A Nobel for Trump? The pros and cons

If political satire died when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973, as Tom Lehrer observed, then what should be made of the movement gaining strength that Donald Trump should be a contender for the laurel wreath?

The winner of the Peace Prize is not always a universally praised decision. Kissinger, who was at the heart of US foreign policy in the seventies, was both sides of the coin, opening up channels between enemies and being labelled a war criminal.

There have, of course, been indisputable collectors of the prize: Nelson Mandela, Lech Walesa, Desmond Tutu, Martin Luther King, Elie Wiesel, Mikhail Gorbachev and Malala Yousafzai. Even organisations founded in Melbourne can win, such as the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons.

It’s bad luck for Trump the deadline for this year’s award was January 31. According to the Nobel Foundation, 330 candidates have been nominated for the Prize; 216 individuals, 114 organisations.

From there, it’s a lot of swotting for the Norwegian expert panel of professors, academics and sometimes foreign advisers as to the winner. By May, a short list has been worked out of usually about 30 candidates, up to August a review takes place of the list and in October, the winner is chosen. The choice is final and no correspondence is entered into. The winner gets their prize in December. Could Trump bluster his way on at this late stage? Perhaps he could threaten a missile attack on Oslo.

Alfred Nobel, he of inventing dynamite fame, more than a century ago initiated the Prize to acknowledge who had 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”.

It is said his mind was concentrated on leaving a legacy after a French newspaper in reporting the death of his brother published Alfred’s obituary by mistake, declaring the “merchant of death is dead’’.

Of all the mistakes in the awarding of the Prize possibly the greatest is the sin of omission: Mahatma Gandhi was nominated five times, and never won.

If North Korea abandons nuclear weapons and the peninsula becomes nuclear free and there is rapprochement between North and South, Trump would be the equal, and more worthy a winner than many others.

Given that Donald Trump, a man who has a pathological hatred of the truth, who has been described by those who worked closely with him as “morally unfit” to hold office, who has been called a con man, charlatan and grifter, sees himself on the podium surely takes this tawdry reality show of a presidency into a world of surrealism Dali could never have imagined.

But, as Maureen Dowd, in The New York Times, has written, despite everything loathsome about him, if North Korea abandons nuclear weapons and the peninsula becomes nuclear free and there is rapprochement between North and South, Trump would be the equal, and more worthy a winner than many others.

As Republican senator Lindsey Graham said: “Donald Trump convinced North Korea and China he was serious about bringing about change. We’re not there yet, but if this happens, President Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize.”

These are, indeed, strange times.

Of course, the Norwegians would have no real idea of the level of Trump’s involvement, nor the rest of the world, apart from the tweets, if anything concrete were to happen. Would they get on the phone to the White House and conduct interviews? And given the personality of Kim Jong-un, who is happy to kill family members to maintain power, what may be said and what will be done are two entirely different things.

And as Trump is basking in his “great man in history” moment (all those fans in the Mid-West shouting to him “Nobel, Nobel, Nobel”) he is threatening to hurl destruction upon Iran. As you would expect any man of peace to do. As he equivocates on gun massacres and the NRA in his own country whenever a massacre occurs. As you would expect any man of peace to do. He has directed a massive expansion –  billions of dollars – to be spent on his country’s military while impoverishing and cutting welfare and services to the nation’s most needy. As to the environment, it is invisible to him.

The Scottish writer Thomas Carlyle wrote: “The history of the world is but the biography of great men”. Trump sees himself as iconoclast par exemplar. There is no one like him. He destroys in order to create. He is a mover, a shaker and a shaper.

There is, of course, the counter argument that all men and women are shaped by the context of their times, that is, the mass movement of people and ideas has shaped history. That is not the Trumpean view of the world.

If he were to receive a Nobel calling, would that erase all else about him and his presidency? No. It would simply accentuate the buffoon in the room. It would confirm the real is now both unreal and surreal.

4 responses to “A Nobel for Trump? The pros and cons

  1. One almost expects the Nobel Peace Prize to be awarded to a dictator or warmonger – so many have been recipients – that it would be no surprise if it were to be awarded to Trump (looking quite Berlusconi-like in the photo heading the various articles list)! Only the latest Nobel Peace Prize awarded to the Australian Peace Activist group IPAN actually deserves such an award. And no comment from PM Trembler, one has noted! Not good for the Pyne/Payne and LNP government trying to position Australia as a top WMD manufacturer/seller! (OMIGOD – I’ve just realised – Mal Trembler must be setting himself up as a contender for the prize. That’s why the Aussie surveillance aircraft flying over Korea to check on observance of unfair US-imposed sanctions on NKorea – trying to upset the rapprochement! Surely worth some points towards the Nobel Peace Prize…?)

  2. If it happens and North Korea sacrifices a great deal for signing an armistice and letting peace break out, maybe Kim Jong-un should get it… after all he’s not invaded any foreign countries, doesn’t assassinate random people with drones in a range or foreign countries and probably quite peacefully ordered the deaths of family members.

  3. In what sense has Trump negotiated a potential peace deal?
    And it is still only a potential deal.
    He has scared the hell out of most of us with his complete lack of diplomatic methodology.
    It’s his scary diplomatic ineptitude that has accidentally made a slight difference.
    If anyone in the Korean saga should be in the running it should be the North and South Koreans who have been quietly getting on with the business.
    Trump is blustering his way into the room and claiming the kudos.
    Typically narcissist. Typically Trump.

Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Newsletter Signup