EU is awarded the Nobel Peace prize

paulaa

It has just been announced on BBC News 24that the European Union has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2012 for over 6 decades of peace, democracy and human rights

The EU has been a key in transforming Europe "from a continent of wars to a continent of peace," Committee chairman Thorbjoern Jagland said in announcing the award in Oslo.

"This is a message to Europe to do everything they can to secure what they've achieved and move forward," Jagland said, saying it was a reminder of what would be lost "if the union is allowed to collapse".

He praised the 27-nation EU for rebuilding after World War Two and for its role in spreading stability after the 1989 fall of the Berlin Wall.

The prize, worth $1.2 million, will be presented in Oslo on December 10. The decision by the five-member panel, led by Jagland who is also Secretary-General of the Council of Europe, was unanimous.

The EU won from a field of 231 candidates including Russian dissidents and religious leaders working for Muslim-Christian reconciliation.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/12/us-nobel-peace-idUSBRE89A1N820121012

DaveyCakes

Very cynical move imo. The first time in its history that the popularity and widespread acceptance of the EU is in danger of slipping and this gets pulled out of the bag.

paulaa

Is this the first time a country or organisation was given this award ?

Ziphius

paulaa wrote: »

Is this the first time a country or organisation was given this award ?

No, in 2007 the peace prize was awarded to the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and Al Gore.

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2007/

Ellis Dee

paulaa wrote: »

Is this the first time a country or organisation was given this award ?

No, other organisations that have received the award include the United Nations, Amnesty International and the International Committee of the Red Cross.

Sixty years without a major conflict in western and central Europe certainly deserves some recognition and there can be no denying that the European Union has achieved a lot of other good things as well. That is why I welcome this award. The failings of the European Union were not a matter that the Norwegians saw as pertinent to its work of peace-building. Those failings can and maybe eventually will be redressed, which is a far better alternative than wrecking the whole imperfect structure.:cool:

As an added bonus, it will probably make a whole horde of eurosceptics, europhobes and assorted other right-wingers, who would probably like to see us go back to the old Europe of armed rivalry, choke on their breakfast cereal.:)

Eggy Baby!

‎"The Nobel Prize is a prize for all the citizens of the EU."

So I won a Nobel Prize? Groovy.

I have to admit, I've never heard of one being awarded to an organisation before.

Still, it makes a lot more sense than awarding one to Obama...

DaveyCakes

The EU did not "prevent war in Western and Central Europe for sixty years".

Firstly, no western or central European country was in any position, financially or militarily, to fight a war for a long time after WWII.

Secondly, the EU would never have been formed if there was even the slightest chance of a war being fought.

Thirdly, the NATO-Warsaw Pact nuclear balance was the real peacemaker.

DaveyCakes

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

So I won a Nobel Prize? Groovy.

I have to admit, I've never heard of one being awarded to an organisation before.

Still, it makes a lot more sense than awarding one to Obama...

Where do we all collect our cash? I make it about a million quid, divided by 500 million people. That's about one-fifth of a cent each:D

Scofflaw

DaveyCakes wrote: »

The EU did not "prevent war in Western and Central Europe for sixty years".

Firstly, no western or central European country was in any position, financially or militarily, to fight a war for a long time after WWII.

Secondly, the EU would never have been formed if there was even the slightest chance of a war being fought.

Thirdly, the NATO-Warsaw Pact nuclear balance was the real peacemaker.

I'm sure the Nobel Committee have little or no idea what they're about.

amused,
Scofflaw

DaveyCakes

Did I say they had little or no idea what they're about?

Scofflaw

DaveyCakes wrote: »

Did I say they had little or no idea what they're about?

Pretty much, yes. Also, you did so with a rather inaccurate version of history, given that European countries have fought a series of wars, both direct and proxy, after 1945 - just not with each other, despite continued differences and occasional friction. Presumably, had the Nobel Committee felt the prize was deserved by NATO (an organisation in quite serious need of a shot in the arm), they would have awarded it to NATO.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Ardent

I'd take the opposite view of DaveyCakes. It's only been 60 odd years since the end of WWII and, when you think about it, the European Single Union has been the single biggest contributor towards peace and prosperity on the continent.

