History Podcasts

Jimmy Carter wins Nobel Peace Prize

Jimmy Carter wins Nobel Peace Prize


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

On October 11, 2002, former President Jimmy Carter wins the Nobel Peace Prize “for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development.”

Carter, a peanut farmer from Georgia, served one term as U.S. president between 1977 and 1981. One of his key achievements as president was mediating the peace talks between Israel and Egypt in 1978. The Nobel Committee had wanted to give Carter (1924- ) the prize that year for his efforts, along with Anwar Sadat and Menachim Begin, but was prevented from doing so by a technicality—he had not been nominated by the official deadline.

After he left office, Carter and his wife Rosalynn created the Atlanta-based Carter Center in 1982 to advance human rights and alleviate human suffering. Since 1984, they have worked with Habitat for Humanity to build homes and raise awareness of homelessness. Among his many accomplishments, Carter has helped to fight disease and improve economic growth in developing nations and has served as an observer at numerous political elections around the world.

The first Nobel Prizes—awards established by Swedish industrialist Alfred Nobel (1833-1896) in his will—were handed out in Sweden in 1901 in the fields of physics, chemistry, medicine, literature and peace. The Nobel Prize in economics was first awarded in 1969. Carter was the third U.S. president to receive the award, worth $1 million, following Theodore Roosevelt (1906) and Woodrow Wilson (1919). Former president Barack Obama won in 2009.

READ MORE: How Jimmy Carter Brokered a Hard-Won Peace Deal Between Israel and Egypt


Jimmy Carter wins Nobel Peace Prize - HISTORY

The five-member committee chose Mr Carter for "decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development".

Although Mr Carter has not openly criticised President George W Bush's policy on Iraq, Friday's award "should be interpreted as a criticism of the line that the current administration has taken," said Committee chairman Gunnar Berge.

"It's a kick in the leg to all that follow the same line as the United States," Mr Berge said.

In his acceptance statement, Mr Carter said he was "deeply grateful" for the honour.

"This honour serves as an inspiration not only to us, but also to suffering people around the world, and I accept it on their behalf," he said.

The former US president also called for greater efforts to promote peace and justice.

"People everywhere share the same dream of a caring community that prevents war and oppression," he said.

Announcing the decision, the Nobel Committee said that during his presidency from 1977 to 1981, Mr Carter's "mediation was a vital contribution to the Camp David Accords between Israel and Egypt, in itself a great enough achievement to qualify for the Nobel Peace Prize".

"At a time when the cold war between East and West was still predominant, he placed renewed emphasis on the place of human rights in international politics."

Mr Carter is the third US president to receive the Nobel Peace Prize - after Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt.

He will receive the award at a ceremony at Oslo's City Hall on 10 December - the anniversary of the death of the prize's creator, Swedish industrialist - and the inventor of dynamite - Alfred Nobel.

A record 156 candidates were put forward for the prize this year, including Afghan President Hamid Karzai, dissidents and campaigning Irish rock star Bono.

Organisations such as the European Court of Human Rights and the UN war crimes tribunal at The Hague were also in the running.

The Committee also considered nominations for the Salvation Army, the Tiananmen Mothers, a network of women who lost relatives in the 1989 massacre in Beijing, and the ecumenical patriarch Bartholomew, spiritual leader of Orthodox Christians.


What&rsquos the Nobel Peace Prize?

Alfred Nobel was a man of many disciplines -- including science, invention, entrepreneurship, literature, and peace. When he passed away in 1896, he dedicated his will to award those who have been outstanding figures in these fields. As a result, in 1900, the Nobel Foundation was established and became the organization responsible for awarding the Nobel Prizes.

According to Alfred Nobel&rsquos will, the Nobel Peace Prize shall be awarded to those who have &ldquodone 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 Nobel Peace Prize is an international award that is awarded every year by the Norwegian Nobel Committee. The prize ceremony takes place annually on December 10, the date on which Alfred Nobel passed away. The prize usually includes a medal, personal diploma, and award money.

Woodrow Wilson's Nobel Peace Prize Medal. Picture provided by the Library of Congress.


Jimmy Carter Wins Nobel Peace Prize

OSLO, Norway – Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday "for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development."

The Norwegian Nobel Committee cited Carter's "vital contribution" to the Camp David Accords between Israel and Egypt and his efforts in conflict resolution on several continents and the promotion of human rights after his presidency.

"In a situation currently marked by threats of the use of power, Carter has stood by the principles that conflicts must as far as possible be resolved through mediation and international co-operation based on international law, respect for human rights, and economic development," the citation said.

The award is worth $1 million.

"I don't think there's any doubt that the Nobel Prize itself encourages people to think about peace and human rights," Carter said.

