILLION people, human beings, friends, and family and continue to do so to this day. Just last week, a woman was beaten by gov't officials because she was pregnant with a second child(which is illegal in China). She was beaten so severly that she probably miscarried, but just to make sure, she was taken to a hospital and injected with drugs to make her miscarry.
She was eight months pregnant. This is the type of order that progressives/communists/socialists want and if they have it there way, it could happen here too.
BTW, look up the eugenicist movement in America, states used to wield the authority to sterilize men and women because of their background or family history. This in not new, nor is it out of the realm of possibility.
Ron Paul for President, 2012
evandefilippis 1 year, 6 months ago
Great column. It's really sad that the least commented on columns are those that matter the most. Alas, OU folks are more interested in sharia law and abortion columns.
Keep on writing, you'll be missed when you head off to medical school.