I have no issue with the award, sometimes you don't appreciate what you have until it's gone.

nagilum2

The Nobel Peace committee continues to make itself more ridiculous. They should just give the prize to themselves next year.

DaveyCakes

Scofflaw wrote: »

Pretty much, yes. Also, you did so with a rather inaccurate version of history, given that European countries have fought a series of wars, both direct and proxy, after 1945 - just not with each other, despite continued differences and occasional friction. Presumably, had the Nobel Committee felt the prize was deserved by NATO (an organisation in quite serious need of a shot in the arm), they would have awarded it to NATO.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I'm well aware of post-1945 wars, but I was replying to a poster who specifically talked about the absence of war in western and central Europe, for which the EU is given, in my opinion, way to much credit, mostly by itself.

Scofflaw

DaveyCakes wrote: »

I'm well aware of post-1945 wars, but I was replying to a poster who specifically talked about the absence of war in western and central Europe, for which the EU is given, in my opinion, way to much credit, mostly by itself.

That begins to look circular - you're claiming that the European countries were incapable of fighting wars with each other, as evidence of which you offer the fact that they didn't...

...and then, since that's obviously not strong enough to explain the peace in Europe, the peace is ascribed to NATO instead, an organisation which offered no alternative mechanisms of intra-European dispute resolution, which the EU specifically and deliberately did.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Eggy Baby!

DaveyCakes wrote: »

The EU did not "prevent war in Western and Central Europe for sixty years".

Firstly, no western or central European country was in any position, financially or militarily, to fight a war for a long time after WWII.

Secondly, the EU would never have been formed if there was even the slightest chance of a war being fought.

Thirdly, the NATO-Warsaw Pact nuclear balance was the real peacemaker.

It created peace through economic interdependence.

Scofflaw

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

It created peace through economic interdependence.

And by virtue of a permanent ongoing process of dialogue about that interdependence. It's far easier for countries that are meeting regularly across a spectrum of issues both to remember their common interests and discuss their differences.

NATO never provided either of those things.

cordially,
Scofflaw

poeticseraphim

Ellis Dee wrote: »

No, other organisations that have received the award include the United Nations, Amnesty International and the International Committee of the Red Cross.

Sixty years without a major conflict in western and central Europe certainly deserves some recognition and there can be no denying that the European Union has achieved a lot of other good things as well. That is why I welcome this award. The failings of the European Union were not a matter that the Norwegians saw as pertinent to its work of peace-building. Those failings can and maybe eventually will be redressed, which is a far better alternative than wrecking the whole imperfect structure.:cool:

As an added bonus, it will probably make a whole horde of eurosceptics, europhobes and assorted other right-wingers, who would probably like to see us go back to the old Europe of armed rivalry, choke on their breakfast cereal.:)

You think someone being a Eurosceptic makes them want war? Or that it could happen now?

Also it is not only Eurosceptics who might balk at this. And it is not only Eurosceptics who ar dissapointed.


Some of the people who mosted wanted Europe to succeed are heartbroken and angry now. Some who even worked there.

I have never been i either camp honestly i see this as a little strange and convienent

The EU has doe a lot of good. but not in the field of peace and conflict resolution politics. It is just not the EU's bag at all. Northern Ireland and the Balkans were hugely indebted to the Americas and the British and not really to the EU.

The EU has accomplished a lot, it is amazing really but this seems to be at a bit of an angle and i prefer when they give it to individuals anyway

At least it isn't Bono.

The EU is not there to prevent war and it is not needed to prevent conflict either. I often wonder how friendly supposed Europhiles think our fellow human beings actually are when they think if the EU dissolved tomorrow the chances of conflict go up. Maybe they are too suspicious of people from other countries to be honest.

Scofflaw

poeticseraphim wrote:

The EU has doe a lot of good. but not in the field of peace and conflict resolution politics. It is just not the EU's bag at all. Northern Ireland and the Balkans were hugely indebted to the Americas and the British and not really to the EU.