"When I was at the White House I was a fairly young man and I realized I would have maybe 25 more years of active life," Carter said, adding that he decided to "capitalize on the influence I had as the former president of the greatest nation of the world and dcided to fill vacuums."

The secretive, five-member committee made its decision last week after months of secret deliberations as it sought the right message for a world still dazed by the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, the war on terrorism that followed and concern about a possible U.S. military strike against Iraq.

Last year's award was shared by the United Nations and its secretary-general, Kofi Annan.

The peace prize announcement capped a week of Nobel prizes, with the awards for literature, medicine, physics, chemistry and economics already announced in Sweden's capital, Stockholm.

The Norwegian Nobel committee received a record 156 nominations -- 117 individuals and 39 groups -- by the Feb. 1 deadline. The list remains secret for 50 years, but those who nominate sometimes announce their choice.

Many known nominees, including former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, reflected the 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States and their aftermath.

President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair were nominated, but their chances for winning seemed doubtful at a time when they are poised to launch a military strike against Iraq.

The first Nobel Peace Prize, in 1901, honored Jean Henry Dunant, the Swiss founder of the Red Cross.

The prizes were created by Swedish industrialist Alfred Nobel in his will and always are presented on Dec. 10, the anniversary of his 1896 death.

This year's Nobels started Monday with the naming of medicine prize winners American H. Robert Horvitz and Britons Sydney Brenner and John E. Sulston for groundbreaking research into organ growth and cell death -- work that has opened new avenues for treating cancer, stroke and other diseases.

The physics award went Tuesday to Masatoshi Koshiba, of Japan, and Americans Riccardo Giacconi and Raymond Davis Jr. for using some of the most obscure particles and waves in nature to increase understanding of the universe.

On Wednesday, the economics prize went to Americans Daniel Kahneman and Vernon L. Smith for pioneering the use of psychological and experimental economics in decision-making. That same day, American John B. Fenn, Koichi Tanaka of Japan and Kurt Wuethrich of Switzerland were given the chemistry prize for making two existing lab techniques work for big molecules like proteins.

Imre Kertesz, a Hungarian who survived Auschwitz as a teenager, won the literature prize Thursday for writing that "upholds the fragile experience of the individual against the barbaric arbitrariness of history," the Swedish Academy said.


We get three perspectives on Mr. Carter, the peacemaker. Zbigniew Brzezinski was National Security Adviser to President Carter and was at his side throughout the Camp David negotiations. Historian Douglas Brinkley is author of a book about Mr. Carter's post-White House years, "The Unfinished Presidency." And Marshall Frady covered Mr. Carter in Georgia and has written several books about the South and southern political figures.

Well, in the Nobel citation from the committee, one of the first things they mention, Zbigniew Brzezinski is the Camp David agreement. What was essential about Jimmy Carter being the third member of that three-corner negotiation?

ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI:

Well, he was essential. He really was essential. Without him, there would have been no agreement. To be sure, in different ways, both Sadat and Begin realized that they could achieve some strategic interest by accommodating, but they were so far apart, and they were so antagonistic towards each other that without Carter's persistence, dedication, grasp of the issues but above all, persistence, willingness to press both, there would have been no accord.

He was essential. He was the one who was the true architect of that peace agreement and I must say a year or so later, when I briefed him as a I did every morning, early in the morning, I came to my office and I heard that Sadat and Begin were given the Nobel Peace Prize but not Carter, I was outraged. I was then the first person to see him and I remember to this day walking into that office and he was sitting in the arm chair by the fireplace in the Oval Office, reading the "New York Times" story. And I was sick to my stomach I was so furious. And I talked to him about it. And he was serene, wistful, but I think he was hurt. And this is wonderful compensation, and a really justified award. I was so happy this morning as if it was something directly involving me. It is just really great. It is nice to be on your show, first time ever not talking about some international crisis but about something that is in a human sense truly warming.

Douglas Brinkley, what at is it about Jimmy Carter's personality that made him essential at Camp David?

DOUGLAS BRINKLEY:

His tenacity. He did not want to give up or give into anything. He was able to at one point even able to have Begin up against the wall, essentially not letting him go when he wanted to leave. And his true belief that peace could be had in the Middle East, and he has continued that process during his post-presidency, using the Carter Center as his base.

We heard him quote St. Paul during that interview. Those kinds of things seem to come out of him more easily than most public figures in our history and in our contemporary politics. Genuine? Studied? What is it?

DOUGLAS BRINKLEY:

It's very genuine. Jimmy Carter does not wear his religion on his sleeve. It's in his heart. When I was doing research and writing on him, I realized when he was in the Navy, and many people don't realize, Carter has had the second longest military career of any president in this century after Dwight Eisenhower &ndash that he would hold bible classes when he was in the Navy. Sometimes when other men were on leave, he was there and would talk about Christianity and Christ. And so the religion is a big part of his life. In many ways, he's a Baptist missionary. And, remember, that his mother, Miss Lillian, worked in the Peace Corps to help people with leprosy. And he inherited that tradition from her also.

