119 comments

I was just checking which were the top guesses on polymarket before the announcement and this winner was not even a choice on there. At least we know there's no insider trading at the Nobel foundation.
> In accordance with Nobel's will, the prize is selected by the Norwegian Nobel Committee, a five-member committee appointed by the Parliament of Norway unlike all the other awards chosen by the Swedish Nobel Committee.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Peace_Prize

There's been accusations of leaks in connection to bets with the Nobel Price in Literature.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_in_Literature_cont...

haunter
Wasn’t that because their CMS had URLs that were easy to guess?

https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/1o51k61/upd...

m463
The prize in economics is even more different, "in memory of alfred nobel"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Econom...

737min
Ethnic Tamil, started career fighting Sri Lanka crackdown on Tamil Tigers. Tamil Tigers invented suicide bombing. Gaza’s Hamas adopted suicide bombing from them.

https://www.tamilguardian.com/content/nobel-laureate-navi-pi...

Yay, congrats Navi! Thanks for contributing to international law!
Great to see that they're not afraid to stand up to the rising authoritarianism
The committee is independent from politics although some dictators may at times misunderstand that.
kzrdude
They have really not made the impression that they are independent of politics, all laureates taken together. But if they improve I'm all for it.
They have opinions and moral values. And a lot of times they coincide with western democracy ideals.

Or - like today - with rules based global world order.

You remember Machado though...

Peace prize for someone who was literally arguing for subjecting her own country to an invasion and foreign occupation.

I remember how Swedish state television suddenly flipped very after that, and started cuddling Cuban exiles who wanted the same there. I think this whole thing was certainly coordinated somehow, behind the scenes in order to attempt to legitmize a future US invasion of Venezuela and their general conduct in the Carribean and South America /Pacific.

Things like this happened during expulsion of the Karabach-Armenians too. Then SVT went out and said that "Armenian separatists [had] agreed to leave Azerbaijan", and they left out the artillery bombardement, the deaths by starvation and the ICJ judgement against Azerbaijan's closure of the Lachine corridor, even though such a judgement by an organization like the ICJ would otherwise by first-page news.

So while I can't be sure that there's some NATO-internal press office coordinating how planned future military activity by members is to be presented in the media, it seems that Turkey could achieve that, and that the US could achieve that.

Yeah, I guess they act independently from international courts.
How do you mean, and who?

If you mean Swedish state television, what I meant was that any such major judgement by a UN court like the ICJ, would be front page news.

Remember, this stuff was subject to long and incredibly annoying thing in the Security Council as well, and SVT ignored that too. It was the biggest thing that happened that whole year, basically and the entire coverage by SVT were those words I quoted in the comment before this, that "Armenian separatists have agreed to leave Azerbaijan".

The Norwegian nobel prize committee. (Your post was heavily edited, if you think i missed some point.)
Yeah, I can be slow in getting them finished.

But at that point I can't have mentioned the ICJ stuff, can I? Hmm. Oh well. I get what I get for my editing.

Fine, i also prefer being able to edit my comments.
kzrdude
The committee in this case is based on retired or ageing Norwegian politicians. That's the construction that we can't do so much about (the will), but I think it's unfortunate for the prize. I think a more independent committee would have been better. I agree with the common criticism that they have given several prizes too rashly or too soon.
They also had connections to Epstein

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_of_Thorbj%C3%B8rn...

I am not sure another committee would do much better though. How would they be chosen? At least these are people with a lot of experience in foreign affairs.

And at the end of the day - it is their price to govern. If they do a bad job, the world will move on.

