VATICAN CITY (AFP) - – Pope Benedict XVI on Saturday moved controversial wartime pontiff Pius XII closer to sainthood by declaring him "venerable", bestowing the same honour on beloved predecessor John Paul II.
The beatification process of Pius XII has been a source of tension with Jewish groups due to the view among many historians that he remained passive while Nazi Germany killed millions of Jews.
The decree was unexpected on a day when Benedict also paved the way for the beatification of John Paul II's Polish compatriot Jerzy Popieluszko, the "Solidarity chaplain" who was murdered by Poland's secret service in 1984.
Announcing the three milestones simultaneously reflects a damage control strategy by the Vatican since Pius XII's progress towards sainthood is "sure to create problems with Jews," said Vatican expert John Allen.
"There is a kind of strategy of taking the sting out of it by bundling it with a pope who is very popular like John Paul II," he told AFP.
The move came as no surprise, since Benedict -- who was himself at the centre of a controversy over his past membership of the Hitler Youth -- "has publicly defended Pius XII at least three times," Allen added.
The Vatican has argued that Pius XII, who was pope from 1939 to 1958, saved many Jews by having them hidden in religious institutions in Rome and abroad and that his silence was born out of a wish to avoid aggravating their situation.
Meanwhile, John Paul II's sainthood dossier has been criticised as a "fast-track" campaign to answer the prayers of millions who adored the Polish pope, who headed the Roman Catholic Church for nearly three decades.
Benedict launched the lengthy process -- which can take decades if not centuries -- just two months after the death in 2005 of John Paul II, whose funeral was marked by calls of "Santo Subito" (Saint Now).
The final stage for beatification is providing evidence of a miracle, usually a medical cure with no scientific explanation which is reviewed by several commissions.
In John Paul II's case, the miracle under consideration -- and subject to another papal decree -- involves a French nun who was cured of Parkinson's disease in 2005.
Vatican watchers expect Benedict to approve the beatification, which could be celebrated next year, either on the April 2 anniversary of John Paul II's death or in October on the anniversary of the start of his papacy in 1978.
Popieluszko's beatification dossier does not require evidence of a miracle because he is considered a martyr.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Thieves steal infamous Auschwitz death camp sign
Thieves steal infamous Auschwitz death camp sign
WARSAW (AFP) - – Thieves on Friday stole the infamous Nazi German "Arbeit macht frei" sign from the entrance to the Auschwitz death camp in Poland, police said, an act that sparked widespread outrage.
The sign, which means "Work Will Set You Free" in German, has become a symbol of the horror of the camp where about 1.1 million mainly Jewish prisoners died during World War II, most in the notorious gas chambers.
Police said the theft may have been ordered by a private collector or a group of individuals.
"A worldwide symbol of the cynicism of Hitler's executioners and the martyrdom of their victims has been stolen. This act deserves the strongest possible condemnation," Polish President Lech Kaczynski said in a statement.
His Israeli counterpart Shimon Peres expressed "the deepest shock of Israel's citizens and the Jewish community across the world".
"The sign holds deep historical meaning for both Jews and non-Jews alike as a symbol of the more than one million lives that perished at Auschwitz," Peres was quoted as saying by his office.
Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum spokesman Jaroslaw Mensfelt told AFP that thieves carried out an expert operation to take the metal sign just before dawn on Friday.
"It's a profanation of the place where more than a million people were murdered. It's shameful," he said.
Camp survivors also decried the theft.
"In taking this historic symbol, the perpetrators wanted to destroy history and committed this perverse act in order to revive Nazism," said Raphael Esrail, 84, president of the Union of Auschwitz Deportees in France.
The five-metre (16-foot) long sign was forged by prisoners on the orders of the Nazis, who set up the camp after invading Poland in 1939. It was not hard to unhook from above the entrance gate "but you needed to know how," Mensfelt said.
A police dog team was tracking the thieves while detectives combed through video surveillance footage from the site and neighbouring areas, and other officers set up roadblocks.
Mensfelt said it was the first serious case of theft at Auschwitz, located on the outskirts of the southern town of Oswiecim, which was annexed and renamed by Germany during World War II. The site has been a Polish state-run museum and memorial since the war ended in 1945.