So I think it is a combination of his bedrock intelligence, his tenacity and the spiritual life, God and Christ mean a great deal to Jimmy Carter. And I'm just very pleased, like Mr. Brzezinski, that he finally got this award. I thought he would have gotten it in 1994. Every year he is on the short list. And it was time indeed. I hope he is enjoying this great, great honor. Now I think he is joining Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt as one of the three Nobel Peace Prize winning presidents and perhaps won't be seen with the middle brow or low brow presidents. He has become a great American hero today all over the world.

Marshall Frady, you heard the Southern Baptist part of him talked about. You were covering him as a Georgia legislator. At the same time he is very much of the South and of the Church and of his times. Was he also an outsider?

MARSHALL FRADY:

Well, in those times, those were the years of sulfur during the Civil Rights Movement and just his essential decency, which was conspicuously evident even at that time in the convulsions of the '60s, set him apart. And he had a kind of Sunday school teacher's earnestness about him that one could not imagine being translated or transferred then into the fearsome machineries of government and power.

And I'm not sure he did make that transfer all together that easily. And his administration, he carried that sort of Southern schoolteacher's morality and earnestness and didacticism on into a culture of power in Washington, which did not receive it that hospitably. And the Presidency, his Presidency had splendid moments, one of which has certainly already been mentioned. It also happened to be the case that the principle of human rights, human rights, for the first time, emerged out of the Carter Administration as part of a vocabulary of discussion of international conduct &ndash one of those invisible values that he cited.

But to a great degree the presidency for Carter, some have said, that it is a splendid misery. But in many respects, it was nothing but misery for Carter. He just was not that agreeably received by that whole firmament of consequence and the establishment, that company town that he found himself isolated in and as an outsider, but when he was defeated, as sorely as he smarted over that, as it's now whimsically wound up, it was like a liberation for what was deepest and had been deepest in him all along. And it was that earnest Sunday school&ndash it's that quality in the American character that Jane Kramer in a classic essay in the New Yorker many years ago cited, it was like a last&ndash like the last cowboy, but the quality of the American character as she put it, expressing right. Acting right. And it is doubtful that any president has had a more distinguished and auspicious post-presidential season and career. It's almost like he was liberated into what is his second term and a global ministry that is open ended, and he has really arrived now after this long and one of the most fantastic and fabulous and fascinating odysseys in American political history, has finally arrived now at his moment of truth, at his destiny.

Let me touch again on human rights, Marshall Frady mentioned it. It wasn't just human rights but a really much more expansive reading of what was included under the rubric, wasn't it?

ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI:

Absolutely. And it also involved a sense of optimism about the future. Don't forget that was a time when many people thought the Soviet Union was riding the crest of history and the United States was going downward. The commitment to human rights so deeply identified with the United States revitalized a sense of historical optimism about America's mission in the world. But I would like to add a further dimension to what was so ably said by the two biographers. Carter was committed to human rights. Carter was deeply religious. But Carter also knew how to wield political power. He knew how to press Sadat and Begin to reach peace and he understood that peace would not be achieved by neglect, but could only be achieved by commitment. And he made that commitment and he stuck to it.

And when it was necessary, he was quite prepared to use force, even commit America to serious obligations in the face of potential conflict for example, the Carter doctrine for the defense of the Persian Gulf area to react to the possibility of Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and downfall of Iran. These were serious commitments. So he combined both the spiritual dimension and the idealistic and yet he had that appreciation for power when power ought to be used. He was willing to threaten Sadat he was willing to threaten Begin &ndash both of them &mdash even in the face of domestic controversy, in order to achieve what he needed to achieve and what he did achieve in Camp David. And I feel that he got a short shrift historically, initially after the end of his presidency. But just as it was said, I think we are now reevaluating him and this award, in a sense, puts a new stamp on him I think he is going to be viewed increasingly as a very, very successful important president.

Well, Douglas Brinkley, you've called it the unfinished presidency, but the men who held the job while he was out fulfilling his destiny in the '80s and '90s, were they always happy about having a freelance diplomat on the road with also the clout and name recognition that a former President of the United States has?

DOUGLAS BRINKLEY:

No, it was complicated. The Reagan Administration wanted nothing do with Jimmy Carter. It is true Ronald Reagan went to the opening of the Carter Center but Carter wasn't invited to the White House, wasn't consulted &mdash wasn't welcomed at our embassies abroad and wasn't invited to the Reagan White House for the unveiling of his own portrait. But things changed when George Sr. came into the White House, things changed because James Baker developed a new relationship with Jimmy Carter. They used him very effectively for a while. Carter, remember in 1989, went to Panama to mediate the elections there.

