Published by the government of Zimbabwe
Reason Wafawarova
13 October 2009
opinion
With Barrack Obama's inherited war in Afghanistan raging on unabated; a war he calls a "war of necessity" and with the occupation of Iraq still intact under his administration, the man himself was shocked to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009.
The deadline for nominations was just a week after Obama assumed office, and the man has just been in office for 10 months.
He is struggling with his public health policy at home, is fast losing the war in Afghanistan, has failed to pull troops out of Iraq as he promised during his election campaign, and he is yet to pull his country out of the global financial crisis.
With this unenviable record, Obama still made it to number one out of the 205 shortlisted candidates whose negatives must clearly have overshadowed this gloomy record of the 48-year-old United States president.
According to Alfred Nobel's will, the Swedish industrialist after whom this increasingly controversial if not notorious prize is named, the award is meant to 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".
Obama has not only failed to abolish the standing armies in Afghanistan, but has actually escalated the war and is pondering sending an additional 40 000 soldiers. He has not stood down the US army in Iraq either, despite his repeated campaign promises.
Well, Barack Obama is now a laureate and he joins that club that has been permanently tainted by one of their numbers, the 1973 winner and fellow countryman of Obama, the infamous Henry Kissinger.
Kissinger won the award despite scheming and overseeing the 1969-75 mass bombings of Cambodia, and also masterminding Operation Condor of the mid 70s -- an operation of rape, kidnapping and murder coordinated by the CIA among the intelligence and security services of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay.
He also tacitly facilitated and supported the post-Allende junta of Augusto Pinochet in Chile, that killed French nationals, and he ordered the invasion of Cyprus, an invasion that led to a 33-year occupation.
Another American, Jimmy Carter, also won the award controversially although his sins were far less than those of Kissinger, his policy rhetoric closely mirrored by that of Obama.
Carter really sounded different from Richard Nixon and others, but he hardly ever implemented any of his sweet sounding rhetoric.
Then there was the irony of the millennium when F.W. de Klerk of South Africa jointly won the award with the deserving Nelson Mandela in 1993 despite being the head of a racist government that instituted the most egregious discriminatory policies ever to be implemented in the colonial era.
Al Gore was another American to controversially win the award in 2007, preaching vigorously against increasing energy consumption despite his own electricity bill clocking 22 619 kilowatts per month, well over double the annual consumption of an average American family.
He also still made it despite his proven "nine scientific errors" in his otherwise noble gospel of climate change.
Yet another American, Cordel Hull, again controversially won the award in 1945 even after he blackmailed and arm-twisted Theodore Roosevelt into returning a ship, SS St Louis, back to Germany with its Jewish occupants, who were later to perish in Adolf Hitler's concentration camps.
Other minor controversies include the Kenyan woman, Wangari Maathai, who won the award in 2004, for championing the planting of trees; something critics said had nothing to do with what Alfred Nobel wanted recognised in his will.
Then there was Rigoberta Menchu who won it in 1992, despite fraudulent claims in her autobiography about details of her stay in Guatemala.
Maybe, just next to the Kissinger black spot is the three-man win of 1994, when the award was shared between Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres and Yasser Arafat.
Rabin is the very man who ordered the expulsion of Arabs from Palestinian-occupied territories and he forcibly erected constructions in the same occupied territories despite the peace agreement that was in place.
Peres was the mastermind of Israel's nuclear weapons and he was responsible for the Qana massacre, the bombing of a Lebanese village where 106 innocent civilians were killed.
Perhaps Arafat was the only true advocate for peace among these three men, but the Western world considered him a "terrorist" and, in fact, one member of the Norwegian select committee of five, which comes up with the Nobel laureates, actually resigned in protest over Arafat's inclusion.
Lastly, but not least, Menachem Begin won the award in 1978 as Israeli Prime Minister. This was despite the fact he had been the publicly known leader of the murderous Zionist group Irgun, the group that was, by self-admission, responsible for the bombing of King David Hotel in 1946.
The Zimbabwean Prime Minister was reportedly a close shave behind Obama, but for what? Despite his known acts of omission and commission within the MDC circles, not least presiding over the split of the same party in 2005, and also his less than popular publicly made calls for sanctions against his own country, the man could not have it wrong with the Nobel Prize team, given the public admiration he draws from Washington, by far the leading contributor to the list of 89 laureates awarded so far.