kzrdude
I think that's fair, and they only get as much importance and attention as we give them.
The committee is selected by the Norwegian parliament, a political body.
p-e-w
And there is a long history of allegations of additional political influence beyond that.
pczy
I find it hard to see how the committee can be genuinely independent of politics when its members are appointed by the Norwegian Parliament.
Norway is one of the few countries in the world that has ”fuck you” money and a functioning representative electoral system. If the parliament appoints the committee, I find it politically suicidal for any representative to dare to directly interfere with the commissions deliberation and choices. There’s hardly anything positive to gain from it for a representative.
how does this imply that they can be disconnected from politics, some may argue on the contrary due to what you just stated.
It cannot be disconnected from politics. The other poster mentioned independence.
j_maffe
The only country that has "fuck you" anything is unfortunately the US.
The current US administration and its voting population is making sure that this won't be the case soon. It's gonna be hard to win back the good will that was built through decades of diplomacy and trade. Even harder when their conventional armed forces have been underwhelming in the attack on Iran.
Asle Toje was appointed by FRP and is very much a political appointed member. While there is not really any indication of meddling by political parties with the committee the appointment is very much politically governed.
ks2048
"independent from politics" seems to have a few different meanings. One is inherently bad and another is not necessarily bad. Of course the committee is political and the entire nature of the award is political.
belorn
Where does it say that the Norwegian Nobel Committee is independent from politics?

As stated on their webpage, "As far as possible, the composition of the Committee is to reflect the relative strengths of the political parties in the Storting." - https://www.nobelpeaceprize.org/nobel-committee/

It is independent to the sitting Norwegian government, as members can't have current seats both in the committee and Storting, but several committee do represent the political parties in Norway.

Currently the committee is made from former Leader of the Centre Party, a foreign policy scholar and writer, former Conservative Party cabinet member that was the Minister of Education and Research, a Political scientist and Chief Executive Officer of Utøya AS, and last the former Labour Party Foreign Affairs Secretary.

There's always FIFA to give out a prize if necessary.
It is not really. They claim so but the members are appointed by the Norwegian government. One of the members, Asle Toje, is very much a political appointed member by the right-wing FRP party.

This process is decided by the Alfred Nobel will.

rob74
I mean, if the really gave the prize to Trump, they would completely destroy their credibility. That's better left to FIFA (not that FIFA had a lot of credibility before creating a peace prize to award it to Trump).
oefrha
And last year it went to someone praising Netanyahu on multiple occasions and tried very hard to kiss Trump’s ass—Trump even got gifted that frigging medal, which was a huge embarrassment for the committee a couple months back. That’s among a long list of extremely questionable recipients. Sure they may have selected the “right” recipient (to some) this year. But why even bother paying attention to a broken clock.
The Peace Prize seems somewhat hit or miss. I'm sure we all remember when it was given to Barack Obama for his lifelong work of not being George W Bush. And of course it was given to Henry Effin' Kissinger.

Maybe this speaks to the difficulty of peace in general. One asshole warmonger can destroy thousands of lives on a whim, but ending or preventing war takes long, steady efforts by large numbers of people. It's not very amenable to an individual prize.

khalic
A clear FU to the Cheeto, love it
I'll be amused to see how the administration reacts. Perhaps we'll end up having the Trump Prizes.
Satire is mostly dead in this world of clownocracy, but someone should prank-call FIFA and ask them who's the winner of this year's FIFA Peace Prize...
hgoel
I've been thinking that part of the point of handing out a bunch of science prizes to the techbros yesterday was to try to overshadow the Nobel prizes.
elias_t
Apparently they just imposed sanctions on the ICC, not sure it’s related but it’s a strange coincidence [0]

[0] US imposes sanctions on ICC hours after former judge wins Nobel Peace Prize - https://www.reuters.com/world/us-imposes-sanctions-internati...

nervai
Reminder that the US administration is on a campaign to dismantle the ICC for echoing similar findings to this Nobel Prize winner in her role at UNHRC [1].

I'm extremely grateful to, and humbled by, these people continuing their brave work knowing they will face the full wrath of the US and Israel govs and their campaigns to dismantle accountability for the worst crimes.

[1] https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/20...

"The ICC poses an intolerable threat to U.S. sovereignty – it claims the authority to prosecute and even imprison American servicemen and officials operating on behalf of America’s national interest. Americans never signed up for this, and all American presidents since the ICC’s ratification have maintained that the ICC does not have jurisdiction over Americans. The ICC previously opened an investigation into U.S. servicemen and intelligence officers and has since refused to close these cases."

Yeah, but somehow if i do some illegal shit according to USA they have no problem arresting me when i come visit (or if they really eager they come to visit me). But how dare you tell us what we can do or cant do INTOLERABLE.

