Search results

According to Alfred Nobel's original intent the Nobel Peace Prize should be awarded to the person or group who has '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'. The peace prize committee has since its original distribution expanded the definition of peace to include righteous social, economic or environmental action that has brought the committee its share of criticism. Even worse the peace price has previously been distributed to controversial laureates such as Theodore Roosevelt, Elihu Root and Hendry Kissing, and the infamous dictators Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin have received a nomination. L. Pitkaniemi

Piracy has a long history and often arises from legitimization problems, which may cause problems in distinguishing pirates from non-pirates. Piracy can essentially be divided into three epochs: classical piracy, colonial piracy and modern piracy. Classical piracy lasted from 1492 to 1730 and was filling a proto-legal space when Protestants pirates defined the pope's authority, colonial piracy took place in the 18th and 19th century Mediterranean Sea, also backed by religious motives, and modern piracy is a phenomenon of the 21st century where the pirates utilize instable regions for their benefit. Legal, normative and conceptual definitions can be used to differentiate between pirates and non-pirates. L. Pitkaniemi

The Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded on an annual basis since 1901. Since then there have been some years when no prize was awarded, usually during wartime, and other years where the award has proved controversial. Nevertheless, the award has always reflected something important about prevailing ideas concerning the concept of peace. This paper seeks to make sense of this history in order to explain some of the underlying discursive dynamics that make certain awards controversial, and others widely applauded. In particular some reflection is offered on the recent direction of the award towards wider social issues such as poverty and the environment. What this analysis reveals is the slow evolution of the Peace Prize from reflecting and legitimising notions of `peace as order' towards more entrepreneurial notions of `peace as justice'. The paper then moves on to briefly consider how the discourse of peace has subtly shifted in the aftermath of 9/11, and why — in the absence of universally accepted accounts of justice — peace is being recast in terms of legitimate frameworks of human security. In the light of this the paper argues for being positive about negative peace, and suggests that if the Norwegian Nobel Committee continues to reflect wider discourses of peace, it will reverse its recent trend of using the prize to highlight wider and wider questions of development and the environment. Lastly, the paper makes a brief case in favour of Interpol being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, both in recognition of its place at the centre of quotidian matters of legitimate international police and security cooperation, and as a means of establishing some conceptual benchmarks by which to disaggregate the police and security measures that states already agree on, from those they do not.

The Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded on an annual basis since 1901. Since then there have been some years when no prize was awarded, usually during wartime, & other years where the award has proved controversial. Nevertheless, the award has always reflected something important about prevailing ideas concerning the concept of peace. This paper seeks to make sense of this history in order to explain some of the underlying discursive dynamics that make certain awards controversial, & others widely applauded. In particular some reflection is offered on the recent direction of the award towards wider social issues such as poverty & the environment. What this analysis reveals is the slow evolution of the Peace Prize from reflecting & legitimizing notions of 'peace as order' towards more entrepreneurial notions of 'peace as justice.' The paper then moves on to briefly consider how the discourse of peace has subtly shifted in the aftermath of 9/11, & why -- in the absence of universally accepted accounts of justice -- peace is being recast in terms of legitimate frameworks of human security. In the light of this the paper argues for being positive about negative peace, & suggests that if the Norwegian Nobel Committee continues to reflect wider discourses of peace, it will reverse its recent trend of using the prize to highlight wider & wider questions of development & the environment. Lastly, the paper makes a brief case in favor of Interpol being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, both in recognition of its place at the center of quotidian matters of legitimate international police & security cooperation, & as a means of establishing some conceptual benchmarks by which to disaggregate the police & security measures that states already agree on, from those they do not. Adapted from the source document.