
The Nobel Peace Prize for 2014 - linux_devil
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2014/press.html
======
soneca
If you won any other Nobel Prize (including the literature) is because you
deserve it. If you won the Peace Prize, is only partially because you deserve
it, but also because you need it.

Nobel Peace Prize laureates are usually taking a stand on controversial topics
in their own countries/communities. They need an international prestigious
stamp to show that they are on the right side of history and have
international support. But also you need to deserve it. Malala has the perfect
balance of both. She is incredibly smart, self-conscious, has a natural sense
of dignitiy and integrity that protect her from the traps of ego and fame -
something very hard to do for any human being, let alone a teenager. She is
making quite an impact on girl's education. But also she needs it badly. Her
life is constantly in danger and this stamp and support from the Nobel Prize
will protect her life and her struggle. More people in her community will
consider that she might be right.

Red Cross is another example of both deserving and needing the prize. They
must enter the worst war zones, and all sides must believe they are not spies
for the enemy. Their brand is the most important brand in the world.

Then you have Obama. His prize is controversial because he obviously didn't
deserve it. But the commitee thought he needded it, and I agree. Not because
he needed more power or validation, like Malala. But he could use a "nudge" to
improve peace in the world. Sure, it was a risky move - and didn't pay well.
But it is part of the goal of Nobel Peace Prize as I see it: help the
laureates to do the right thing toward peace. So I don't think it was a
necessarily bad move. But it surely hurts its brand. I think the commitee
should be more conservative about who deserves its prize; but I agree that is
also important to find who need it.

~~~
MichaelApproved
To understand why Obama won the prize, you need to understand _about_ the
history of the prize. The prizes were created because Nobel was upset that his
invention of TNT caused so much destruction in the world. At the time, TNT was
a WMD.

Obama's worked to reduce nuclear weapons while in the US Senate. That effort
would've made Nobel proud.

Further, Obama recently removed Syria's declared chemical weapon stock pile.
If he didn't earn it before this, he definitely earned it now. This is
directly at the heart of why the Nobel prize was created.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize)

 _In 1888, Nobel was astonished to read his own obituary, titled The merchant
of death is dead, in a French newspaper. As it was Alfred 's brother Ludvig
who had died, the obituary was eight years premature. The article disconcerted
Nobel and made him apprehensive about how he would be remembered. This
inspired him to change his will._

~~~
beeworker
I believe you mean Putin removed Syria's declared chemical weapon stock pile
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_of_Syria%27s_chemic...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_of_Syria%27s_chemical_weapons))
-- without Russia the US could have officially gone to war with Syria. The
continued meddling Obama's supported in the middle east, and the utter failure
in taking ISIS seriously, should be enough to strip him of any peace price.

~~~
kolev
Isn't US at war already breaching the sovereignty of Syria by bombing its
territory and training and supplying mercenaries with arms?

------
BetaCygni
Should we still take the Nobel Peace Prize seriously? Obama winning it was a
bit of a stretch in my opinion, though the Pax Americana is a real thing.

~~~
erokar
We should not. It's nation branding and it's politicized (I'm Norwegian btw).
The members of the committee are appointed by the Norwegian parliment and are
mainly former politicians. We all knew they would never have the balls to give
it to Snowden. To me, that proves the impotence of the prize.

~~~
aric
Gandhi didn't receive a Nobel Peace Prize. Snowden is in good company. It's
company with the rest of the world at that.

~~~
q2
please, name is "Gandhi" not "Ghandi".

~~~
aric
Funny, I had edited it just before you said that. I know but it's muscle
memory in typing Ghana.

------
mef
Interesting that the section of the press release about Malala doesn't mention
that she was shot in the face for her activist work, and kept doing it
regardless.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malala_Yousafzai](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malala_Yousafzai)

~~~
varjag
Nobel Peace Prize is supposed to be results-oriented, it's not an award for
personal heroism.

~~~
discardorama
Tell that to those who gave it to Obama.

------
rverghes
I think they should put a 10-20 year waiting limit on the Peace price. Give
history some time to see what actually happened. Not to denigrate Malala, she
sounds like an amazing young women. But I don't see that she has actually
accomplished anything yet. Maybe in 20 years the quality of life and education
for women in Islamic countries will have gone up notably, and she will have
been identified as the catalyst for that. Then she will definitely deserve the
prize.

But right now it sounds like feel-good wishful thinking.

I think that giving the prize to the people who contributed the most for peace
in 1994 or earlier would give us some perspective, some confirmation that what
they actually did worked and led to a better, more peaceful world.

------
simplekoala
It is a shame that Indian government never even conferred a Padma award to
Kailash Satyarthi
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padma_Shri](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padma_Shri))
but was bestowing these awards in abundance to corrupt and classless
politicians and journalists (Rajdeep Sardesai, Burkha Dutt)

Govt of India and Indian media was probably caught off-guard by this
development.

~~~
simplekoala
Check out his list of awards on
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kailash_Satyarthi](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kailash_Satyarthi).
None from India?

