SHORTLY now, if not already taking place, the Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize selection committee will be examining nominations for this year’s winner.
The result of this coveted and highly sought-after prize is expected to be announced in early October. This year’s winner will hold special significance amid hopes for the possible end of two of the bloodiest wars waged in recent times – in Gaza and Ukraine.
Should a temporary truce, if not a definitive and sustainable peace settlement, be negotiated to stop the casualties and deaths in these two killing fields – with the threat of expansion beyond their current territories and the possibility of nuclear weapons being brought into the fray – a contender, if not the favourite to win the prize, is US President Donald Trump.
This is due to his undeniable leading role in bringing together the key combatants and his pressure on them to arrive at whatever peace agreement is finally put in place – even if the agreement may be controversial and may not last long.
According to the Norwegian Nobel Institute, over 300 individuals and organisations have been nominated for this year’s prize. By convention, the identities of nominees are not publicly announced. However, nominating bodies such as academic organisations, scientists, lawmakers and former laureates are permitted to disclose their submissions.
Nominations are selected based on their achievements in relation to the following:
- Promoting peace agreements: Facilitating or brokering significant peace agreements between conflicting parties.
- Reducing international tensions: Working towards reducing tensions and potential conflicts between nations through diplomacy, treaties or negotiations.
- Humanitarian efforts: Leading or supporting large-scale humanitarian efforts that alleviate suffering and promote peace, including addressing poverty, disease and displacement.
- Disarmament: Advocating for and achieving significant progress in global disarmament, particularly in the reduction of nuclear weapons.
- Promoting democracy and human rights: Supporting democracy, human rights and the rule of law in regions where these are under threat.
- Environmental peace-building: Linking environmental sustainability with peace-building, as environmental issues can be a source of conflict.
- Public advocacy: Using public platforms to advocate for peace and non-violence, influencing public opinion and policy.
Trump’s supporters will argue that he is the most outstanding leader working to end the current military conflicts in both war-torn regions and that his work for peace surpasses that of Pope Francis – an early favourite, in part due to the Western media’s coverage of his ailing health condition.
Another early favourite is former Nato secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg, whose nomination by his fellow Norwegian colleagues in Norway’s parliament is surprising, given his consistent stance as a war hawk in Europe and elsewhere, including the Asia-Pacific region.
For now, Trump has one nomination from US Republican congressman Darrell Issa, who said on platform X that he had nominated Trump as “no one deserves it more.”
According to Issa’s office, the nomination was based on Trump’s diplomatic efforts in the Middle East. However, the nomination was submitted after the official deadline and may not be accepted.
What will influence the award?
No one should have any doubt that the peace prize selection is heavily influenced by the ideological positioning of the Norwegian government.
Winners have included the European Union (EU) in 2012, whose selection was unprecedented, unexpected and undeserving. They have also included former US president Barack Obama, who was awarded the prize just months into his presidency, with the committee citing his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.”
Obama subsequently, along with other Nato member countries, organised the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi’s legitimate Libyan government and was instrumental in enhancing the US military commitment to Afghanistan, as well as launching numerous airstrikes in Syria and Yemen that killed close to 4,000 people.
The secretary of the Norwegian committee later indicated that the award to Obama was a mistake, while Obama himself admitted on a television programme that he did not know why he received the award.
Likely to be against awarding the prize to Trump is the Norwegian government, especially if the peace agreement results in Russia taking control of Crimea and Ukraine is unable to become a Nato member.
The selection committee itself is appointed by the Norwegian parliament and is supposed to be independent. However, with members representing various political parties in Norway, the claim of independence and neutrality appears baseless and has little merit.
As a Nato member country closely aligned with the EU on foreign policy issues, Norway has not only been committed to supporting President Volodymyr Zelensky but has also provided Ukraine with substantial military and financial assistance, especially since Russia’s military incursion into Ukraine in 2022.
Trump has argued that Zelensky is gambling with World War III, but this possible scenario appears lost on the Norwegian government and other Nato countries determined to win peace through more war. Their strategy – backed by Nato and the EU – appears focused on securing Vladimir Putin’s and Russia’s capitulation, regardless of how long the conflict must continue, rather than embracing Trump’s transactional diplomacy aimed at stopping the massive loss of lives and destruction of infrastructure.
Trump’s stated concern – “I want the bloodshed to stop” – is clearly not a priority for the EU and Nato since they have no boots on the ground in what Russia regards as a proxy war instigated by Nato.
Surprise winner?
Should the prize committee be looking out for a global political figure to surprise the world with this year’s award, they may want to consider Chinese President Xi Jinping.
His contributions to global security and development, especially through his Belt and Road Initiative and leadership role in the BRICS grouping – which now comprises 55% of the world’s population and 46% of global GDP – meet most, if not all, of the selection criteria publicly listed for the award.
Lim Teck Ghee’s Another Take is aimed at demystifying social orthodoxy.
Comments: letters@thesundaily.com