No doubt the Zimbabwean Prime Minister is a brave man, but many doubt if he is brave for the right reasons, or if he is just brave against a common enemy with those who admire him.
In direct contrast to the controversies of the Nobel Peace Prize is the Rome Statute of 1998 and its subsequent International Criminal Court.
This court is so popular and monopolised by Africans that even minnows like this writer had to engage a legal team to show cause why it should not be appropriate for host authorities here to hand him over to The Hague.
The crime was nothing other than cyber hate speech and baseless allegations of egregious crimes spread with no other intention except to incite Australian authorities against this writer.
The authors of this slander and malice are, of course, the self-anointed and self-proclaimed "democratic forces", whose idea of democracy goes nowhere beyond the ascension of Morgan Tsvangirai to the presidency of Zimbabwe.
The 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court created an institution that allows individuals to be held accountable for the most egregious human rights violations.
The Rome Statute gives the ICC jurisdiction over genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and, when a definition is agreed, the crime of aggression.
The court can only hear cases arising out of events that occurred after July 1, 2002. Unlike the Nuremburg and ad hoc International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, the court operates on the principle of complementarity, devised to preserve considerable state sovereignty.
Complementarity means that the ICC will only have jurisdiction when a national legal system is unable or unwilling to carry out a genuine investigation or prosecution of persons alleged to have committed international crimes.
Thus the ICC is in effect a safety net for the failure of national legal systems, and not the first port of call for the prosecution of international crimes.
While the United States stands opposed to the ICC (although the White House is too happy to advocate for the implementation of the indictment of President Omar Al-Bashir of Sudan for alleged crimes against humanity), the rest of the Western countries are quite enthusiastic about a court that prosecutes those accused of most serious violations of human rights, except, it seems, where those individuals are Westerners.
Australia, for example, only ratified the ICC after adding a last-minute "declaration" or "reservation" that protects Australian citizens from prosecution at the ICC, a compromise that almost led to the rejection of the ratification by the UN depositary on the grounds that such a "reservation" was not permitted by the Rome Statute.
The clash between the desire to be seen to be supporting international enforcement of human rights, and the reluctance to subject the conduct of Westerners to international scrutiny is the teething debate in mainstream Western communities and their body polity.
Double standards, bias, manipulation and outright arrogance have become synonymous with the human rights regime in the West.
The ICC has in its seven years in existence indicted 13 people, three of whom were at the request of their own governments (but not without undue manipulation and pressure from the West); and not surprisingly all the 13 are from Africa. They include Germain Katanga, Mathieu Ngudjolo and Thomas Lambanga, all from the Democratic Republic of Congo and Jean-Pierre Bemba of the Central African Republic, as well as Omar Al-Bashir and two others from Sudan.
The July 2006 murderous Israeli bombing campaign of Southern Lebanon, George W. Bush's free killings in Iraq and Afghanistan from 2001 up to today under Obama, and the December 2008 massacres of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip by the Israelis; all do not count for egregious crimes against humanity or war crimes -- not when they involve the "civilised world".
Cluster bombing and the sophisticated firepower of the US and Israel do not result in war crimes or crimes against humanity.
Only the spears of the tribespeople of Kenya and the AK47 rifles of the Sudanese people are primitive enough to result in their handlers being dragged to the ICC for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The atrocious mass killings of Kissinger, Peres and Rabin can attract the Nobel Peace Prize while Westerners find nobility in discussing the possibility of dragging Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe to The Hague on the basis of a cholera outbreak directly caused by the economic warfare waged on his country by the Western alliance.
Meanwhile, the very man who mobilised the sanctions against Zimbabwe was unsurprisingly hot in the running for the Nobel Peace Prize, and, of course, the "recalcitrant" Mugabe is meant to pay the price for the iniquity of the actions of his Prime Minister, Morgan Tsvangirai. Such is the world order we have today.
Kwame Nkrumah was never in the running for the award despite being the founding father of Sub-Saharan independence and the Organisation of African Unity. Mahatma Gandhi was in the running five times but never won the award despite him being a much more respected political achiever than the whole bunch of US laureates combined.