"All leads are being considered, but we are focusing on a theft ordered by a private collector or a group of individuals," Oswiecim police spokeswoman Malgorzata Jurecka told AFP.
Police offered a 5,000-zloty (1,200-euro/1,700-dollar) reward for information leading to the recovery of the sign or the arrest of the thieves.
Kaczynski urged the public to help. "It's our collective duty to return it to its rightful place from which it has been ripped by force," he said.
Meanwhile, museum staff placed a replica sign above the gate.
Nazi Germany initially created the camp for Polish resistance fighters in an army barracks in 1940.
Auschwitz was later expanded into a vast complex, after the Nazis razed the nearby village of Brzezinka -- Birkenau in German.
About 1.1 million people perished at Auschwitz-Birkenau -- one million of them Jews from Poland and the rest of Nazi-occupied Europe -- some from overwork, starvation and disease, but mostly in the gas chambers.
It was one of six death camps set up in Poland by the Germans, who murdered six million Jews during the war.
Some of the other death camps had the same sign, erected in a cynical ploy to maintain the illusion that they were labour camps.
Auschwitz-Birkenau's other victims included non-Jewish Poles, Soviet and other Allied prisoners of war, Roma and anti-Nazi resistance members from across Europe.
It was liberated by Soviet troops in January 1945.
The theft came a day after Germany donated 60 million euros (88 million dollars) to a global fund to preserve the site.
The Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum said the money represented half the total it needs to ensure the site's future as a permanent memorial to Nazi victims. About 4-5 million euros are needed each year to maintain it.
WARSAW (AFP) - – Thieves on Friday stole the infamous Nazi German "Arbeit macht frei" sign from the entrance to the Auschwitz death camp in Poland, police said, an act that sparked widespread outrage.
The sign, which means "Work Will Set You Free" in German, has become a symbol of the horror of the camp where about 1.1 million mainly Jewish prisoners died during World War II, most in the notorious gas chambers.
Police said the theft may have been ordered by a private collector or a group of individuals.
"A worldwide symbol of the cynicism of Hitler's executioners and the martyrdom of their victims has been stolen. This act deserves the strongest possible condemnation," Polish President Lech Kaczynski said in a statement.
His Israeli counterpart Shimon Peres expressed "the deepest shock of Israel's citizens and the Jewish community across the world".
"The sign holds deep historical meaning for both Jews and non-Jews alike as a symbol of the more than one million lives that perished at Auschwitz," Peres was quoted as saying by his office.
Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum spokesman Jaroslaw Mensfelt told AFP that thieves carried out an expert operation to take the metal sign just before dawn on Friday.
"It's a profanation of the place where more than a million people were murdered. It's shameful," he said.
Camp survivors also decried the theft.
"In taking this historic symbol, the perpetrators wanted to destroy history and committed this perverse act in order to revive Nazism," said Raphael Esrail, 84, president of the Union of Auschwitz Deportees in France.
The five-metre (16-foot) long sign was forged by prisoners on the orders of the Nazis, who set up the camp after invading Poland in 1939. It was not hard to unhook from above the entrance gate "but you needed to know how," Mensfelt said.
A police dog team was tracking the thieves while detectives combed through video surveillance footage from the site and neighbouring areas, and other officers set up roadblocks.
Mensfelt said it was the first serious case of theft at Auschwitz, located on the outskirts of the southern town of Oswiecim, which was annexed and renamed by Germany during World War II. The site has been a Polish state-run museum and memorial since the war ended in 1945.
"All leads are being considered, but we are focusing on a theft ordered by a private collector or a group of individuals," Oswiecim police spokeswoman Malgorzata Jurecka told AFP.
Police offered a 5,000-zloty (1,200-euro/1,700-dollar) reward for information leading to the recovery of the sign or the arrest of the thieves.
Kaczynski urged the public to help. "It's our collective duty to return it to its rightful place from which it has been ripped by force," he said.
Meanwhile, museum staff placed a replica sign above the gate.
Nazi Germany initially created the camp for Polish resistance fighters in an army barracks in 1940.
Auschwitz was later expanded into a vast complex, after the Nazis razed the nearby village of Brzezinka -- Birkenau in German.
