Johana Lorduy – [email protected]
While many continue to cheer for the winners of the Nobel Peace Prize in recent years, there are those who continue to try to understand the compelling reasons that the Norwegian committee has had for granting this recognition.
In a recent publication in The New York Times, titled: Nobel Peace Prize: A Growing List of Questionable Choices written by editor Rick Gladstone, some names of winners are highlighted. questionable.
The previous criticism, the NYT article points out, is awakened after the measures of Abiy Ahmed, the prime minister of Ethiopia and who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2019, “to violently repress the Tigray region and risk sinking the second most populous country in Africa in disastrous civil war. “
In the text, Gladstone quotes Henrik Urdal, director and research professor at the Oslo Peace Research Institute, who analyzes the selections of the Nobel Peace Prize.
“The committee can always play it safe with candidates who are completely indisputable, because of past achievements,” said Henrik Urdal, director and research professor at the Oslo Peace Research Institute.
“But especially in recent years, the committee had tried to award prizes for processes, for trying to encourage the awardees to live up to the award, and that is extremely risky business,” Urdal said.
What is most striking is that among the questioned examples appears the name of former president Juan Manuel Santos, who in 2016 received the award.
According to the article: “Mr. Santos, President of Colombia at the time, was honored for his determined efforts to end the country’s more than 50-year civil war by trying to make peace with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia. , or FARC, a leftist guerrilla group. “
“The award was announced just days after Colombians narrowly rejected the peace agreement in a referendum, a deep shame for Santos. While a peace agreement was eventually pushed through the country’s legislature, recent events in the country suggest that it is once again descending into conflict, “he added.
For their part, others who appear referenced are the former president of the United States Barack Obama, who in 2009 won the Nobel Peace Prize; Kim Dae-jung, former president of South Korea and winner in 2000; Yasir Arafat, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin winners in 1994; and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991.
In the case of Obama, the article notes that: “just in his first term as president, Obama won” because of his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation among peoples. “But many critics, some supporters and even himself Obama questioned the election, since he had not yet achieved any significant results for the cause of world peace. “For what?” He recalled asking in his autobiography when he learned that he had been elected.
Furthermore: “Some commentators said the Nobel committee had made an” ambitious choice, “seeing potential in Obama’s hopes for a calmer world, marked by his desire to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But Obama he authorized an increase in US troops in Afghanistan and presided over a vast expansion in the drone strike program. It would also be a few more years before most of the US forces in Iraq left. “