[ad_1]
MANAGER
Barack Obama builds on the criticism of his own peace prize the new autobiography. Criticism points to last year’s award, which is close to scandal.
REVIEW: Barack Obama published his new autobiography today. Among other things, he talks about the Peace Prize. Joe Raedle / Getty Images / NTB
see more
Manager: This is a Dagbladet editorial and expresses the views of the newspaper. Dagbladet’s political editor is responsible for the editorial.
“For what?” It was the first reaction of former President Barack Obama when he learned that he had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, he writes in his recent autobiography “A Promised Land.” The press secretary “listened tactfully to the question,” he says. In Oslo, Obama meets the sea of candlelit people outside the Grand Hotel and thinks about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He writes: “The idea that I, or any other human being, could create order out of such chaos seemed ridiculous – on one level, it was an illusion that the crowd there cheered.”
Obama gets the mention of the Peace Prize in his book in a polite way, but the criticism is not yet to be misunderstood. It is quite deadly. Obama felt that he had been given the prize poorly and that in practice it was up to him to try to define a solid justification.
The Nobel Peace Prize is still considered one of the most prestigious awards in the international community. The position is based on traditions and a flexible interpretation of the will that has allowed a series of interesting and good awards. The award not only comments on history and social developments, but also participates in it. It is a fortress, as we saw when the award went to Chinese human rights activist Liu Xiaobo in 2010. The Peace Prize raised the issue of human rights in China at a time when international attention focused on the events in the country was still weak.
But as the Obama example shows, it can also have quite insignificant results.
The activist The approach has also been shown to go completely wrong. Since before, the price of Aung San Suu Kyi has remained in disrepute. Having made a name for herself as an activist for peace and democracy, in recent years she has emerged from quite a different side. It culminated in his defense of what has been viewed as an attempted genocide by the Rohingya minority in Myanmar.
It also seems almost as wrong to go with last year’s award. Less than a year after Ethiopia’s Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed greeted the sea of people from the balcony of the Grand Hotel in Oslo, the country is now in an escalating armed conflict. Ahmed received the award based on the first important steps he took as Prime Minister. He released political prisoners, unleashed the media and made peace with Eritrea. International observers now point out that other seemingly conciliatory measures have also laid the groundwork for the conflict that has arisen. It is also speculated whether the Peace Prize has curbed criticism from abroad, which would otherwise have been stronger in the run-up to the conflict.
The Nobel Committee has The criticisms have probably already been heeded. This year’s award to the United Nations organization The World Food Program is more cautious. The lesson for the Nobel Committee may be as David Pilling, Africa editor at the Financial Times, writes in an article: When in doubt, you may want to wait.
[ad_2]
