|
A
Political Prize
A Committee of Five
| Why a Norwegian Nobel Committee?
| The Independence of the Committee
| From Nomination to Ceremony & Nominators
and Campaigns | Professional Advisers
| The Norwegian Nobel committee has decided...
To decide who has done the most to promote peace is a highly
political matter, and scarcely a matter of cool scholarly
judgement. The task requires an ability and a will to view
conflicts in the world community as objectively as possible
while keeping a strong commitment to certain common moral
and political principles. Should the members of the Nobel
Committee be expected to have such qualifications? Is it possible
for five individuals from a small country on the northern
periphery of Europe to make decisions on the basis of some
universal interpretation of peace? Isn't it more likely that
their judgements would either be in accordance with the national
interest of their country or divided along the same ideological
lines which distinguish Norway's political parties from one
another? Critical questions and protests against the decisions
of the Norwegian Nobel Committee have been raised on a number
of occasions since 1901. As a matter of fact, some people
strongly objected to the whole idea that a Norwegian body
should be given the task of awarding the peace prize. Until
1905, Norway and Sweden were in a union under a common Swedish-Norwegian
king. The Norwegian parliament was increasingly dominated
by national liberals who worked to further Norwegian self-governance
within the union, and eventually to dissolve the union altogether.
Swedish conservatives feared that the Norwegians would abuse
the peace prize in their struggle for nationalistic ends.
|
|