Yes, that’s what sovereignty means: a sovereign state governs itself and is not governed by others. A sovereign state can agree to abide by certain rules or submit some disputes to another arbiter, but it does so consensually by treaty. The US never ratified a treaty establishing the authority of the ICC, so it has not consented to that diminution of sovereignty.

You as an individual are not sovereign, and when you come to the land over which the US is sovereign, you are subject to US law.

yread
Conversely, American individuals are also not sovereign so when they come to a sovereign land where they are sought (by the state or its partners through treaties) for crimes, they are subject to the the state's laws and treaties.
So it should be no surprise to USA that sovereign countries that abide to ICC rulings take actions against individual USA citizens.
This isn't true, the US considers prosecution by the ICC as an act of war.
The main part of the argument is that the US is very happy to apply their laws to foreign citizens for things they have done on foreign soil and are also happy to legally or illegally extract those citizens from the foreign states. That does in fact directly violate those other states sovereignty.
weberer
>foreign citizens for things they have done on foreign soil

When has this ever happened? You might be referring to Maduro's extradition, but that was due to him being charged with smuggling mass amounts of cocaine into the USA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosecution_of_Nicol%C3%A1s_Ma...

i was just going to bring this up, but a different aspect: I'm not curious about the drug charges, I'm curious about the gun charges as unlevied.
j_maffe
Sanctioning ICC judges. They did nothing relevant to US citizens.
Ever heard of extraordinary renditions?
brookst
This would more persuasive if the US didn’t have a long history of prosecuting, even kidnapping, foreign nationals on foreign soil for violations of US law.
tgv
> a sovereign state governs itself and is not governed by others

Hence, if anyone commits a crime in another country, they fall under the jurisdiction of that country. So while the US doesn't have to recognize the ICC, listen to it, or follow its verdicts, other countries are free to do so.

But now the US is threatening the judges of the ICC, which is hypocritical to say the least. It's more of a mafia thing, really. Not surprising, given Trump's background.

> You as an individual are not sovereign, and when you come to the land over which the US is sovereign, you are subject to US law.

And if an american, whom ICC have found guilty on crimes, visits a country which upholds ICC rulings they should be arrested, no?

Nobody talked about kidnapping people in the US or doing anything similar. In contrast, the US is in a habit on (among others)

1. kidnapping

2. bombing

3. otherwise assassinating

4. sanctioning

5. demanding extradition (the only actual "legal" part)

foreign citizens that they do not like. We can also say that no other, non american citizen has actually agreed to these practices either, nor to US authority to be the world serif. So these arguments more like read like monopoly of global violence/authority than "sovereignty".

> The US never ratified a treaty establishing the authority of the ICC, so it has not consented to that diminution of sovereignty.

True, they could ignore the ICC, but they shouldn't go around sanctioning and punishing and threatening its judges.

Vaslo
Yes because the only law that the US needs to recognize is its own.
doing a pretty shit job at that too tbh
khalic
Oh but others must recognize America's laws right? Oh the hypocrisy
Vaslo
It’s not hypocrisy. Don’t follow them. But when your interests conflict with ours, then we will exert our influence.
khalic
No you will kidnap people, have them killed, silenced, accounts freeze, etc. It's not merely "exercising influence", it's coercion. It's exactly the case here, it's the US's prerogative not to follow the ICCs judgements, it's none of your fkn business what laws other countries have. If a US citizen is in another territory, it's that territory's law that count.

Your government also routinely ignores its own laws and judgements.

Hypocrisy at all the levels, and lying to try to still have the moral high ground.

ks2048
Sometimes self-interest leads to cooperation.
Vaslo
I agree with you.
mda
Typical American hubris.
tchalla
I wish more people understand this very clearly instead of hiding behind "democratic values" and other moral lectures.
As Americas star continues to wane over the coming decades y'all are really going to regret this "might makes right" stance.
Vaslo
Not very worried about it. Im 100% sure we will be fine.
croon
It's not hypocrisy if your argument is that "might makes right", but if your argument is that the US has other principles, it is indeed hypocrisy.

And in that case, so much for "western ideals", if it's purely "America first, no ideals".

enaaem
The US is a colony of Israel.