And it was Carter who pointed a finger at General Manuel Noriega and called him a thief, somebody who was dishonest, who ran a fraudulent election. And Carter's word was believed around the hemisphere. Some people were skeptical about the Bush Administration and what they were doing in Panama but everybody believed Carter because he was the broker of the Panama Canal treaties, and therefore, once again his presidency gave his post-presidency credibility.

Daniel Ortega had actually visited the White House and the Sandinistas came to Washington and Carter caught a lot of flack from the right for that, but in 1990, Ortega welcomed Carter to be a mediator and when Ortega lost, it was Jimmy Carter who went at midnight to see Daniel Ortega and said you lost you could be do more for Nicaraguan history by bringing democracy to this country by admitting that you lost. After talking to Carter, Ortega stepped down.

But he got into trouble with the Bush Administration over Iraq, after &mdash he was against Desert Storm, Jimmy Carter, and did everything he could to prevent that, including writing letters to various UN members urging them not to cooperate with the Bush Administration then. And that angered people like Dick Cheney and Brent Scowcroft some and they kind of cooled out on Carter. The Clinton relationship for eight years was difficult because Carter and Warren Christopher, who were very, very close, had a bit of a falling out but Carter had &ndash I believe asserted himself very effectively in stopping a serious bloody intervention into Haiti and as earlier in the program was mentioned, in North Korea. I think his diplomacy in those two areas in 1994 was stellar &mdash Bosnia less so.

But the Clinton Administration sort of froze him out after that because he was stealing too many headlines, was on the cover of the magazines, sometimes spoke to CNN prematurely. And Madeleine Albright in the second Clinton Administration would call and consult with Carter, but they tried to keep him at arm's distance from even a country that was not significant to American security like Sudan, and this current administration has had nothing to do with Carter, although I was very pleased to see that President Bush called Jimmy Carter and spoke with him for a few minutes today. I thought that was a very gracious thing for the president to do.

Now Nobel Laureate Jimmy Carter. Douglas Brinkley, gentlemen, thank you very much.


A Kick in the Leg: The Secret, Corrupt Political History of the Nobel Peace Prize

Norwegian born Unni Turrettini is an attorney, leadership coach, and the author of Betraying the Nobel: The Secrets and Corruption Behind the Nobel Peace Prize (Pegasus Books &ndash November 3, 2020).

The Nobel Peace Prize as we know it is corrupt at its core. Sometimes the Nobel Peace Prize Committee hands out Nobel&rsquos medal to people and organizations that deserve it. Other times it has a different agenda. The history of the Nobel Peace Prize and the United Nations is complicated: sometimes it&rsquos a &ldquosafe choice,&rdquo other times, it&rsquos a &ldquokick in the leg&rdquo to the U.S. government.

The Nobel Peace Prize 2020 has been awarded to the UN&rsquos World Food Program for its efforts to combat &ldquohunger as a weapon of war.&rdquo The United Nations is a long-time favorite of the committee, having won the Nobel Peace Prize seventeen times. It&rsquos a safe winner for the Norwegian Nobel Committee, considering some of its previous selections. For example, the 2019 laureate, the Ethiopian prime minister Abiy Ahmed Ali, has turned out to be a disappointment. Ali won for his efforts to make peace between his country and Eritrea, and also for lessening tensions within Ethiopia. A year later, Ali has proven to be more of an authoritarian leader than a peace champion. Reports show extrajudicial killings, massive jailing of political opponents, and lengthy internet shutdowns as a means to control the population. Many are asking if last year&rsquos prize was premature, so in contrast, choosing the WFP brings the risk for disappointment, and therefore the chance of criticism, close to zero.

Despite the scandals that have surrounded the UN, including the UN Peacekeeping forces&rsquo (winner of the Nobel Peace prize in 1988) involvement in sexual violence against women in the places they were mandated to protect, Norway considers the UN to be a check on American power, and the closest to a world government we have yet achieved.

When President Barack Obama won in 2009, he had been in office for roughly eight months (and for less than two weeks when he was nominated by the February 1 deadline). There was another motivation behind Obama&rsquos Peace Prize, however - The Nobel Peace Prize, in addition to being used for politically strategic purposes, has also sometimes been used with the intent to punish and keep people, especially politicians, in line.

This was true in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on American soil on September 11, 2001. All of a sudden, many Western countries felt united against a common enemy&mdashal-Qaeda&mdashand President George W. Bush was able to form an alliance to find and fight the terrorists. As a result, the United States, through the eyes of the Norwegian government, stood out as too powerful and self-important.