Christiane Amanpour of the CNN had the temerity to play for President Mugabe a video clip of Desmond Tutu of South Africa insulting Cde Mugabe, and she reckoned the insults were worthy respecting because Tutu is a once awarded member of the list of controversial laureates honoured with this Norwegian overrated prize.
Amanpour even called Tutu a freedom fighter and ranked him alongside Cde Mandela.
It really turns out that the Nobel Peace Prize has been turned into a rightwing political tool to promote Western values that are often disguised as democratic values, while the wrath of international law for such misdeeds as war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and even aggression are reserved for the "lesser" people; only whose conflicts produce these crimes while conflicts involving the Western alliance is beyond reproach.
Did we not just hear that Zimbabwean Finance Minister was "honoured" as the best Finance Minister in Africa?
That kind of fraudulent thinking is insulting to African people, much as it may have flattered the unassuming lawyer-turned-politician Tendai Biti.
Congratulations, Prime Minister Tsvangirai, for a good run for the ultimate prize and for the lesser prizes you just picked up in Europe.
I am sure you did Zimbabwe proud.
This writer hopes that Obama will answer the "call to action" from Norway and start working for the award that he was clearly honoured with well in advance.
This was like a marriage certificate, probably the only certificate one is awarded before the process of examination.
Indeed we know that many have this certificate annulled or even torn to pieces in anger as the going gets tough.
We call it divorce, and we hope Obama is not going to be divorced from the legacy for which he was awarded this prize; clearly without any slight expectation.
Zimbabwe, we are one and together we will overcome. It is homeland or death!
Reason Wafawarova is a political writer
Read comments. Write your own.
Copyright © 2009 The Herald. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
This article is meant for Army Generals and Boarder Gezi Graduates who suffer from lack of independent analysis and do not have access to a variety of media. Otherwise for someone who have access to variety (spice of life) this will not change the way I/we think but its just a waste of paper to make your boss happy. For interest sake what do you think about the prizes that RG Mugabe got from Western Nations after killing the Ndebele people in the 1980s did he deserve them by then, you should have included this in your article then we will start to take you serious
All, please see below comments from Reason. I've leave you all to judge his sanity for yourself.
1) (LACKS!)Reason believes Travel warnings on Zimbabwe equate to a travel embargo on Zimbabwe by western powers.
2) (LACKS!)Reason believes The US is required by ZIDERA to influence allies to vote against financial support to Zimbabwe. If you read ZIDERA you will find this is not the case.
3) (LACKS!)Reason boasts of murdering many Rhodesian farmers.
4) (LACKS!)Reason believes that Britain reports directly to Washington, and has no mind of its own.
5) (LACKS!)Reason believes that Britain wants to make Zimbabwe a colony again.
6) (LACKS!)Reason believes Tsvangirai is a traitor who deserves the death penalty.
7) (LACKS!)Reason hates Zimbabwean asylum seekers who he believes earn a living by "soiling the name of an innocent man".
8) (LACKS!)Reason believes that the MDC by Complaining about the persecution of its members and supporters is not a sign that they beleive in human rights.
9) (LACKS!)Reason believes the MDC called for ruinous sanctions against the people of Zimbabwe.
10) (LACKS!)Reason believes that no one who preaches against human rights abuse is genuine. These people only have the agenda of the west behind them.
11) (LACKS!)Reason believes the delay of releasing election results was to enable the ZANU PF to "teach people to vote correctly" with no MDC in sight.
12) (LACKS!)Reason continually tries to pass off his unsubstantiated opinion as fact.
13) (LACKS!)Reason believes that the US has enough influence in the IMF with only 16% of the vote to run the organisation.
14) (LACKS!)Reason believes that the US ZIDERA restricts the IMF from lending money to Zimbabwe, even though with ZIDERA in place, the IMF has just released $500m to Zimbabwe. How is this possible?
15) (LACKS!)Reason believes the MDC is run from number 10 downing street. He must be really worried that this would effectively make Brown the PM of Zimbabwe.
16) (LACKS!)Reason believes that himself and fellow contributor 'Moyo' are brothers from the same village. Moyo's response was "Reason, we are not brothers at all. There could be a chance that…"
17) (LACKS!)Reason's comments are like watching a car crash - or a freak show at the circus.
