Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 7,207
- 25
The basis (even if not strictly adhered to) for the Nobel Prizes is spelled out in Statute #1 of the Nobel Foundation charter, and the portion relevant to the Peace Prize is:waht said:It meant to be a sarcastic comment. Yesteryear's award was JUST for getting elected, this year's it's for resisting human oppressing and spending most of one's life in prison for it. Sound's like a quantum leap.
...and one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.
In last year's thread, one of the participants <cough> listed the following contributions (of the top of his head) that seemed relevant to the criteria spelled out above:
1. Fraternity between nations:
Egypt speech; interview with Al-arabiya; reopening talks with Syria; restarting negotiations with Iran (and possibly gaining the biggest enrichment related concession from them yet); denouncing expansion of Israeli settlements in occupied territories yet pressing forward towards a roadmap via Clinton, Mitchell, Gates, Jim Jones (NSA) et al; aiding in the final phase of the normalization process between Turkey & Armenia; improving relations with Russia and China, lifting restrictions on Americans visiting relatives in Cuba...
2. Abolition or reduction of standing armies:
I don't see very much here in terms of reducing the size of the operating US military, but that may partly be from my ignorance. One thing that comes to mind is his rejection of expanding the F-22 inventory. And indirectly, the work towards easing up the Turkey-Armenia conflict may be the best chance yet for a troop reduction in Nagorno-Karabakh. Also, the rethinking of the European missile defense program is no doubt a huge de-escalating factor for military force in the Eastern Europe-Russia-Ukraine-Belarus region, and has also led to improved relations between NATO and Russia. Also, in terms of not taking actions that would cause a troop escalation, you can put down the smart decision of not jumping on the "Georgia good, Russia bad" bandwagon during the conflict in Georgia/S. Ossetia, in which we now know Georgia (the state, not its people) was no innocent victim.
3. Holding and promotion of peace congresses:
Calling for and chairing the UNSC meeting on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, leading to resolution 1887.
Not aware of any other "peace conferences" other than the Summit of the Americas meeting that happened earlier - and I don't recall anything noteworthy about it, but that too may just be a result of my ignorance of the proceedings.
From my reading of that list, it seems like the recipient managed to do a little more than JUST get elected.