Fredrik S. Heffermehl
Lawyer, author and Nobel historian
fredpax /a/ online.no, SKYPE: paxfred – http://www.nobelwill.org

Who will win the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize?

Many forms of peace work qualify and I was not so interested in who would win as in why. There can be no doubt that the EU has not actively pursued the global peace order Nobel wished to support. Its ambition is to be a strong regional power, with rapid deployment forces, strong arms production and arms trade, it possesses nuclear capabilities via two countries - it is a union for use of force, not for demilitarization of international affairs. The committee has not made the slightest effort to explain how the winner has contributed to the peace vision of Nobel. The 2012 prize adds to a great scandal, Jagland is not using honest language and should leave the Nobel committee, and the Council of Europe should also examine what his handling of the Nobel prize during 3 years has to say about his suitability as Secretary General of a body with a main responsibility for promoting democracy and rule of law in the European area.

An order from Swedish authorities in March 2012 has far-reaching consequences for the Norwegian awarders. The order required the Norwegian Nobel committee to read the will, follow Nobel´s intentions not their own, and placed the Oslo Nobel awarders under strict supervision of the Swedish Nobel Foundation in Stockholm.

Nobel´s intention was clear, the will is easy to read. Nobel wished a demilitarization of international relations. The veteran Norwegian politicians in the Nobel Committee adhere to the opposite approach and have been unwilling to promote Nobel´s peace vision. Tin reality the prize has for decades been the Norwegian Parliament´s peace prize, not Nobel´s. In reality many forms of peace work can qualify, I only expect the committee to show what the winner has done for the global peace order that Nobel had in mind.

Many people in the world are living in misery and we all live under a deadly threat of extinction as a result of global militarism. I hope citizens of all nations will one day unite in throwing off the yoke of militarism. We are spending astronomic sums on what we call ”security” but which actually is assured insecurity. The great military machinery of the world is doing its best to nurture fear and conflict in order for itself to prosper, in reality they are unpatriotic and do their best to prosper with no visible consideration of the common interest. We all suffer the costs and the risks.

This system is not offering security, not protecting our interests – but the Norwegian politicians do not have the imagination to see the new international system that Nobel envisioned. It is time for the peoples of the world to rally behind Nobel and insist that the Norwegian politicians stand up for the common interest in creating a global peace order.

The last three years, with Thorbjørn Jagland as the committee chair has seen some of the worst winners in the history of the prize. The use of the prize to please the USA has a long history, but was never as pronounced as in this period. One year the president of the one superpower, the next year a dissident in China, last year an African president, of Liberia, who, having assisted US militarism, was an American favorite. This line of candidates bears a distinct mark of the committee secretary, Geir Lundestad, who was a professor of modern US history and whose academic career has consisted in analyzing military power games rather than how to abolish them.

The role of Jagland, the Nobel committee chair, is particularly disappointing. He is the Secretary General of the Council of Europe whose purpose is two-pronged, promote democracy and the rule of law. The way Jagland has been handling the Nobel prize has implied sabotage of the honest and fact-based discourse that is indispensible to democracy, it cannot function without. In addition the misuse of entrusted funds is normally a case for the police.