About 1.1 million people perished at Auschwitz-Birkenau -- one million of them Jews from Poland and the rest of Nazi-occupied Europe -- some from overwork, starvation and disease, but mostly in the gas chambers.
It was one of six death camps set up in Poland by the Germans, who murdered six million Jews during the war.
Some of the other death camps had the same sign, erected in a cynical ploy to maintain the illusion that they were labour camps.
Auschwitz-Birkenau's other victims included non-Jewish Poles, Soviet and other Allied prisoners of war, Roma and anti-Nazi resistance members from across Europe.
It was liberated by Soviet troops in January 1945.
The theft came a day after Germany donated 60 million euros (88 million dollars) to a global fund to preserve the site.
The Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum said the money represented half the total it needs to ensure the site's future as a permanent memorial to Nazi victims. About 4-5 million euros are needed each year to maintain it.
Father Jerzy Popieluszko - Solidarity Chaplain
VATICAN CITY (AFP) - – Pope Benedict XVI on Saturday approved the beatification of Father Jerzy Popieluszko, the "Solidarity chaplain" who was murdered by the Polish secret service in 1984.
The decree placed the charismatic priest, a staunch anti-communist who laced his sermons with political messages backing the Solidarity trade union movement of future president Lech Walesa, a step away from sainthood.
Three Polish secret service officers abducted Father Popieluszko in October 1984 after he celebrated his last mass in Bydgoszcz, central Poland.
They tortured him to death and then threw his body into the River Vistula, some 120 kilometres (70 miles) north of Warsaw.
Identified thanks to the priest's chauffeur, the three were jailed for between 14 and 25 years.
In October, Popieluszko's mother accepted Poland's highest honour, the Order of the White Eagle, for her son.
His beatification process began in May 2001, and last year Benedict authorised a speedier procedure.
Because the murdered priest is considered a martyr, Popieluszko's beatification dossier did not require evidence of a miracle.
"Solidarity was alive because Father Popieluszko gave his life," Walesa said at a Rome screening of a documentary on Popieluszko.
"When the state cannot speak, the (Catholic) Church does. Without the symbiosis with the Church, Poland would have been wiped off the face of the earth," Walesa said.
The Nobel Peace laureate also said that he and Popieluszko felt the fact the pope at the time was Polish presented "an opportunity for Poland and other countries to make a break with communism."
Another film on Popieluszko, "To Kill a Priest," was made in 1988 by Polish director Agnieszka Holland starring Christopher Lambert.
The decree placed the charismatic priest, a staunch anti-communist who laced his sermons with political messages backing the Solidarity trade union movement of future president Lech Walesa, a step away from sainthood.
Three Polish secret service officers abducted Father Popieluszko in October 1984 after he celebrated his last mass in Bydgoszcz, central Poland.
They tortured him to death and then threw his body into the River Vistula, some 120 kilometres (70 miles) north of Warsaw.
Identified thanks to the priest's chauffeur, the three were jailed for between 14 and 25 years.
In October, Popieluszko's mother accepted Poland's highest honour, the Order of the White Eagle, for her son.
His beatification process began in May 2001, and last year Benedict authorised a speedier procedure.
Because the murdered priest is considered a martyr, Popieluszko's beatification dossier did not require evidence of a miracle.
"Solidarity was alive because Father Popieluszko gave his life," Walesa said at a Rome screening of a documentary on Popieluszko.
"When the state cannot speak, the (Catholic) Church does. Without the symbiosis with the Church, Poland would have been wiped off the face of the earth," Walesa said.
The Nobel Peace laureate also said that he and Popieluszko felt the fact the pope at the time was Polish presented "an opportunity for Poland and other countries to make a break with communism."
Another film on Popieluszko, "To Kill a Priest," was made in 1988 by Polish director Agnieszka Holland starring Christopher Lambert.
Saturday, October 24, 2009
German unification: Thatcher was wrong
German unification: Thatcher was wrong
By Timothy Garton Ash, For The Straits Times
HISTORY has come back to haunt Britain. Just over 20 years ago, the then British prime minister Margaret Thatcher told the then Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev: 'Britain and Western Europe are not interested in the unification of Germany. The words written in the Nato communique may sound different, but disregard them. We do not want the unification of Germany.'
