The Message in the Prize
President Bush will not be amused by the Nobel Prize awarded to Mohamed ElBaradei and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), predicts the Age in Australia.
"Intentionally or not, the decision ... is a rebuke to United States President George Bush," says the Melbourne daily.
While Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice offered congratulations, observers in the international online media expressed no doubt the rebuke was intentional.
The Times of London calls it an undeserved "slap in the face" for the United States.
Foreign editor Bronwen Maddox writes that ElBaradei and the IAEA "have failed to detect covert nuclear programmes in at least three countries - and failed to get diplomatic purchase on the problems when others have finally brought them to light. That does not amount to a contribution to world peace.
ElBaradei's only correct call, he says, was "the one most provocative to the US: that Iraq, in 2003, had no significant nuclear programme."
The Guardian was more approving, saying the Norwegian Nobel Committee has "returned to sticking its neck out."
The committee's recent awards -- to Kenyan environmentalist Wangari Maathai in 2004, Iranian human rights activist Shirin Ebadi in 2003 and former U.S. president Jimmy Carter in 2002 -- "were well deserved but essentially about recognising people the international community had overlooked," says Guardian blogger Simon Jeffery.
"Coming after the oil-for-food report and a spike in UN bashing, largely from the US right, the award to the IAEA, a UN agency, is also a boost to the world organisation and an endorsement of the principles of multilateral diplomacy," he writes.
More than one news story recalled The Washington Post's story from last June that John R. Bolton (now U.N. ambassador) had waged an intensive behind the scenes effort to oust ElBaradei from his job. The Bush administration abandoned the effort when it found that all of its allies favored retaining the Egyptian-born head of the nuclear watchdog agency for a third term.
There was no immediate official reaction from Iran, but it may not be positive. The Islamic Republic News Agency reported Friday that hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was attending a government-sponsored rally in defense of Iran's nuclear program on Friday, around the time the Nobel Peace Prize was announced. One demonstrator carried a sign reading "Board of Governors' resolution is US plot."
That resolution, criticizing Iran's noncompliance with IAEA inspections, was unanimously approved last month under ElBaradei's leadership.
The Russian government, which has resisted the European and U.S. pressure campaign on Iran, called the selection "right and absolutely irreproachable," according to MosNews.
Anti-nuclear activists and environmentalists in France are indignant, though few chose to be quoted by name, reports Liberation, the left-wing Paris daily. The unnamed sources say that the IAEA covered up the true extent of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster 20 years ago and has effectively promoted the spread of nuclear weapons.
The Norway Post says history played a role in the choice, citing both the 60th anniversary of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan and "the committee's habit of awarding anti-nuclear activists at ten-year intervals."
"In 1995, British ban-the-bomb scientist Joseph Rotblat won with his Pugwash organisation. In 1985, the award went to a US-Soviet group of doctors, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War," the Oslo-based site noted.
By Jefferson Morley |
October 7, 2005; 12:19 PM ET
| Category:
Global
Previous: Who's In Charge? |
Next: The Radical Gardener
Posted by: WOW | October 7, 2005 02:23 PM
What a joke the "nobel" prize, we should let the whole group move to another country!
Posted by: BC | October 7, 2005 02:33 PM
BC; They(i.e. the Nobel committee)are already in another country.
Posted by: RTB | October 7, 2005 02:51 PM
Another slap in Bush's arrogant face.
He can't bully everyone out of his job.
I don't agree with everything the IAEA has done but there is no evidence it would be better under someone else. Especially not someone who Bolton would prefer.
They were dead right about Iraq and Bush and Bolton and the rest of that insane cabal in the White House and the Pentagon were dead wrong. It was no small deal. 1000s of people died because of Bush's "mushroom cloud in New York" propaganda. It caused war not peace. Therefore it is appropriate to award someone who stood in the warmonger's way.
Posted by: jumbo | October 7, 2005 03:22 PM
Call me old fashion, but I am a UN fan. Contrary to popular belief, the UN is not a government. It cannot make laws, it has no military force, and it has no police. It does however provide an opportunity for a continuing dialogue between countries that has resolved many conflicts. It also does some very useful work aiding the poor all over the world. Is it perfect? No! Are we perfect? Again, no!
As to nuclear weapons, it is very hard to stop a sovereign country from getting them if they have the resources and money. Unlike the UN, they can make laws, have a military, and a police force.
If you feel like blaming some government for nuclear proliferation, France has, among others, supplied Israel,Iraq, North and South Korea, Iraq with Nuclear power plant which are necessary for nuclear weapons. But, I still eat French Fries!
Posted by: P. J. Casey | October 7, 2005 03:29 PM
Mohamed ElBaradei and the IAEA richly deserve the Nobel Prize for Peace. However, to call it an undeserved "slap in the face" for the United States(The Times, London) seems unwarranted because the US continues to support the cause of IAEA. That President Bush rushed to invade Iraq in spite of ElBaradei's report that WMD were not found there implies in no way that he was not for peace. We see how he struggles to bring peace (and democracy to boot) to Iraq by waging a war of choice because "God told him to do so." (Look out for BBC Two Series, "Israel and the Arabs: Elusive Peace" to be broadcast on Mondays from October 10, 2005).
Does that mean God got slapped in the face? Incredible!
Posted by: Jack K. | October 7, 2005 07:35 PM
Well, I would have been happier had the Peace Prize gone to the manager of Hotel Rwanda. Nevertheless, I suppose there's something to be said for Dr. El-Baradei and controlling nuclear proliferation. The people who had money on Condoleezza Rice and Bill O'Reilly must be beside themselves!
Posted by: Richard T. Collins | October 7, 2005 08:27 PM
The Nobel Committee originally proposed to give their award to Mordechai Vanunu, the Israeli whistleblower revealing that country's nuclear armament industry. The Jewish delegation to the Bilderberg convention strenuously objected to that award, supported by US representation (Rumsfeld? Perle?. ElBaradei was the compromise candidate.
Posted by: Mandamas | September 22, 2006 02:07 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
I agree with the assertion that this will be a rebuke to the WH. But what gets me is the seemingly poor job the IAEA has done. I mean India and Pak go hard nuke, Israel has been allowed to play possem, and Khan was peddling all sorts of goodies to just about anyone. And lets not even speak about NK.
Someone is handing them an award? More like they should get a kick in the pants.