But according to the Norwegian government, there is a solution to avoid one nation standing out too much above the others: The United Nations, which is why the UN and its secretary-general Kofi Annan won Nobel&rsquos prize just weeks after President Bush declared war on terror and Al-Qaeda in September 2001.

Then in 2002, former US President Jimmy Carter won. The committee chair, Gunnar Berge, made it clear that Carter was selected not only because he deserved it, but more importantly because the award &ldquoshould be interpreted as a criticism of the line that the current administration has taken. It&rsquos a kick in the leg [meaning: slap in the face] to all those who follow the same line as the United States.&rdquo In essence, Norway wagged an admonishing finger at the United States.

According to the committee, Carter &ldquocontinues to be, the mediator who seeks peaceful solutions to international conflicts.&rdquo Between the lines, one could almost hear: Unlike President Bush. Carter was also the first American president who wished to give the Palestinians their own homeland and stressed that the Israelis had to stop building new settlements on the West Bank. His position on the Palestine-Israel conflict was in line with the Norwegian government&rsquos.

&ldquoCarter only served one term as President of the United States,&rdquo Berge said as a dig to the United States. &ldquoIn a country where such importance is attached to outward success, that has cast a shadow. Carter&rsquos principal concern was to do what he felt was right, even when it was not the smartest political step to take.&rdquo Once more, unlike President Bush was the subtext.

Another &ldquokick in the leg&rdquo award toward President Bush and the United States came in 2005. The winner was the International Atomic Energy Agency and its director general, Mohammed ElBaradei. Although in name it sounds promising, The IAEA&mdashwhich is an advisory agency to the UN&mdashhasn&rsquot done anything to reduce nuclear weapons in the world. But ElBaradei had been opposing American policy for years and was an open foe of President Bush. Al Gore, also an opponent to Bush and his administration, won the prize in 2007 for his battle against global warming. Gore may have lost the presidential election to George W. Bush in 2000, but through the Nobel Peace Prize, he was vindicated.

When Barack Obama was announced the winner in 2009, the journalists present asked the committee chair to name some things Obama had achieved in the name of peace in the previous year to deserve Nobel&rsquos medal. The committee chairman responded with, &ldquoWe want to send a signal to the world.&rdquo The signal, it appears, was that Obama brought with him the hope of change from the previous Bush administration&rsquos politics.

No other prize holds more prestige than the Nobel Peace Prize. In his will, Alfred Nobel used three concepts to clarify his approach toward a more peaceful world and which type of work he wished to support. He used three expressions&mdashthe best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.

The Nobel committee, consisting of five members elected by the Norwegian parliament, hasn&rsquot always followed Alfred Nobel&rsquos instructions. According to former committee secretary Geir Lundestad, &ldquoThe committee thinks there are many roads to peace.&rdquo

Selecting winners who are clearly not peace champions creates distrust. But the Nobel Peace Prize, as an institution, isn&rsquot alone in this. Today, trust in leadership is also at a historic low in governments and corporations. The Nobel Peace Prize Committee is showing an example of leadership that is divisive instead of unifying. Instead of making the bold choices our world needs, it has fallen into the temptation of power and politics. It has been swayed by popularity and fame instead of standing up for the true values of the Nobel Peace Prize&mdashAlfred Nobel&rsquos intentions of peace and unity. As a consequence, unworthy candidates have been chosen and other, more deserving ones have been ignored.

By ignoring Nobel&rsquos last will and testament, and perverting the historical significance of the prize, the committee has disconnected from Nobel and transformed his prize for global disarmament into a general prize for whatever it most conveniently defines as &ldquopeace&rdquo at the moment. Now, the Nobel Foundation in Stockholm must restore the meaning, honor, and integrity of the prize. Perhaps then, the prize will affect the change which Nobel intended.


Carter Wins Nobel Peace Prize

OSLO, Oct 11 -- Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday for a quest for democracy and human rights in an award that also faulted Washington's drive to oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

Carter, who was president from 1977 to 1981, won from a record field of 156 candidates vying for the prize named after Alfred Nobel, a Swedish philanthropist and inventor of dynamite.

The five-member committee praised decades of "untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development."

Since he left office, beaten by Republican Ronald Reagan, Carter has won praise for tireless work in trying to bring peace from the Middle East to North Korea.He has been repeatedly nominated for the prize, worth $1.0 million.

"He has shown outstanding commitment to human rights, and has served as an observer at countless elections all over the world," the committee said its citation.

"He has worked hard on many fronts to fight tropical diseases and to bring about growth and progress in developing countries. Carter has thus been active in several of the problem areas that have figured prominently in the over one hundred years of Peace Prize history," it added.

Carter came close to winning in 1978 when Israeli Prime Minister Menachim Begin and Egyptian President Anwar Sadat shared the Nobel Peace award for a peace deal brokered by Carter.