What? Who provides ongoing funding for peace and cross-border projects, the US or the EU? Hint: Peace III and InterReg IV are EU initiatives.

poeticseraphim wrote:

The EU is not there to prevent war and it is not needed to prevent conflict either. I often wonder how friendly supposed Europhiles think our fellow human beings actually are when they think if the EU dissolved tomorrow the chances of conflict go up. Maybe they are too suspicious of people from other countries to be honest.

I hope that's intended as irony.

cordially,
Scofflaw

poeticseraphim

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

It created peace through economic interdependence.

It SUSTAINED peace through economic interdependance, sustaining peace is harder to do so it is noteworthy.

Peace had been achieved through conflict cessation of that conflict through the victory of those with good intention and careful boundaries and caveated conditions created through negotiatation and treaties.

Post ww2 you could say this continuing negotiation over the years evolved into the EEC then later the EU.

The Americans funded and aided a lot of this at the begining and they should not be forgotten.

poeticseraphim

Scofflaw wrote: »

What? Who provides ongoing funding for peace and cross-border projects, the US or the EU? Hint: Peace III and InterReg IV are EU initiatives.



I hope that's intended as irony.

cordially,
Scofflaw

It is intended to parody the way they represent those who view the EU differently. It is equally ridiculous to portray either as war mongerors who distrust others. People are not going to stop liking their neighbours or like them any less if the EU dissolved tomorrow.

I notice you did not mention the poster who said

As an added bonus, it will probably make a whole horde of eurosceptics, europhobes and assorted other right-wingers, who would probably like to see us go back to the old Europe of armed rivalry, choke on their breakfast cereal

It is not quite Irony.....but then....




I don't agree with either Europhiles or Eurosceptics.....they both seem mad.

It is the British taxpayer who is the greatest unsung hero of the NI peace process. They have always funded the Army the NI itself community projects and the bulk of the cross border initiatives.

Eggy Baby!

The Americans funded and aided a lot of this at the begining and they should not be forgotten.

So let's give the Americans the peace prize......haha jk

JohnMc1

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

So I won a Nobel Prize? Groovy.

I have to admit, I've never heard of one being awarded to an organisation before.

Still, it makes a lot more sense than awarding one to Obama...

I was wondering that too. So we can all say we're Nobel Peace Prize recipients. That will look sweet on the CV.

Eggy Baby!

JohnMc1 wrote: »

I was wondering that too. So we can all say we're Nobel Peace Prize recipients. That will look sweet on the CV.

Would we even need jobs? We could live on the prize money alone

JohnMc1

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

Would we even need jobs? We could live on the prize money alone

You're right. When should I expect my check?

Scofflaw

poeticseraphim wrote: »

It is intended to parody the way they represent those who view the EU differently. It is equally ridiculous to portray either as war mongerors who distrust others. People are not going to stop liking their neighbours or like them any less if the EU dissolved tomorrow.

I notice you did not mention the poster who said

It is not quite Irony.....but then....

It is irony, I fear, since the xenophobe-eurosceptic correlation is statistically strong. Not, I suspect, because eurosceptics are necessarily xenophobes, but because xenophobes are almost bound to be eurosceptics.

poeticseraphim wrote: »

I don't agree with either Europhiles or Eurosceptics.....they both seem mad.

It is the British taxpayer who is the greatest unsung hero of the NI peace process. They have always funded the Army the NI itself community projects and the bulk of the cross border initiatives.

I wonder if that's actually true - apart from the vexed question of whether funding the Army is as positive a step as you take it to be, I can't help but notice that even searching the UK for cross-border funding yields primarily EU-funded initiatives.

cordially,
Scofflaw

ButtimersLaw

I remember the peace prize was won in 2007 by Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for their wonderful work in alerting the world to the threat from man-made global warming. Since then, of course, Gore and the IPCC have become so discredited that in many eyes they are little more than objects of ridicule.

It is a little more than ironic that the Prize for Peace is awarded as we see, for example, suicide rates in Ireland at an all time high and rioting on the streets of the EU, both caused in part by the policies of the EU.

Personally, I think it's premature to claim the EU is a harbinger of peace, as there is a good chance that the next years will show the policies of the EU lead to civil unrest and more bloodshed across the EU.

