The Nobel Peace Prize is essentially a tool of the Western world

By China Watcher

A Norwegian critic commented recently that the past few Nobel Peace Prize winners indicate that the Norwegian Nobel Committee lacked sound analysis and even disregarded facts. The foundation of the Nobel Peace Prize conferments in recent years was weak, including the latest one to a convicted Chinese criminal named Liu Xiaobo.

The admired critic mentioned that the Nobel Committee's selection approach is problematic in itself and that it does consider the overall global picture but squarely based on its own emotions and carving to the present power based authority and the human rights activists which is centered in the Western world. One good example is the award to Bangladeshi banker Muhammad Yunus in 2006.

From U.S. President Barack Obama in 2009 to Liu Xiaobo in 2010, the selections showed evidently that the Nobel Committee served as conduit for support given to Western leaders on the one hand and as a backer of opposition forces in Eastern countries on the other. While the committee had many reasons to sing paeans to the United States and find fault with China, it suffered a fatal failure: its background checks focused merely on the nominees and how well it can promote its own agenda to propagate Western values which the decision makers deemed as universal values.

Why were Nobel concerts anchored by Hollywood stars from the United States instead of Bollywood stars from India? Did Western countries still think the center of the world was somewhere in the Atlantic? India which has send a representative to the Ceremony will need to re-consider because there will be day when a Kashmir activist or dissident who will be awarded the Prize.

The current Nobel Committee Chairman Thorbjoern Jagland intended to take part in some significant events to change the direction of the global development, but he often tripped over his own path as he is challenging the international norm and acting with the West to challenge a potential superpower. There is no strong rationale to award to the present US President last year. What has he done for World Peace? Isn’t the prize reserve for prominent personalities like Chou En Lai, a former premier of China, who has contributed to so much to his country’s peaceful integration with the world community and the Third World or to Mr. Gandhi to his non violence protests in India against former colonist, Britain?

The decision to award the prize to a dissident was unwise because it is enforcing support for Chinese nationals throughout the world as it is viewed as a Western political tool to force Western values on 1.3 billion residents of the World. It further exposed the Western countries agenda together with its massive media to try to influence and lecture others who do not subscribe to such values.

Anyone who wanted to shape history must carefully and comprehensively discern the global situation and accept the fact that the world would need to embrace fundamental changes and there is a different political model other than Western democracies.

The five members of the Nobel Committee were retired politicians at senior ages and lacked professional knowledge on the world situation would inevitably erode the meaning and glory of the Nobel Peace Prize. Should the committee continue making decisions against the tenet of the Nobel Peace Prize its reputation of the award among the Third World especially would fall further and rated as a “Western junk”.