The Nobel Peace Prize 2020

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2020/press-release/

by danielskogly • 6 years ago

111 81 6 years ago

nobelprize.org

JumpCrisscross• 6 years ago

Is the Peace Prize now just a grant program? When did that start?

antris• 6 years ago

What are you on about...?

TheRealNGenius• 6 years ago

always has been

onion2k2• 6 years ago

When did that start?

The Nobel Peace Prize was first awarded to an institution in 1904 - https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/1904/summary/ - so, to answer your question, 116 years ago.

ecommerceguy2• 6 years ago

I think he's talking about it being a grant program. Probably tongue in cheek as well.

Synaesthesia2• 6 years ago

One of the more deserving winners of this prize.

BurnGpuBurn• 6 years ago

Speaking of undeserved winners, I so hoped they would give it to the US president again...

radu_floricica• 6 years ago

Well, Obama got it for not being Bush so if Biden wins... They're gonna give him two?

rvz• 6 years ago

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2020 to the World Food Programme (WFP) for its efforts to combat hunger, for its contribution to bettering conditions for peace in conflict-affected areas and for acting as a driving force in efforts to prevent the use of hunger as a weapon of war and conflict.

Good. Giving recognition to often overlooked efforts like this is completely deserved and worthy of this prize.

swyx• 6 years ago

Im not sure why this is but I'm always happier about the prize going to an organization rather than an individual person. I think literally placing the entire weight of world peace on one person is too much, and it places that person under incredible scrutiny for the rest of their life (or conversely anything bad they personally did in the past gets dragged up). handing it to an org recognizes that it takes much more than a single person to effect change and puts the cause above identity or personal flaws.

Malala does seem to be handling it well, so what do I know.

thomasfl• 6 years ago

Totally agree. The European Union got the peace prize in 2012. Europa used to be most warn torn part of the world, and the origin of two world wars. Members states of the EU are expelled if they have armed conflicts with their neighbouring countries.

M2Ys4U• 6 years ago

Not exactly - there's no mechanism to expel a member state from the EU.

Member states may have "certain [...] rights deriving from the application of the Treaties to the Member State in question, including the voting rights of the representative of the government of that Member State in the Council" suspended, but "The obligations of the Member State in question under the Treaties shall in any case continue to be binding on that State." (Article 7 TEU)

The only way for a member state to cease being a member state is through the withdrawal process in Article 50 TEU (i.e. like Brexit).

yostrovs3• 6 years ago

The United States are still waiting for their peace prize on the same grounds. And the peace has lasted longer.

yitchelle• 6 years ago

Very much in agreement with you.

In this day and age, a single person having this level of impact on the world is rare. They might be the figure head, but there is usually a team behind the figure head that finally implements it. The team also deserve the recognition.

achow• 6 years ago

In 1998 'United Nations Peacekeeping Forces' [1] won the peace prize; and this particular winner (org had people from multiple countries) is true embodiment of the point - "it takes much more than a single person..".

[1] aka 'The Blue Helmets' https://i.ytimg.com/vi/d-2uMYBSL68/maxresdefault.jpg

dhyreueu• 6 years ago

Don't know if this one really aged well considering how rapey the blue helmets turned out to be. It's more of an Aung San Suu Kyi type of example.

yadco• 6 years ago

Donald Trump signed multiple peace deals this year

m0zg• 6 years ago

With more peace deals to come, by the way. Also he did not start any new wars, and started withdrawing US forces from the idiotic endless wars started by previous administrations. Donald Trump has done more for world peace than any US president since Reagan. It'd go further back than that, but Reagan defeated communism, which is pretty huge in itself.

addicted• 6 years ago

Somehow more forces in all the places he said he would withdraw forces from than the beginning of his term = withdrawal of forces?

The only genuine force withdrawal he did was in Syria, which will damage the US dramatically going forward because they completely abandoned their allies because Erdogan was able to sweet talk Donald Teump.

And the “peace deals” are a joke because they were signed between Israel and countries that were never hostile towards each other in the first place. UAE and Bahrain? It was simply Trump paying UAE/Bahrain your tax dollars for them to formally announce something that has always been the case, and Bibi doing the same so that Trump could continue to allow him to annex Palestinian land in peace to satisfy the most orthodox people in his country who are keeping him in power and saving him from prosecution.