------
tokenadult
I did some looking up on pages of the linked website here to see what the
criteria are for choosing winners of the Nobel Prize for world peace. First,
one must be nominated by an eligible nominator:[1]

"Who may nominate candidates for the Peace Prize?

"According to the statutes of the Nobel Foundation, a nomination is considered
valid if it is submitted by a person who falls within one of the following
categories:

"Members of national assemblies and governments of states

"Members of international courts

"University rectors; 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; (proposals by
members of the Committee to be submitted no later than at the first meeting of
the Committee after February 1)

"Former advisers to the Norwegian Nobel Committee"

Then there is a process for choosing a prize winner or prize winners for the
year from among the list of nominees:[2]

"At the first meeting of the Nobel Committee after the February 1 deadline for
nominations, the Committee's Permanent Secretary presents the list of the
year's candidates. The Committee may on that occasion add further names to the
list, after which the nomination process is closed, and discussion of the
particular candidates begins. In the light of this first review, the Committee
draws up the so-called short list - i.e. the list of candidates selected for
more thorough consideration. The short list typically contains from twenty to
thirty candidates.

"The candidates on the short list are then considered by the Nobel Institute's
permanent advisers. In addition to the Institute's Director and Research
Director, the body of advisers generally consists of a small group of
Norwegian university professors with broad expertise in subject areas with a
bearing on the Peace Prize. The advisers usually have a couple of months in
which to draw up their reports. Reports are also occasionally requested from
other Norwegian and foreign experts.

"When the advisers' reports have been presented, the Nobel Committee embarks
on a thorough-going discussion of the most likely candidates. In the process,
the need often arises to obtain additional information and updates about
candidates from additional experts, often foreign. As a rule, the Committee
reaches a decision only at its very last meeting before the announcement of
the Prize at the beginning of October.

"The Committee seeks to achieve unanimity in its selection of the Peace Prize
Laureate. On the rare occasions when this proves impossible, the selection is
decided by a simple majority vote."

With that in mind, it's actually remarkable to me how often non-politicians
and non-jurists have won the Nobel Prize for world peace. Each year, the
committee has a lot of nominees to consider from a lot of different sources.
During the process of investigating nominees and seeking unanimity, a lot of
names fall out of consideration.

[1]
[http://nobelpeaceprize.org/en_GB/nomination_intro/nomination...](http://nobelpeaceprize.org/en_GB/nomination_intro/nomination_criteria/)

[2]
[http://www.nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/](http://www.nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/)

~~~
igivanov
What is even more remarkable is how often the winners (including the current
ones) have nothing to do with the original intent of the Prize.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Peace_Prize](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Peace_Prize)

"According to Nobel's will, the Peace Prize shall be awarded to the person who
in the preceding year "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.""

What you listed is just bureaucratic procedures and maneuvering. For tat, the
Nobel Committee deserves a Nobel Prize in Bureacracy.

------
sremani
I am still unable to understand what Malala is doing and why is she so great.
Of course she is way better than an average teenager but I just do not
understand the whole hoopla, she is safe and warm far away from SWAT valley in
UK, and get to rub shoulders with powerful people who are interested in photo-
op. Her ability to attain access is great but is it Nobel Peace Prize worthy.

Nobel Peace Prize lost shine for me. I still think their pure sciences awards
are the gold standard, on the border on economics and completely disappointed
in the peace prize.

~~~
Kalium
The Peace Prize has pretty much always been about trying to aid the efforts of
a person or organization rather than a recognition of achievement.

~~~
disputin
Sounds like it needs to be renamed. It has a serious image problem as it is.

------
dismal2
Just a reminder that there are baddies/evil-doers over there, keep the drone
war over Pakistan raging!

------
tiatia
What is so great about the Nobel peace prize if even a war criminal
extraordinaire like Churchill can get it?

Besides the death of thousands of German civilians:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repatriation_of_Cossacks_after_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repatriation_of_Cossacks_after_World_War_II)

[http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Others/Others-Doc-
History/+D...](http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Others/Others-Doc-History/+Doc-
History-WW2Period/MassMurdererChurchillHandsBackPrisonersToStalin.htm)

The only odd thing about this picture is: One guy is missing:
[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d2/Yalta_sum...](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d2/Yalta_summit_1945_with_Churchill%2C_Roosevelt%2C_Stalin.jpg)

~~~
tiatia
So, after Churchill and Yasser Arafat, I see Robert Mugabe and Fidel Castro as
serious contenders. Osama Bin Laden is out of the question since you have to
be alive to receive the prize.

------
enlightenedfool
Good that they got their focus back to real people who really worked for peace
instead of wolf-in-sheep's-clothing, grandiose politicians.

------
elastine
It is hard to justify this prize as anything but a popularity prize.

------
sanoli
Given all the talk about Obama winning the Peace Prize some time ago, here's
an explanation:

[http://superitch.com/images/2010/10/Sorensen1.jpg](http://superitch.com/images/2010/10/Sorensen1.jpg)