The committee that year wanted to give Carter the prize but he had not been formally nominated by the February deadline.

Gunnar Berge, head of the committee, said that Carter had been informed. "I think there is reason to say he was surprised and very happy," he told reporters.

The committee also criticised U.S. President George Bush and his campaign to oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. Carter has said it would be a tragic and costly error for the United States to attack Iraq without U.N. support.

Berge, asked if the award criticised Bush, said: "With the position Carter has taken on this it can and must be also be seen as criticism of the line the current U.S. administration has taken on Iraq.

"In a situation currently marked by threats of the use of power, Carter has stood by the principles that conflicts must as far as possible be resolved through mediation and international cooperation based on international law, respect for human rights and economic development," Berge said.


Georgia and the Nobel Peace Prize

Nobel Peace Prizes won by two famous Georgians are displayed in Atlanta, both close to downtown hotels and just a mile and a half apart from each other. Although the Norwegian Nobel Committee selects only one person a year on average to receive arguably the planet's highest award, Atlanta also has links to several other Nobel laureates.

Martin Luther King Jr. announced during the ceremony for the 1964 award: "I accept the Nobel Peace Prize at a moment when 22 million Negroes of the United States of America are engaged in a creative battle to end the long night of racial injustice." His medal is displayed at the King Center's Freedom Hall (449 Auburn Ave. NE). A walking trail with historic markers links the King medal to one awarded to another Georgian.

Jimmy Carter won the 2002 prize for his work at the nonprofit Carter Center and the brokering of the Camp David Peace Accords while president. The Carter Presidential Library (441 Freedom Pkwy.) features two of the three medals each Nobel laureate receives, providing a rare opportunity to see both sides at the same time. (Carter's third medal is exhibited at his old Plains High School, which is now part of the National Park Service's Plains Historic Site.)

The other American presidents who've won the Nobel Peace Prize&mdashTeddy Roosevelt in 1906 and Woodrow Wilson in 1919&mdashalso have Georgia ties. Roosevelt's mother, Mittie Bulloch, was raised in Roswell, Georgia, now a suburb of Atlanta. Visitors to Roswell won't see Teddy's prize, but they can view the home where his parents were married, the antebellum Greek revival mansion called Bulloch Hall (180 Bulloch Ave.).

Woodrow Wilson spent part of his boyhood in Augusta, worked for a while as an attorney in Atlanta, and married a woman (his first wife Ellen Axson Wilson) who was raised and buried in Rome, Georgia. It is sometimes suggested, only partly in jest, that "If you manage to get elected president and your mother lived in Georgia, you have a hundred percent chance of winning the Noble Peace Prize!"
Family relationships also link Atlanta to Peace Prizes won by three leaders in Africa. South African Bishop Desmond Tutu (1984) and former President Nelson Mandela (1993) have a daughter and granddaughter, respectively, residing in Atlanta. The daughter of Kenyan environmental activist Wangari Maathai (Nobel Prize in 2004) worked for several years at the Carter Center in Atlanta. In addition, agricultural scientist Norman Borlaug (Nobel Prize in 1970) is a long-time consultant (not in residence) for the center.

Thus, in the 86 years that a prize has been awarded, there is a Georgia connection on eight occasions. Without stretching the point too much, one might argue the number is nine. Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin won their Nobel Peace Prizes for 1978 in recognition of the Camp David Peace accords, which were hosted, of course, by Jimmy Carter.

&mdashJay Hakes serves as the director of the Carter Presidential Library. He came to Atlanta in 2000 after seven years as administrator of the federal Energy Information Administration. He is currently writing a book on energy policy during the Nixon, Ford, and Carter presidencies and is a member of the Local Arrangements Committee.


Jimmy Carter wins Nobel Peace Prize

Former American President Jimmy Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize today for his peace mediation efforts and promotion of human rights in, what the awards committee said was, a criticism of US policy and "a kick in the leg" to those following the same line.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee cited Mr Carter's "decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development."

The award, worth $1 million, singled out Carter's "vital contribution" to the Camp David Accords between Israel and Egypt and his efforts in conflict resolution on several continents and the promotion of human rights after his presidency.

"In a situation currently marked by threats of the use of power, Carter has stood by the principles that conflicts must as far as possible be resolved through mediation and international co–operation based on international law, respect for human rights, and economic development," the citation said.

"It should be interpreted as a criticism of the line that the current administration has taken," Gunnar Berge, chairman of the Nobel committee, said. "It's a kick in the leg to all that follow the same line as the United States".

Mr Carter said the prize "encourages people to think about peace and human rights."

He said his most significant work has been through the Carter Centre, which he established after his presidency and which celebrates its 20th anniversary this year.

"When I was at the White House I was a fairly young man and I realized I would have maybe 25 more years of active life," he told CNN, adding that he decided to "capitalise on the influence I had as the former president of the greatest nation of the world and decided to fill vacuums."

Last year's award was shared by the United Nations and its secretary–general, Kofi Annan.

Mr Carter, who was president from 1977–1981, brokered the 1978 agreements that were signed by Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin at the Camp David.

But while Mr Sadat and Mr Begin shared the 1978 Peace Prize for their efforts, the Nobel committee said Carter was left out due to a technicality – he was not nominated in time.

The peace prize announcement capped a week of Nobel prizes, with the awards for literature, medicine, physics, chemistry and economics already announced in Sweden's capital, Stockholm.

The Norwegian Nobel committee received a record 156 nominations – 117 individuals and 39 groups – by the Feb. 1 deadline. The list remains secret for 50 years, but those who nominate sometimes announce their choice.

Many known nominees reflected the 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States and their aftermath, including former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani.

The first Nobel Peace Prize, in 1901, honoured Jean Henry Dunant, the Swiss founder of the Red Cross. The prizes were created by Swedish industrialist Alfred Nobel in his will and always are presented on10 December, the anniversary of his 1896 death.

This year's Nobels started on Monday with the naming of medicine prize winners American H. Robert Horvitz and Britons Sydney Brenner and John E. Sulston for groundbreaking research into organ growth and cell death – work that has opened new avenues for treating cancer, stroke and other diseases.

The physics award went on Tuesday to Masatoshi Koshiba, of Japan, and Americans Riccardo Giacconi and Raymond Davis Jr. for using some of the most obscure particles and waves in nature to increase understanding of the universe.

On Wednesday, the economics prize went to Americans Daniel Kahneman and Vernon L. Smith for pioneering the use of psychological and experimental economics in decision–making. On the same day, American John B. Fenn, Koichi Tanaka of Japan and Kurt Wuethrich of Switzerland were given the chemistry prize for making two existing lab techniques work for big molecules like proteins.

Imre Kertesz, a Hungarian who survived Auschwitz as a teenager, won the literature prize Thursday for writing that "upholds the fragile experience of the individual against the barbaric arbitrariness of history," the Swedish Academy said.


Jimmy Carter wins Nobel Peace Prize - HISTORY

The Norwegian Nobel Committee said Mr Carter merited the $1m award for promoting peace and democracy throughout the world.

Out of a record 156 candidates, Afghan leader Hamid Karzai was tipped as the firm favourite to pick up this year's award.

Do you think the right man won this year's Nobel Peace Prize? Who was your choice?

This Talking Point has now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.

It would be nice if all our leaders had as strong moral convictions as Carter. I am glad to hear that he is opposed to Bush's stupid war and not afraid to say it. I believe a lot of politicians in the US feel the same way but do not have the guts to seem unpatriotic. Too bad he is not president now. He is the right choice for the prize.
Bob C, USA

Perhaps he has done a lot for peace in some world conflicts but we must not forget the very heavy mistakes in his policy towards Iran.
Rodolphe O. Andersen, Belgium

As a fellow Georgian who has seen the remarkable things Carter has done since leaving the Presidency and with the Carter Center, I applaud the choice. Truly a man whose sole goal is the promotion of peace and justice in the world.
Maggie, USA

Mr Carter's main accomplishment seems to be that he is the least worst post-war US president. Commendable, but hardly Nobel-commendable.
Mark Tinsley, UK

Yes Jimmy 'fixed it' for a lot of kids and his charity work is certainly commendable. Well done Jimmy!
Chris Coleman, Manchester, England

A good man and a great president. If he doesn't deserve a Nobel peace prize, I don't know who does. Thank you Jimmy Carter, for being the man you are.
John, Canada

I don't really care what some Norwegian Nobel Committee thinks, especially when it has become completely beholden to a politcal ideology. Another politcal correct joke of an institution.
sam, USA

I think Jimmy Carter was the best choice for the award this year. He has devoted so much effort pushing for good health, democracy and world peace and understanding. Millions around the world have much to thank him for. Congratulations President Carter!
Denis Nkweteyim, Cameroon

Symbols are very important. Carter epitomises a constant and never-ending quest for peace within what has become almost a war-mongering mentality in his country. I think it is a very good choice.
Blair MacKenzie, Canada

A very appropriate choice, especially in view of Carter's opposition to the coming invasion of Iraq by Bush and Blair.
Pawel Artymowicz, Sweden

I'm glad at long last President Jimmy Carter's activities have been recognised. It baffles me they didn't give him the Nobel Prize much earlier. Some recent laureates may not have deserved it more than him.
Jones Fahari, Tanzania

Yes, it went to the right man this time! Congratulations Mr Carter. Trust me he won't use the prize money for himself.
Peter, Sweden

Not the best choice in my opinion, but at least they didn't choose Bush, which would have been a total farce.
Rahul Mahajan, UK

Bono should have received this prize. He has no hidden agenda other than peace.
Helen, Scotland

Yes Carter was one of the great American presidents and has worked hard for peace and justice. A person his country can be proud of.
Steve, UK

I think Roy Keane should be given the Nobel peace prize. His diplomatic nature and all round interpersonal skills would be a good addition to the list of such prestigious winners that went before him.
Joe Belttinton, England


Analyze Jimmy Carter's shortcomings as U.S. president and his Nobel Prize-winning humanitarian work

NARRATOR: Jimmy Carter—the 39th president of the United States—received sharp criticism for his handling of domestic and foreign affairs while in office. After leaving the presidency, however, he won wide respect for his efforts as a diplomat and humanitarian. In fact, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002.

Carter grew up in the small town of Plains, Georgia, where his family owned a peanut farm. After high school, he attended the U.S. Naval Academy and served in the navy for seven years. He returned home to run the family farm after his father's death in 1953. Carter also became involved in local politics, fighting for equality and integration. He was elected Georgia's governor in 1970 and declared . . .

JIMMY CARTER: The time for racial discrimination is over.

NARRATOR: In 1976 Carter ran for president. His background as a peanut farmer became a large part of his image. He was seen as an outsider to the national political scene, someone who could restore public confidence following the Watergate scandal and President Richard Nixon's resignation. Carter's campaign slogans proclaimed him to be "A Leader, for a Change," and "Not Just Peanuts." He won the election, defeating President Gerald Ford, Nixon's former vice president.

After taking office, President Carter faced an energy crisis and a struggling economy. He established the Department of Energy, emphasized spending cutbacks, and approved measures designed to stimulate the economy. Despite his efforts, unemployment remained high and inflation rose sharply during Carter's administration.

Carter achieved one of his greatest presidential successes in September 1978. He hosted a summit meeting between Egyptian President Anwar el-Sādāt and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin at Camp David, the presidential retreat in Maryland. Egypt and Israel had been in a state of war since the establishment of Israel 30 years earlier. After nearly two weeks of talks, Begin and Sādāt reached an agreement to end the fighting between their countries. They signed a peace treaty six months later.

The second half of Carter's term saw several foreign policy challenges. After the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979, Carter banned the export of certain American goods to the Soviet Union. He also led a boycott of the 1980 Olympic Games in Moscow.

In November 1979 Carter faced a greater crisis as Iranian militants stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehrān and took more than 50 Americans hostage. Carter's attempts to win their release proved unsuccessful, and the hostages remained captive for more than 14 months.

The Iran hostage crisis and the struggling economy caused many Americans to lose confidence in Carter's abilities as president. Carter had addressed America's "crisis of confidence" in 1979. He argued that Americans were not only doubting him, they were doubting themselves, too.

JIMMY CARTER: We've always believed in something called progress. We've always had a faith that the days of our children would be better than our own. Our people are losing that faith, not only in government itself but in the ability as citizens to serve as the ultimate rulers and shapers of our democracy.

NARRATOR: President Carter sought reelection in 1980 but lost decisively to Ronald Reagan. The hostages were finally released on January 20, 1981, minutes after Carter left office.

Carter's image and legacy improved in the years after his presidency. He and his wife, Rosalynn, began working with Habitat for Humanity in 1984. In the following decades, they spent one week each year helping build homes in the United States and abroad. The Carters became the organization's most visible advocates, helping to raise awareness and recruit volunteers for the Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter Work Project.

The couple also founded the Carter Center, which advocates for peace, democracy, health, and human rights. The center has engaged in conflict mediation and election monitoring across the world. It also played a leading role in the initiative to eradicate Guinea worm disease, which affected millions of people in Africa and Asia.

In 2002 the Nobel Foundation awarded Carter the Nobel Peace Prize "for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development."


Watch the video: Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize (June 2022).


Comments:

  1. Akinor

    You are not right. Let's discuss. Email me at PM.

  2. Bevin

    I'm sorry, but I think you are making a mistake. Let's discuss this. Email me at PM.

  3. Nikazahn

    In my opinion, you are wrong. I'm sure. I can defend my position. Email me at PM, we will talk.

  4. Macgregor

    This remarkable phrase is necessary just by the way

  5. Marlow

    I can recommend to visit to you a site on which there is a lot of information on a theme interesting you.

  6. Walwyn

    I congratulate, the excellent thought

  7. Oxnaford

    It is difficult to say.

  8. Rorey

    Between us, I recommend that you search google.com

  9. Zephyrus

    Your phrase is matchless... :)



Write a message