And yeah, supplying arms to the Saudis so they can continue slaughtering the Yemenis and unilaterally breaking a peace deal so Iranians can die in massive numbers are not starting a war, but is causing civilian death tolls that are extremely high.

And sure, creating massive instability and allowing China to run free in most of Asia and Africa is also not starting a war, but is completely weakening the US and emboldening China in ways we couldn’t have imagined 5 years ago (for all his anti China talk, Trump has been remarkably weak against them, which isn’t surprising considering that until January the highlight of his tenure was gonna be a joke of a trade deal with China, and that he spent years without touching trade with China but slapping tariffs on all the US’s allies).

And of course, dismantling treaties with Russia, such as the open skies treaty for example, which was a completely one sided treaty in favor of the US and its allies only served to increase the risk of war.

And how about jumping into peace talks between S Korea and N Korea (S Korea’s new President was elected on the explicit platform of trying to restart peace discussions with N Korea) and derailing the entire process, by giving Kim exactly what he wanted...a photo op with the US president which he could promote within his own country, without getting anything in return (I guess the love letters from Kim to Donald Trump was something).

And we haven’t even gotten to the part where he and his have explicitly and implicitly supported and emboldened white supremacists in the US and Europe.

Donald Trump is best looked at as someone who never boiled the water, but definitely turned up the temperature so it’s hitting close to 190. He has taken decades of goodwill and trust, and burned it so he could claim minor victories which hurt the US massively but can be something for him to crow about.

It requires an extremely narrow way of looking at the world (at basically the PR level) to think Donald Teump is even close to being net positive for world peace.

contravariant2• 6 years ago

No matter what he did it's a bad idea to give the Nobel Peace Prize to someone so divisive.

kabouseng• 6 years ago

For example someone like Obama...?

not_a_moth• 6 years ago

Try listening to his addresses and speeches over the last couple years, and look at the policies he's implemented. Look at all the dishonest coverage, and yes his blunt way of talking doesn't help, but it's still hard not to conclude that the media is the primary source of him being considered divisive.

netcan2• 6 years ago

Well....

Politicians like to be recognized as "great" and a the Nobel Peace Prize does appeal to many. Trump's desire is a good example. If you avoid controversial figures, you avoid using the prize as a motivator exactly where you need it.

For example, Begin/Sadaat and Arafat/Rabin. The first peace worked out. The second one didn't. But, all four of these people led a pretty violent life as militaristic and nationalistic leaders. They're all extremely controversial in the middle east, and in their own countries.

I definitely don't think avoiding divisive political figures is a good. thing. That said, I don't think he's earned one.

altacc4• 6 years ago

Out of curiosity, please list these recent peace deals.

If the UAE/Baharin normalization with Israel is on that list, them remove it. Getting two countries, who are not in conflict, to acknowledge each other and begin a formal relationship is definitely not a peace deal. A peace deal needs to involve the warring parties, which this did not.

crusso2• 6 years ago

That's a ridiculous amount of hair splitting. The normalization of diplomatic relations between Israel and major powers in the Middle East is a huge win for anyone who cares about peace.

It's astounding to me that people hate Trump so much that they refuse to recognize the historicity of this moment. We're seeing a fundamental change in the dynamics of a conflict that has been ongoing for generations, and there's no denying that a huge impetus for that change has been a rethinking of how to solve the problem by the Trump administration.

sabana• 6 years ago

So by your logic there would always have to be wars for there to be a Peace prize? What about keeping the peace? Preventing a war?

9HZZRfNlpR• 6 years ago

Not listening and getting rid of Bolt? Anyone who was alive during Bush administration all around the world, and want world peace, cheered for the decision.

scottlocklin2• 6 years ago

Forgot about this one already?

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/1978/ceremony-speech...

Synaesthesia2• 6 years ago

Frankly if Obama won it, so should Trump.

collyw3• 6 years ago

Trump is far more deserving. He has been far more anti-war than Obama.

altacc4• 6 years ago

One-upping Obama seems to be a primary motivation for Trump, but it’s not how awards work. Just because Obama got the peace prize when he shouldn’t have doesn’t mean Trump should also get it when he shouldn’t have. Two wrongs not making a right and all that.

collyw3• 6 years ago

Lost all credibility to me when they gave it to Obama despite him not doing anything.

crumbshot2• 6 years ago

And people like Henry Kissinger and Shimon Peres before that. I agree, this prize is a nonsense.

