If not Obama, who should have won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize?

Great Debates
1

Since the reaction here has mostly been negative I’d like to know who Dopers see as deserving potential winners. Nobel’s will says the award should go 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.”

My first thought was that maybe it should have gone to Aung San Suu Kyi, but it turns out she won the prize in 1989, and I think that statement has already been made.

I thought about the Iranian protesters, who were probably the most visible activists of the last year, and about Neda Agha-Soltan in particular. Or if that is too symbolic (or if she’s not eligible), maybe Mir Hossein Mousavi or another Iranian opposition leader. But they’re still leaders approved by Iran’s theocrats and I’m not sure any of them really deserve it, as opposed to being on the right side of a battle with two bad sides.

I think someone in another thread mentioned the Dalai Lama, who won the prize in 1991.

So who are the other people who could have won the peace prize this year?

2

My top two would have been Denis Mukwege and the Iranian protesters.

3

I might select a leader of the opposition to Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe.

4

Marisa Tomei.

5

Condoleezza?

6

George W. Bush?

7

I meant to put Benazir Bhutto on my list as well, but the prize can’t be awarded posthumously. So that’s a no-go for her and for Neda.

8

Hu Jia or the Cluster Munition Coalition.

9

Greg Mortenson and/or the Central Asia Institute for all of their work building schools in strife-torn areas, as described in Three Cups of Tea.

Or that grassroots group of Israeli and Palestinian moms for peace.

10

Greg Mortenson without a doubt.

11

How about Bill Clinton for getting those chicks out of North Korea.

12

How about philanthropists? Bill and Melinda Gates, for instance, have done lots of good with their charities.

13

If he eventually gets it, it won’t be for that.

14

Sima Simar.

Wei Jingsheng.

Another mention for Hu Jia.

15

Read a BBC article which collected statements about the peace prize award today from a bunch of people. There was an interesting comment saying that the prize has recently trended towards political figures with huge armies at their command. This seems odd for a peace prize, surely it should go to someone with no blood on their hands, and who has actively worked to prevent bloodshed. That’s a good point, but the reality is that only those who control the dogs of war have a chance of making peace.

Enjoy,
Steven

16

The problem with this approach is that, at least currently, there is only one “superpower” left. The prize is at risk of becomming nothing more than a nod of approval towards American political leaders whom Europeans happen to approve of.

17

What’s wrong with that?

18

This.

19

Glad he did it, but I’m not sure that rises to the Nobel Peace Prize level.

I think the committee favors activists and people who are on the ground doing the good work themselves rather than just giving their prize to rich people, even if those rich people are supporting very good causes.

Denis Mukwege looks like a good choice. I’ll have to familiarize myself with the other names being mentioned here.

20

It diminishes what the Prize is supposed to be for, to make its award a mere matter of routine.

"Congratulations on your election last week, Mr. President. Ah, I see you are a Democrat. Here’s your Nobel. "