Friday, October 07, 2005


IAEA, El Baradei Awarded Nobel Peace Prize

So what?

The Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to the International Atomic Energy Agency and its chief Mohamed ElBaradei. The reasoning given:
The Norwegian Nobel Institute's prize committee said it hoped that the prize will strengthen the United Nations organization and refocus energy on nonproliferation in the wake of a failure to strengthen the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty at a United Nations conference earlier this year.

"The director general has stood out as an unafraid advocate," the Nobel committee chairman, Ole Danbolt Mjoes, said in making the announcement beneath crystal chandeliers in a small vaulted room on the third floor of the Norwegian Nobel Institute in Oslo. He added that the I.A.E.A.'s work is of incalculable importance "at a time when disarmament efforts appear deadlocked, when there is a danger that nuclear arms will spread both to states and to terrorist groups, and when nuclear power again appears to be playing an increasingly significant role."

Mr. Mjoes said the award to Mr. ElBaradei was not meant as a veiled criticism of Washington or of Mr. Bush. "This is not a kick in the legs to any country," he told reporters gathered for the announcement. A former committee chairman described the 2002 prize to former President Jimmy Carter as a "kick in the legs" to Mr. Bush
Considering the recent its track record, the Nobel committee could have done worse. Jack Kelly comments:
I suppose we should be grateful that the Nobel Committee gave the prize to an appeaser of terrorists rather than to a terrorist himself, as the Nobel Committee did when they awarded the prize to the late, unlamented Yassir Arafat.
As in the past, the intent of the award is to influence diplomatic negotiations, not in recognition of any actual achievement in advancing the cause of peace.

The Nobel Foundation is a transnational activist organization with an openly political agenda:
In his will, Alfred Nobel wrote that the Peace Prize should, among other criteria, be awarded to whoever had done most for the "abolition or reduction of standing armies". In its application of this criterion in recent decades, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has concentrated on the struggle to diminish the significance of nuclear arms in international politics, with a view to their abolition. That the world has achieved little in this respect makes active opposition to nuclear arms all the more important today.
This begs the question: Why, exactly, is this award newsworthy?


<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?