She went on to say, inaccurately: 'I can tell you that this is also the position of the US president.'
That's according to the Russian record, made by one of Mr Gorbachev's closest aides. A British note of the conversation, just published in a volume prepared by Foreign Office historians, conveys the same ideas in more elusive Whitehall wording.
This was an act of spectacular disloyalty to a faithful and important Nato ally. It showed a lack of respect for the aspirations of the East Germans, who would soon say clearly that their hopes of freedom - the political value Mrs Thatcher was most closely identified with - would best be realised by unification with an already free German state. And it was very short-sighted.
She was not just expressing her worries in private to a Western ally; she was putting them before the man who had the power to stop German unification. The British note goes on: 'Mr Gorbachev said that he could see what the Prime Minister was driving at. The Soviet Union understood the problem very well and she could be reassured. They did not want German reunification any more than Britain did.'
Things are made no better by the fact that then French president Francois Mitterrand was conveying much the same message to Moscow. Mr Gorbachev's close adviser Anatoly Chernyaev, who made the record of the Thatcher conversation, notes in his diary on Oct 9, 1989, that president Mitterrand's aide Jacques Attali 'talked with us about a revival of a solid Franco-Soviet alliance, including military integration - camouflaged as the use of armies in the struggle against natural disasters'.
At a witness seminar in London last week, organised by the Foreign Office historians, Mr Hans-Dietrich Genscher, the West German foreign minister at that time, reacted with magnificent condescension. He was aware of Mrs Thatcher's opposition, he said, but he didn't worry too much about it. He knew that so long as the Germans had the Americans behind them, the Brits would always come round in the end. Which, of course, they did - but not without squandering a heap of goodwill in Germany.
The now published records show that the Foreign Office, from the then Foreign Secretary Douglas Hurd down, did repeatedly warn (although not without some mandarin trimming along the way) that Mrs Thatcher's vocal opposition was impolitic, misguided and short-sighted. That is doubtless one reason why the Foreign Office is hurrying to publish the documents now, after just 20 years.
It is particularly interesting for me to read the internal pre-history of what became known as 'the Chequers seminar' in March 1990, attended by six historians of Germany, of whom I was one. Since that famous or infamous event is represented only by a vivid but misleading summary by Mrs Thatcher's then private secretary Charles Powell, it is worth saying again what several other participants have already put on record: the overwhelming message of all the historians present was that the Federal Republic must be trusted and supported in carrying through German unification.
I remember one electrifying moment when the veteran, conservative historian Hugh Trevor-Roper, who had been in Germany immediately after the end of World War II, interrogating senior Nazis for his classic account of the Last Days Of Hitler, said to the effect: Prime Minister, if anyone had told us in 1945 that there was a chance of a Germany united in freedom, as a solid member of the West, we could not have believed our luck. And so we should welcome it, not resist it.
Twenty years on, we can see clearly how Trevor-Roper was right and Mrs Thatcher, wrong. None of her nightmares has been realised. United Germany is not lording it over Europe. Even a severe economic recession has not driven German voters to the far right. When Mrs Angela Merkel announces her new government, it will be a moderate liberal-conservative coalition of Christian Democrats and Free Democrats: the very model of a modern centrist democracy. And German unification opened the door to European unification, through the eastward enlargement of the European Union.
Yes, even in this success story of united Germany, there are some causes for concern. A political system originally designed to prevent a reversion to dictatorship has developed almost too many checks and balances, so that necessary reform is difficult. Germany's special relationship with an authoritarian Russia is a European problem.
But there are justified concerns about every major European state - not least, about Britain. Europe used to have sleepless nights over something called 'the German question'. Twenty years on, a bigger worry should be the British question.
It's in Britain that the leader of a far-right, nationalist, xenophobic party, the British National Party, controversially appears on the BBC's Question Time, a mainstream television show. It's Britain that has a discredited parliament, a constitutional mess, the erosion of civil liberties and a chronic identity problem. It's Britain that still can't work out where it belongs in the world, and what kind of country it wants to be.
