Firstly, I confess to knowing nothing of Liu Xiaobo until recent news stories about the Chinese government’s attempts to twist the arm of the Peace Prize committee against granting him the award. So I do not profess to be in a position to make any judgement about his worthiness for the award. Yes, I can spend some time investigating the links others have provided on this thread, to become better informed. But at the moment, rather than making any attempt to pass judgement, it is more a point of order I am seeking to make.
Yes, this award does have something of a history of political and diplomatic considerations that don’t necessarily have any obvious connections with the promotion of peace. Surely Kissinger was one of the most controversial winners of the award. Last year, as some other wag pointed out, it wasn’t so much The Obama Award as the Not George Bush Award.
Absolutely, if Liu is the right person for the award then it is important that the Chinese government’s attempts to intimidate the committee are shown to be utterly ineffective. But, is there perhaps a legitimate question mark over whether the award is correct or not. That is not, in any way, to question whether his cause has been perfectly noble, his means perfectly justified, and his achievements significant and important. But have they actually been about the promotion of peace? This is not supposed to be the Nobel Prize for the heroic facing down of a brutish and inhumane regime. It’s supposed to be the Nobel Prize for the most significant contribution to removing tension, easing conflict, promoting conditions for long-term peace. Is this perhaps another demonstration of the fact that this prize is not, in fact, what it purports to be.
, Le Duc Tho). Clearly, I don’t understand how people are nominated.
)
.
