Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern delivers her address to the United Nations General Assembly in New York. Photo / UN
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern delivers her address to the United Nations General Assembly in New York. Photo / UN
COMMENT
President Donald Trump is currently making waves as he tries to position himself for the Nobel Peace Prize, which will be announced on Friday, October 11. He is suggesting he is deserving of this award, "for a lot of things" but has not received one yet because they arenot given out fairly. It appears to irk him that, "they gave one to Obama".
The President is making these noises, as the bookies place the chances of his winning as 12th best. The front-runner is the young climate change activist Greta Thunburg. The 2nd placed favourite, but a bit behind the front-runner, is the New Zealand Prime Minister, Jacinda Adern. Reporters without Borders is running very close behind at third.
These names and organisations are part of this years' pool of 301 candidates, which have to be carefully sifted through by the five members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, as appointed by the Norwegian Parliament. This body distributes both the award and the funds (about US$925,000) that go with each award in broad accordance with the will of Alfred Nobel, who made his fortune out of his invention of dynamite. His bequest to humanity (in addition to his explosives) was for an annual gift to those, "who during the preceding year have conferred the greatest benefit to humankind".
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. File photo / Peter Meecham
Although there are Nobel awards for Chemistry, Physics, Medicine and Literature, the most well known of them all, is the Nobel Peace Prize. Since 1901, this award has been handed out annually when there have been worthy recipients, to those who have, "done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition of reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses".
The adaptation and application of this language over the subsequent decades has not always been free of controversy. Sometimes, the most obvious choices (like Mahatma Gandhi) did not get the Peace Prize, while at other times, some, like Aung San Suu Ky of Burma did get it (for her non-violent struggle for democracy and human rights), but many are currently questioning the wisdom of that decision. For 2019, the 301 number divides into 223 individuals and 78 organisations.
The organisation which is running as third favourite, Reporters Without Borders has never been awarded the Peace Prize, but is currently a serious contender, due to the context relating to the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi Arabian officials.
President Trump has a few considerations in his favour. As a geographical group, more prize winners come from America than any other country. In addition, next to religious leaders who are the dominant group of recipients over the Nobel history (with names like Mother Teresa, Desmond Tutu and the Dalai Lama being familiar to most), the next most well represented group is American presidents. Four American leaders have received the award, with three of them getting it for their work in peace initiatives, whereas with Barrack Obama in 2009, his primarily qualification seems to have been not being George W Bush. A secretary of state (Henry Kissinger, jointly with his Vietnamese counterpart Le Duc Tho, for ending the Vietnam War), got it, as did two American Vice-Presidents.
The other pattern that suits Donald Trump, is that although the Peace Prize is moving towards gender equity in current times, historically, it has been overwhelmingly awarded to men, with the chances for a women winning Nobel distinction being much greater in any of the other scholarly prizes – than with peace.
Also, in terms of age structure, the award tends to go to more mature citizens, with the average age of peace prize winners being in their early sixties. Malala Yousafzai (the young woman the Taliban tried to execute) the prize's youngest ever winner at 17, was an anomaly.
Greta Thunburg's case is strong because she is the antithesis of many of these patterns noted above. She is only 16 years old, female, and has become both the alarm bell for the planet and the voice for a new generation which has woken the populace from its slumber, warning of real danger ahead. This thematic focus is particularly important to the Nobel Committee, which had previously awarded the prize to both Al Gore and the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change, for their work around global warming.
Although the New Zealand Prime Minister does not command the same global media coverage as Greta Thunburg, the depth of her response to the Christchurch Massacre, on March 15, has made her in the eyes of many people the best candidate for the award. The justification here is twofold.
First, the sincerity, empathy and compassion she displayed towards the families of the victims and the Muslim community they come from, was unique in an age when tolerance, respect and reconciliation are rare.
Second, her legislative and policy agenda, from the reform of gun laws, to the Royal Commission to find out how the risk slipped past the authorities; through to the international initiative in the form of the Christchurch Call to try to tether the worst parts of the internet, is ground-breaking.
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern's response to victims and families after the Christchurch terror attack was unique in an age when tolerance, respect and reconciliation are rare. Photo / Getty Images
These efforts shine even brighter when juxtaposed to the failures of other countries to respond appropriately or even make serious attempts to prevent such atrocities recurring.
The Norwegian decision makers, who suffered their own mass shooting in 2011, will be sure to have these considerations in mind as they try to speak for humanity, for who is the most deserving person in making the world a better place, for 2019.