But then it's lacked credibility from the start. Nobel only funded it to help rebrand his anticipated legacy, to offset being remembered as "le marchand de la mort".

jasonlotito• 6 years ago

This is decidedly not true. You can do your own research as to why he was given it, as well as the process involved. To suggest he did nothing is a flat out lie.

collyw3• 6 years ago

Why don't you point out something he did rather than claiming it is a lie? If your claim is that he did something to deserve it, then the onus is on you to prove it.

Here is the first link I get returned for Obama Peace Prize"

https://nypost.com/2019/11/02/why-obama-got-a-nobel-peace-pr...

It even says: “It is true, Obama did not do much before winning,” Lundestad, 74, a member of Norway’s Nobel Committee until 2014, told The Post.

Second link I got returned is this: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34277960

"Nobel secretary regrets Obama peace prize"

zeveb• 6 years ago

To suggest he did nothing is a flat out lie.

The deadline for nominations was eleven days after his inauguration. What did he do in those eleven days — other than not being Mr. Bush — that made him merit the prize?

Seriously, when I saw the headline here on HN I thought, 'oh sheesh, what now?' and was pleasantly surprised to see it go to a deserving organisation this year. That is how poor their decision 11 years ago was: over a decade later and I view the award with suspicion.B

refurb2• 6 years ago

It seems more like the Time magazine “Person of the year” cover.

Stalin and Hitler both graced the cover at various points in time.

EForEndeavour• 6 years ago

Time Person of the Year does sound like a prize, and I'd guess most people do think of it as a honour, but it's explicitly not that. The "Person of the Year" is some person, group, idea, or thing that Time Magazine decides "for better or for worse... has done the most to influence the events of the year" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Person_of_the_Year)

cgtyoder• 6 years ago

Yasser Arafat - still the only person to hijack a plane and win the Nobel Peace Prize.

netcan2• 6 years ago

So far...

The prize going to political leaders has been a mixed bag. Aung San Suu Kyi didn't turn out, for a recent example. The Arafat/Rabin choice seems poor in retrospect, but ATT it would have seemed like a similar choice to Begin/Sadaat a few years earlier. The latter peace did work out.

None of these people were pure white snow. All four were aggressive, militaristic nationalists for all their life. They all made peace though, or tried.

These are the kinds of choices that make the Peace Prize actually active. Politicians seek recognition, usually. I think venerating them for peacefulness does actually motivate. Trump wants one, for example. If an opportunity was there, I think he might have actually taken it just to get the prize.

drichel• 6 years ago

Menachem Begin bombed the King David Hotel

lokl2• 6 years ago

When I unexpectedly found myself responsible for feeding 100 people at imminent risk of starvation, half way around the world, WFP made it happen. Not only did they make an urgent delivery, they paved the way for a partnership with the Food and Agriculture Organization to set up a sustainable way for the people to feed themselves long-term (chickens: eggs to eat and to sell to buy other food). When talking about food security, even small numbers like this have an enormous impact, and it is truly mind-boggling to consider the overall impact of their work.

bigyikes• 6 years ago

How do you unexpectedly find yourself in a situation like that?

lokl2• 6 years ago

I was helping these people with a different type of need (non-life-threatening), then later the food security situation developed and nobody else seemed to be able/willing to help, so I changed my focus. As I imagine is often the case where WFP is concerned, the population was especially vulnerable due to pre-existing medical conditions.

known• 6 years ago

And Modi regime in India wasted 1500 tons of food grains https://thewire.in/government/food-corporation-of-india-godo...

flobosg• 6 years ago

The Handwriting on the Wall, from Aaron Swartz:

I recently attended a talk at Stanford by Walter Bradford Ellis, a too-little-known activist and writer on the issue of global poverty and world hunger.

http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/handwritingwall

tomohawk• 6 years ago

WFP needs ‘systemic overhaul’ to limit abusive behaviour: external review

https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news/2019/10/14/WFP-Unite...

The Nobel Peace Prize 2020

Related Stories