SeanW

Scofflaw wrote: »

It is irony, I fear, since the xenophobe-eurosceptic correlation is statistically strong. Not, I suspect, because eurosceptics are necessarily xenophobes, but because xenophobes are almost bound to be eurosceptics.

Nigel Farage of UKIP often starts his speeches in the UK with "If you've come tonight to hear about how everything in Europe is awful and we should never go beyond the Channel, you've come to the wrong meeting."

It is also common for Euroskeptics (and I increasingly include myself in this) to want a Europe where we trade with each other, talk to each other, go visit each others' countries, work together sometimes. But not this political union where we have an unelected Commission making laws for 500 million people and turning national parliaments (increasingly) into a rubber stamping house for European directives.

This idea that the European Union prevented a modern democratic Germany from trying to crush France etc again but for the advent of the international government in Brussels is both infantile and bizarre, and also a serious insult to the German people.

This award comes at a time when the ill fated Euro project (having imposed on Greece a monetary policy that was always going to end in disaster) is keeping countries like Greece in a death grip, where it is common for Germans to characterise the Greek people as lazy, sponging and useless, while the Greek people now demonise the Germans as Nazis.

It's a joke.

The Bishop!

Scofflaw wrote: »

It's far easier for countries that are meeting regularly across a spectrum of issues both to remember their common interests and discuss their differences.

There's the flip of the coin or counter argument to that obviously.

It's far easier for countries that are meeting regularly across a spectrum of issues both to forget their common interests and ignore their differences in the interests of trade. China comes to mind.

SeanW wrote: »

Nigel Farage of UKIP often starts his speeches in the UK with "If you've come tonight to hear about how everything in Europe is awful and we should never go beyond the Channel, you've come to the wrong meeting."

From my very limited understanding of it, Farange is basically the voice of the City of London. Dressed up as Europhobia for 'the interests of the nation'.

Money talks. Money also walks. So they'll aim to take the U.K out of the whole deal if that's what it takes.

Scofflaw

The Bishop! wrote: »

There's the flip of the coin or counter argument to that obviously.

It's far easier for countries that are meeting regularly across a spectrum of issues both to forget their common interests and ignore their differences in the interests of trade. China comes to mind.

True, that happens too, but I don't think it detracts from the other point - there are many more issues discussed in the EU than trade.

The Bishop! wrote: »

From my very limited understanding of it, Farange is basically the voice of the City of London. Dressed up as Europhobia for 'the interests of the nation'.

Money talks. Money also walks. So they'll aim to take the U.K out of the whole deal if that's what it takes.

Certainly the latter - the Tories are heavily dependent on City money at this stage. But Farage represents more the blue-rinse belt of southern England - the retirement towns - and a generation that never trusted the Continent and remembers the Empire.

cordially,
Scofflaw

SiegfriedsMum

Scofflaw wrote: »

Certainly the latter - the Tories are heavily dependent on City money at this stage. But Farage represents more the blue-rinse belt of southern England - the retirement towns - and a generation that never trusted the Continent and remembers the Empire.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Much of the problem in the UK was initiall caused by the political classes misselling the EU to the UK electorate. THey were told it was a common market, and the EU even agreed to be called the "Common Market" to add weight to this slight of hand. In Ireland, schoolchildren were told it was for "political and economic Union".

However, we are where we are and the issue for the EU now, it seems to me, is that rather than the rest of Europe coming close and closer together, many across the EU are distrustful of its institutions and see it as a massive bureaucracy which serves itself and not the people of Europe.

While it doesn't really matter what these people think, as the EU is not a democracy and does not have to answer to them, the fact is that parties like UKIP are a very real threat to the EU, and that they seem to be gaining ground in the UK is worrying.

While UKIP are a single issue party, there seems little immediate prospect of them disappearing in the short term, and it might be a mistake to dismiss them as representing an old generation. Many young people right across Europe feel disenfranchised, and which the mroe established political parties talk in a convoluted politico speak, the apparant straight talking of UKIP in the UK is attractive to many of the younger generations. In Ireland we see something similar with Sinn Fein.