Understanding the Award.

From The Nobel Peace Prize: From Peace Negotiations to Human Rights
by Francis Sejersted
Chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Commitee, 1991-1999
Read the entire article at http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/articles/sejersted/index.html

1.Where the Peace Prize is concerned, the wording has been seen as opening up opportunities to engage in processes which have not yet reached a conclusion, but where there has been clear evidence of progress...

2.The Prize, in other words, is not only for past achievement, although that is the most important criterion. The committee also takes the possible positive effects of its choices into account. Among the reasons for adding this as a criterion is the obvious point that Nobel wanted the Prize to have political effects. Awarding a Peace Prize is, to put it bluntly, a political act – which is also the reason why the choices so often stir up controversy.

3.The mention in the will of the "abolition or reduction of standing armies, and the holding and promotion of peace congresses" reflects the period in which the will was written. The approach today is to see it as pointing to general disarmament and the dissemination of the concept of peace. The most important provision, however, is contained in the term "fraternity between nations." This general and open provision has provided a basis for the wide definition of peace-related work which the committee has applied right from the start.

4.The selection of individual prize-winners is never easy, but the focus on particular cases does make it possible to take into consideration the whole range of relevant factors, whether of a universalist or culturally related kind, and to strike a balance. The Laureate will symbolise good will and purity of heart all over the world, but the choice must also win sympathy in his or her own cultural environment. It is the committee's experience that it is possible to find worthy candidates who represent universal ideals of human rights in the most varied cultures.

5.Laureates must be more than skilled diplomats; it is important for them also to be able to stand out as symbols of good will. Only then can the Peace Prize contribute, in the words of Laureate Elie Wiesel, "to turning history into a moral endeavour."

6.Why has the Nobel Peace Prize acquired such enormous prestige? There are many peace prizes, some of them worth large amounts of money. But none of them have so far matched the Nobel Prize in prestige. This is partly fortuitous, and also a question of the age of the Prize. But it must also be attributed to the assumption underlying what we have been discussing, which is that the broad range of criteria always includes what I have called a strong moral element. It appears to be precisely this type of prize which has the potential to attract people's attention. There also appears to be a self-reinforcing element here: widespread attention attracts still more attention. Many people, in short, feel a need for symbols that can appeal to their better instincts, or (Kant again) help them to overcome the evil principle in themselves. The choices of Peace Prize Laureates appear to have succeeded in some measure in creating symbols of this kind, whether the Laureate is a humanitarian aid worker like Mother Teresa or Fridtjof Nansen, an antimilitarist like Carl von Ossietzky, a statesman like Woodrow Wilson or Willy Brandt, or a campaigner for human rights like Nelson Mandela or Carlos Belo. I think this goes a long way towards explaining the prestige of the Prize. When all is said and done, the most important effect of the Nobel Peace Prize may be that it has succeeded in creating clear symbols which appeal to our best instincts – symbols of good will.

I have also found this information:

_ Myth: The prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.

More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.

http://www.nobelpeaceprize.org

From Nobel's Will:

According to Nobel's will, the Peace Prize is to go to whoever "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".

by some for the spirit in which it is given is baffling and contrary to the Prize's criterion. Perhaps the requirements have changed in the past few hours since you and I read it. :shrug:

find out what the foundations of the award are. A simple Google search turns up all the information, but the knee-jerk reflex seems to kick in instantly.

The Nobel Peace Prize is what it is...an award by a committee which has, as its mission, fulfilling the will of Alfred Nobel. It is that simple, and the will is there to be read.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

You may have a lot of unrecs today though; some don't like a dose of facts blurring their rhetoric.

Yeah, I know but it gives me satisfaction knowing that haters cannot say they speak the truth about the Prize and the reasoning behind awarding it to Obama. He is exactly who the committee was looking for and fulfills their requirements beautifully.

and to strongly support the politics that moves in the direction of peace even during times of war. You're very welcome and thank you!

and why. They have their goals, and those are all that matter in the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize. What the rest of us think is irrelevant.

The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded by a committee. They award it to whomever they think best meets the criteria they must follow. It is their decision, and second-guessing it is an exercise in futility.

It is the Nobel Peace Prize, not the DU Favorite Guy Award. It's not the GOP Peace Prize. It has nothing to do with American politics. It is the Nobel Peace Prize. Only their committee has any right to explain how and why President Obama was awarded it. They have said why.

That is it.

Congratulations, Mr. President!

IMO it's telling that some people seem to be willfully ignoring the reason for this award.

in the award and who awards it. The Committee is simply carrying out the wishes of Alfred Nobel. They can do nothing else.

They have selected President Obama. That is all that any of us should be concerned about. It is their award; it is their criteria.

Again, Congratulations, President Obama. What more is to be said?

:kick:

5.Laureates must be more than skilled diplomats; it is important for them also to be able to stand out as symbols of good will. Only then can the Peace Prize contribute, in the words of Laureate Elie Wiesel, "to turning history into a moral endeavour."


W was not a "skilled diplomat", was not a symbol of good will, and did not have any moral endeavors.

:rofl: I laugh and cry at the same time. What a mess of a man and how bizarre is it that we have a president who wasn't even trying for the award, got it and it makes many fume. W did a fine job turning things upside down and inside out.

:kick: