Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
October 13, 2012
Daalder’s Peace Prize Envy

The European Union was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. It is obvious that the Nobel award is a political price given by the committee to further this or that peculiar political interest. I personally do not regard it as much of an honor.

Still one has to admit that the European Union was from its very beginning a peace project especially between France and Germany. It was driven by European politicians who had lived through the terrible times of two huge wars and were eager to avoid more of those. Nearly 70 years of peace between the big European countries who had been fighting each other for centuries is certainly a notable success.

But getting a price for that leads to envy. Just see this official tweet by Ivo Daalder, the U.S. ambassador to NATO:

Congrats to #EU for that #Nobel. As for peace in #Europe, maybe #MarshalPlan, US troops, & #NATO had something to do w/ it as well

Yes Mr Daalder, the Marshall Plan helped a bit. (Even as it was solely driven by ideological U.S. self interest.) But the Nobel Price committee already recognized that back in 1953 and awarded Marshall the peace prize. But as Daalder can not even spell Marshall's name he likely did not known that. Is lack of historic knowledge a quality of U.S. ambassadors?

As for U.S. troops and NATO. No, they had (and have) little to do with peace in Europe. There was this thing called the cold war that has cost us Europeans a lot and would likely not have happened without them. That war planed to use my country as its nuclear battlefield and thereby for its total annihilation. Neither the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet army nor NATO and U.S. troops deserve a peace prize for that.

Comments

Well, it was the threat of stopping the Marshall Plan money that made France approve of resolution 181.

Posted by: m_s | Oct 13 2012 16:50 utc | 1

Prize is what you win, price is what you pay.
Same word in German, two words in Englich

Posted by: ralphieboy | Oct 13 2012 17:29 utc | 2

Englisch? English. You know, that language I was raised with…

Posted by: ralphieboy | Oct 13 2012 17:32 utc | 3

In any case, I’m for nominating the Bering Straits for next year’s Nobel Peace Prize for the role it has played in keeping the USA and Russia from each other’s throats…

Posted by: ralphieboy | Oct 13 2012 17:51 utc | 4

@ralphieboy – thanks, corrected.
I like the Bering Straits idea. Can we submit that to the prize council?

Posted by: b | Oct 13 2012 18:49 utc | 5

Is lack of historic knowledge a quality of U.S. ambassadors?
It is a quality of nearly all Americans.

Posted by: Susan | Oct 13 2012 19:40 utc | 6

I support the theory that Nobel Peace Prize committe wants to get one in before the eurocrisis breaks the EU apart. Posthumous prizes not allowed and all that.

Posted by: a swedish kind of death | Oct 14 2012 7:51 utc | 7

all EU has done is mad peace in europe and turned europe back to the third world for its war passion

Posted by: brian | Oct 14 2012 8:08 utc | 8

all EU has done is mad peace in europe and turned europe back to the third world for its war passion
Actually, brian, I’d posit that it’d be more of their gawd-awful pursuit of ‘Austerity’ for all, rather than any sort of Peace half measures displayed…! 8-(

Posted by: CTuttle | Oct 14 2012 8:21 utc | 9

50 years too late!
At least it wasn’t the Economics prize 😉

Posted by: Noirette | Oct 14 2012 12:57 utc | 10

one has to admit that the European Union was from its very beginning a peace project especially between France and Germany

the peace project took off because war had been thoroughly tried out, had failed to proclaim a real winner, and had left Europe in ruins
what brought peace in Europe for 60+ years were the wars which shattered European ambitions at empire-building (with a view of world domination); they should have awarded the Nobel prize to the Russian/Soviet army, which crushed Napoleon’s and Hitler’s armies; and if you want to add Great Britain to the picture, then it was Hitler which caused her empire to bleed to death, so he too contributed
ok, wouldn’t award a Nobel for that, but there are the dynamics of “European peace”
the Nobel prize to the EU is also highly improper, since a united Europe lined up behind the Us is showing itself more and more to be like a pack of old wolves, too weak to hunt by themselves, but together very dangerous for the world; and the stronger the union, the stronger the old bellicose and selfish instincts return

Posted by: claudio | Oct 14 2012 13:10 utc | 11

Well said, and dont worry, I got price/prize wrong as well;) The EU deserves the Nobel Price, no doubt. Mearsheimer argued that US troops were the only reason why Europe remained peaceful after the end of Cold War. I strongly reject that point. We remained peaceful, because we became not only allies, but friends and there was simply no reason to fight a war. Maybe you would like to read my article on it http://conflictandsecurity.wordpress.com/

Posted by: Thomas Hauschildt | Oct 14 2012 13:54 utc | 12

Nobel P P: is also improper (see claudio @ 11) – imho – because it rewards a supra-national entity, linked to corporate-banking authority nexus depriving ppl in the nation states of autonomy and decisionary powers.
See the votes contra the EU and how they were overcome (France, Holland, Ireland..)
EU parliamentarians and other ‘advisors’ or ‘nominated’ posted to Brussels – all those guys and gals there drinking super beer – are paid way over what local, national, pols with same rank and expertise get.
Between roughly the same or just a bit over (those from Belgium itself), 2x, 3x, or even, on occasion, 10 x as much (Greece, Portugal.)
That pay, with its perks (car, chauffeur, hotel favors, per diems, travel allowance, tax breaks, etc. etc.), are flouted and lead to a assumption of privilege, superiority, enough to create a feeling of impunity, entitlement, assumed leadership.
These ppl enter an in-crowd who want to dominate, swerve around amongst themselves, assume top-dog habits, consider themselves brilliant, in part because they become completely detached from their national mandate, which in fact *was never clearly specified..*
These plummy posts of course do not attract the most lowly, caring, honest kind of ppl.

Posted by: Noirette | Oct 14 2012 15:27 utc | 13

Nobel P P: is also improper (see claudio @ 11) – imho – because it rewards a supra-national entity, linked to corporate-banking authority nexus depriving ppl in the nation states of autonomy and decisionary powers.
See the votes contra the EU and how they were overcome (France, Holland, Ireland..)
EU parliamentarians and other ‘advisors’ or ‘nominated’ posted to Brussels – all those guys and gals there drinking super beer – are paid way over what local, national, pols with same rank and expertise get.
Between roughly the same or just a bit over (those from Belgium itself), 2x, 3x, or even, on occasion, 10 x as much (Greece, Portugal.)
That pay, with its perks (car, chauffeur, hotel favors, per diems, travel allowance, tax breaks, etc. etc.), are flouted and lead to a assumption of privilege, superiority, enough to create a feeling of impunity, entitlement, assumed leadership.
These ppl enter an in-crowd who want to dominate, swerve around amongst themselves, assume top-dog habits, consider themselves brilliant, in part because they become completely detached from their national mandate, which in fact *was never clearly specified..*
These plummy posts of course do not attract the most lowly, caring, honest kind of ppl.

Posted by: Noirette | Oct 14 2012 15:27 utc | 14

“Nobel P P: is also improper (see claudio @ 11) – imho – because it rewards a supra-national entity, linked to corporate-banking authority nexus depriving ppl in the nation states of autonomy and decisionary powers.”
Nice take Noirette, think I agree.

Posted by: ben | Oct 14 2012 16:11 utc | 15

Sorry for the double post.
The EU did not contribute to peace. That is a modern myth. This is the FIRST link on goog, gives all the lies, it is rubbish, revisionist propaganda.
http://europa.eu/about-eu/eu-history/index_en.htm
Argh!
The first agreements were commercial, as we all know. Right from the start, powerful industries and corps. clubbed together to extend their grip and break down barriers (commerce, currency, regulations, labor, transport, building infrastructure…) that existed. And in a way, that never changed.
The European currency Union was a way for the powerful countries to extend their markets and use cheap labor, dominating peripheral regions, corrupting its elected – key figures with official bribes all in the name of ‘development’ or ‘growth’ …
… Since the finance part ran amuck, and ‘growth’ seen only as ‘productivity’ and ‘competitiveness’ has halted (it did long ago but was covered up) as the inputs into the system that make it limp along – energy in its various forms, rare metals, etc. – are more expensive and scarcer – the merry-go-round or treadmill of competition, tech advance, consumerism, dies a slow, for now, unacknowledged, death.
The EU will break up.
It cannot exist without the ersatz growth, without massive debt, now out of control. The debt is basically investment in uncoordinated and illusory efforts – e.g. Spain’s investment in wind energy, France nominatin’ a Minister for Industrial Renewal, Holland with its ginormous private mortgage debt. Etc.

Posted by: Noirette | Oct 15 2012 14:26 utc | 16