Do you know how contradictory the Nobel Prize is? Alfred Nobel, a world-famous inventor, was also an indispensable arms dealer in war. At the end of his life, the big man who invented "explosives" suddenly made a 180-degree turn, and used his huge wealth to reward those who contributed to world peace and scientific progress. But the road to the Nobel Prize has never been smooth, especially the Peace Prize, which has been controversial. Speaking of which, do you remember the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize ceremony? The absence of the ambassadors of the United States, Britain, and France was a real embarrassment. Moreover, during the awarding process, he did not forget to "pour cold water" on China. What's going on here? Do you think there's a story behind this?
Looking back at the Nobel Peace Prize in those years, it always feels a little complicated. Nobel himself probably did not expect that his Peace Prize would become a "weather vane" for international politics. 2017 was an extraordinary year, when the Peace Prize was awarded to an organization called the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN). This group has a strong voice and its goal is the complete prohibition of nuclear weapons worldwide. I have to say that this goal sounds quite shocking, but it is precisely this goal that stirs the nerves of several nuclear powers in the West.
First of all, this ICAN started in Melbourne, Australia, and was officially unveiled in Vienna, Austria in 2007. With the halo of "nuclear abolition" on their heads, they are determined to return the world to a "clean" state without nuclear weapons. By 2017, this force was already significant, with the support of more than 100 countries. But the irony is that none of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, the "big guys", are involved.
The ceremony at which the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded is often a great occasion for countries to demonstrate diplomatic etiquette. The 2017 awards ceremony was an "unprecedented" scene - the three nuclear powers, the United States, the United Kingdom and France, sent only second-tier diplomats to attend. This "intentional or unintentional" diplomatic coldness not only embarrassed those present, but also disappointed ICAN. Their chairman, Finn, could only smile wryly at the time, and in their opinion, this situation was undoubtedly a lack of recognition of their efforts.
Why did these three countries do this? It's not hard to guess why, ICAN's activities have a direct impact on their nuclear weapons strategy. This resistance was especially evident after ICAN's call for state support for the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) received a certain response. As for Russia and Israel, although they are also nuclear-armed states, they chose to attend, and this "alternative" statement is also thought-provoking.
ICAN's actions did not stop because of the cold treatment of the nuclear powers. In October 2020, the Treaty of Honduras Vegas officially entered into force and became part of international law, although it was not signed by the nuclear-weapon states, but it is enough to show that the call for peace and abolition of nuclear weapons can no longer be ignored. Behind the Nobel Peace Prize is not just a trophy, it is a recognition and encouragement of those who are driving significant change around the world.
Let's go back to that ceremony, in addition to the attitudes of these great powers, the ceremony itself is full of symbolism. Both the award and the laureate were women, which is rare in the history of the Nobel Prize. Berither Rice-Anderson, chair of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, represents not only Norway, but also the belief in peace. The ICAN awardee, Beatrice Fein, and senior representative Thuro Setsuko represent the steadfastness and perseverance of the global nuclear abolition movement.
At the award ceremony, Setsuko's words were quite intriguing: "Women have always played an important role in the peace movement. "This is not only an affirmation of the role of women in the peace movement, but also a demonstration of the diversity and inclusion of the global peace movement. Although the Nobel Peace Prize was founded by men, today, its message is the common aspiration of all mankind - peace.
In this atmosphere of celebration of peace, discordant voices followed. At the press conference, a reporter asked a question about China, and Setsuko's answer didn't seem so comfortable. She referred to China's role in international peace and suggested that China's position on nuclear weapons is not the same as ICAN's goals. This pouring cold water is undoubtedly a challenge to China, and it also reflects the different voices and positions in the international community.
In today's globalized world, the actions of any country can become the focus of attention on the international stage. As an important member of the world, China's role and stance in international affairs have naturally attracted attention. ICAN's award is not only a recognition of its nuclear abolition efforts, but also a call for global nuclear safety and peace efforts.
The Nobel Peace Prize, born from the legacy of Nobel, was originally intended to reward those who have contributed to the peace of mankind. But in this complex and ever-changing world, every award award can become a bellwether for international politics, and every choice is full of deep meaning. The 2017 Peace Prize was awarded to ICAN not only in support of the nuclear abolition movement, but also as a reaffirmation of the idea of global peace. The volatility of international politics and the positions of different countries have made this award always controversial. Can the peace we hope for really be promoted and realized through such an award, or is it just a high-profile idealistic performance? These are questions that deserve deep consideration by each and every one of us.