18) (LACKS!)Reason believes the Zimbabwean Herald is a paper that is independent of the ZANU PF.
19) (LACKS!)Reason believes the March Election last year was 'unriggable'. Why? Because someone told him so.
20) (LACKS!)Reason believes that ZIDERA was drafted in the back of a Harare hotel.
21) (LACKS!)Reason believes that a document that was drafted in the back of a hotel can make its way through the highest parts of the US government and become law.
22) (LACKS!)Reason believes that the wide spread violence and intimidation and murder of MDC supports before the Run Off election was simply an "exclusive intercation with rural voters". He uses this euphemism for rape, torture and murder that the Butcher of Harare Mugabe and his bunch of Zanu-PF thieves unleashed on the Zimbabwean people. He legitimises violence in this context.
23) (LACKS!)Reason will not accept any election result where the winners are the MDC. If the MDC do win the next election, he plans a wide spread wave of violence, murder and intimidation like the last elections.
24) (LACKS!)Reason believes it is ok to use violence as a mean to show "Western sponsors who really has the power in Zimbabwe"
25) (LACKS!)Reason believes ZIDERA is not illegal! Finally some good news!
26) (LACKS!)Reason believes there is an embargo on trade from the US and Zimbabwe, when trade between the US and Zimbabwe has doubled since ZIDERA was put in place.
27) (LACKS!)Reason believes it is illegal for any US Company to trade with Zimbabwe.
28) (LACKS!)Reason believes it is illegal for any US citizen to travel to Zimbabwe.
29) (LACKS!)Reason believes that Mugabe should take the blame for the ruining of Zimbabwe (some more good news!)
30) (LACKS!)Reason will start arguing against your character once you have in in a corner, like a school yard bully name calling.
31) (LACKS!)Reason believes that Zimbabwe was a safe place to travel during the elections, even though 130 were murdered and many many more tortured.
32) (LACKS!)Reason believes the Herald provides a 'non-partisan' view.
33) (LACKS!)Reason believes its ok that Mugabe and Grace own 12 farms, and that other politicians own multiple farms
34) (LACKS!)Reason admits to spreading propaganda and lying!
35) (LACKS!)Reason believes that the payment of $500m by the IMF was allowed by the G20, and not through the usual voting process. Why? Because someone told him so. (He would believe the world was flat if you told him).
36) (LACKS!)Reason believes that ZIDERA stats says the US will "ensure that its allies block any vote" for the financing of Zimbabwean projects. No where does ZIDERA state this. It’s a blatant lie.
37) (LACKS!)Reason will one day be deported from Australia.
38) (LACKS!)Reason believes that “Zimbabwe is not Afghanistan”. He’s oh so smart!
39) (LACKS!)Reason believes that Britain is a threat to Zimbabwe’s national interest.
40) (LACKS!)Reason is hiding out in Australia because he is a coward.
41) (LACKS!)Reason had this comment written about him “"What courage do these lick spittle commentators have in running away from their homeland and then pretending that the country is being ably managed by a hero of the African revolution”
42) (LACKS!)Reason believes the “The IMF are very good at advising you to hang yourself.”
43) (LACKS!)Reason said “I do not lie!” haha. That’s ironic.
44) (LACKS!)Reason believes he is a “great writer”! haha that’s hilarious.
45) (LACKS!)Reason likes to call people names to make him feel better about his own personal inadequacies.
46) (LACKS!)Reason stated that Bennett called for sanctions on Zimbabwe. At the same time he refuses to back this comment up with a link to a reputable source, even though he says it would be easy to find on Google.
This post was deleted because it contravenes AllAfrica's commenting guidelines.
AWT i think a prize for the worst leader should be in place in this way it will name and shame them and the nominees for the awared are ....!!!!!
I am always amazed how people can have such differing views. However when a reporter is so biased as this one he loses all credibility with the general readership. I hope your drivel is not actually printed as it would be a shame to destroy trees to print this rubbish.
Your ability to ignore or obfusciate facts makes your writing worthless to anyone but those who for convenience agree with your views.
For example FW de Klerk was not awarded the Nobel Peace prize because he was the leader of the Apartheid regime. It was because he voluntarily laid down his power in order to enable a new dispensation, something that your psychotic leader is unable to do.