The Other Nobel Controversy

What the recent uproar over the Nobel Committee chairman's lucrative new post says about Norway's peace prize complex.

BY KJETIL WIEDSWANG | DECEMBER 17, 2009

The face of Thorbjørn Jagland, chairman of the Nobel Peace Prize committee, was pasted all over the front pages of Norwegian newspapers this week -- though not because he awarded the peace prize last Thursday to an American president currently waging two wars. (That decision went over well in Oslo in the end.) What Norwegians were not so fond of was Jagland's recent acceptance of a post that comes with a tax-free salary of $380,000 a year, a mansion, and servants.

Norwegians love to save the world, but they are less comfortable being reminded that they are doing so from such a wealthy, privileged place. The evolution of the Nobel Peace Prize has always been a struggle about finding Norway's position among the countries of the world. And this year was no different.

The U.S. president's selection certainly created debate in Norway when it was announced in October. As happened elsewhere, Norwegian commentators deemed it too early for Obama to receive such an accolade; they questioned the logic of awarding the hallowed prize to someone simply for not being George W. Bush.

The criticism was more or less silenced after the ceremony in Oslo, where the U.S. president's speech was surprisingly well received. "Obama's speech created a new common image of what until now had been seen as opposites -- war and peace," wrote the daily tabloid Dagbladet. "Peace-loving Norwegians must understand that war may be necessary to secure the peace," commented VG, the country's largest circulated paper. Jan Egeland, director of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs and a former junior minister and U.N. director, went so far as to say that Obama's Nobel lecture was "the most important ever."

Jagland, however, didn't fare so well. Norwegians questioned his appointment as the general-secretary of the Council of Europe, a pan-European organization that has long been dwarfed in importance by the European Union. To Norwegian ears, earning twice what a Norwegian prime minister takes home, and not being taxed on it, is mildly suspect. Of course, Jagland bears no responsibility for the council's special tax exemption, but it created a barrage of moral condemnation all the same.

The uproar over Jagland's tax-free gig says something powerful about the Norwegian political mentality, as well as the logic behind awarding the peace prize to seemingly awkward candidates. The five-member Nobel committee is appointed by the Norwegian parliament, and the panel's members represent core national values: Lutheran-inspired egalitarianism, with a bit of a missionary edge. The world would be a better place if everyone acted like Norwegians, most Norwegians think, sometimes forgetting the fact that is easier to be a lover of peace and harmony when you are filthy rich.

JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images

 

Kjetil Wiedswang is an editorial writer and political commentator for Dagens Næringsliv, a Norwegian business newspaper.

Facebook|Twitter|Reddit

NAZIA

3:27 AM ET

December 18, 2009

Blunders turn disaster

The selection of obama as winner of peace prize from western judges proved that western people and selectors living in filthy rich and extremely safe environment are unaware of bitter reality of destruction going on in few Muslim countries in the name of peace.You people make blunders and this blunders are implemented on third world countries by bribing and strengthening their weak leadership.
if obama send some troops in EU to eradicate extremism even then he would have been selected for this award or we Muslims are exceptional human beings whom dead bodies are marked as success of mission of peace through US drones and NATO forces.

 

HAVHEST

6:29 PM ET

December 20, 2009

The Other Nobel Controversy

Two points: First, Norway may seem "filthy rich" so some, but most Norwegians are certainly not, as anybody who visits the place can't help but notice. By and large they live modestly and frugally.
Second, for Nazia: Your comment about Obama sending troops to the EU to eradicate extremism is a bit short of the mark. Reading "Europe" for "EU", I'd suggest that one of Obama's predecessors sent the U.S. armed forces to the Balkans twice to bring an end to local military actions that were, in large part, the products of extremism and which were also directed at your fellow Muslims.

 

NAZIA

1:05 PM ET

December 21, 2009

Aggressive attiude only for msulims community

Washington's plans for the military facilities and backup always envisages the deployment of small units in different places of EU, mostly maintenance and logistical staff, who can handle at short notice much larger troop movements in times of emergency. Germany after WW2 obliged US army in different bases as their forces helped them a lot in war against Nazis. but in 2003 Germany, France and Russia suspected the US is using NATO as its personal weapon, circumventing the United Nations, where international action should really be decided.So withdrawal for even peace keeping mission was requested till the end of year.
During the Iraq war, the US made use of military bases in Bulgaria and Romania to assist its military effort. It is more friendly act rather than aggressive combat done in Iraq, Afghanistan and now in Pakistan
the largest remaining US base in the region, and to Bosnia-Hercegovina was to create support for muslims against russian annd same strategy like aghanistan was seen here where saudi funded groups raised religious riots and ensued civil war on peaceful surroundings of kosov.
In all such cases one thing is common all 1st world countires brutally used their forces for Muslim majority areas .

 

MILAN

4:59 AM ET

December 31, 2009

where international distance

where international distance learning high school action should really be decided.So withdrawal for even peace keeping mission was requested till the end of year.
During the Iraq war, the US made use of military bases in Bulgaria and Romania to assist its military effort. It is more friendly act rather than aggressive combat done in Iraq, affordable school Afghanistan and now in Pakistan
the largest remaining US base in the region, and to Bosnia-Hercegovina was to create support for muslims against russian annd same strategy like aghanistan was seen here where saudi funded groups raised religious riots and ensued civil war on peaceful surroundings of kosov. online ged

 

MILAN

5:00 AM ET

December 31, 2009

implemented on third world

implemented on third world countries by bribing and strengthening their weak leadership.
if obama send some troops in EU to eradicate adult high school diploma extremism even then he would have been selected for this award or we Muslims are exceptional human beings whom dead bodies are marked as success of mission of peace through US drones and NATO forces. get high school diploma

 

AZUAN

12:48 AM ET

January 11, 2010

the_other_nobel_controversy

can you tell that the prize committee is feeling the heat? they have to rationalize how they came to such an absurd descision. carter's response is no surprise either. he was another ridiculous pick and now feels complled to pretend the prize is worth something now. Regards; AJL24

 

MARK84

7:42 AM ET

January 16, 2010

The Other Nobel Controversy

I think,that's a big mistake for noble award this years.How Obama can win this award?Obama get a bad reputation in 2009.Obama fail to handling economy crisis in U.S.