The writer is professor of European Studies at Oxford University and a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Twenty years on, we can see clearly how Trevor-Roper was right and Mrs Thatcher wrong. None of her nightmares has been realised. United Germany is not lording it over Europe. Even a severe economic recession has not driven German voters to the far right. When Mrs Angela Merkel announces her new government, it will be a moderate liberal-conservative coalition of Christian Democrats and Free Democrats: the very model of a modern centrist democracy.
By Timothy Garton Ash, For The Straits Times
HISTORY has come back to haunt Britain. Just over 20 years ago, the then British prime minister Margaret Thatcher told the then Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev: 'Britain and Western Europe are not interested in the unification of Germany. The words written in the Nato communique may sound different, but disregard them. We do not want the unification of Germany.'
She went on to say, inaccurately: 'I can tell you that this is also the position of the US president.'
That's according to the Russian record, made by one of Mr Gorbachev's closest aides. A British note of the conversation, just published in a volume prepared by Foreign Office historians, conveys the same ideas in more elusive Whitehall wording.
This was an act of spectacular disloyalty to a faithful and important Nato ally. It showed a lack of respect for the aspirations of the East Germans, who would soon say clearly that their hopes of freedom - the political value Mrs Thatcher was most closely identified with - would best be realised by unification with an already free German state. And it was very short-sighted.
She was not just expressing her worries in private to a Western ally; she was putting them before the man who had the power to stop German unification. The British note goes on: 'Mr Gorbachev said that he could see what the Prime Minister was driving at. The Soviet Union understood the problem very well and she could be reassured. They did not want German reunification any more than Britain did.'
Things are made no better by the fact that then French president Francois Mitterrand was conveying much the same message to Moscow. Mr Gorbachev's close adviser Anatoly Chernyaev, who made the record of the Thatcher conversation, notes in his diary on Oct 9, 1989, that president Mitterrand's aide Jacques Attali 'talked with us about a revival of a solid Franco-Soviet alliance, including military integration - camouflaged as the use of armies in the struggle against natural disasters'.
At a witness seminar in London last week, organised by the Foreign Office historians, Mr Hans-Dietrich Genscher, the West German foreign minister at that time, reacted with magnificent condescension. He was aware of Mrs Thatcher's opposition, he said, but he didn't worry too much about it. He knew that so long as the Germans had the Americans behind them, the Brits would always come round in the end. Which, of course, they did - but not without squandering a heap of goodwill in Germany.
The now published records show that the Foreign Office, from the then Foreign Secretary Douglas Hurd down, did repeatedly warn (although not without some mandarin trimming along the way) that Mrs Thatcher's vocal opposition was impolitic, misguided and short-sighted. That is doubtless one reason why the Foreign Office is hurrying to publish the documents now, after just 20 years.
It is particularly interesting for me to read the internal pre-history of what became known as 'the Chequers seminar' in March 1990, attended by six historians of Germany, of whom I was one. Since that famous or infamous event is represented only by a vivid but misleading summary by Mrs Thatcher's then private secretary Charles Powell, it is worth saying again what several other participants have already put on record: the overwhelming message of all the historians present was that the Federal Republic must be trusted and supported in carrying through German unification.
I remember one electrifying moment when the veteran, conservative historian Hugh Trevor-Roper, who had been in Germany immediately after the end of World War II, interrogating senior Nazis for his classic account of the Last Days Of Hitler, said to the effect: Prime Minister, if anyone had told us in 1945 that there was a chance of a Germany united in freedom, as a solid member of the West, we could not have believed our luck. And so we should welcome it, not resist it.
Twenty years on, we can see clearly how Trevor-Roper was right and Mrs Thatcher, wrong. None of her nightmares has been realised. United Germany is not lording it over Europe. Even a severe economic recession has not driven German voters to the far right. When Mrs Angela Merkel announces her new government, it will be a moderate liberal-conservative coalition of Christian Democrats and Free Democrats: the very model of a modern centrist democracy. And German unification opened the door to European unification, through the eastward enlargement of the European Union.
Yes, even in this success story of united Germany, there are some causes for concern. A political system originally designed to prevent a reversion to dictatorship has developed almost too many checks and balances, so that necessary reform is difficult. Germany's special relationship with an authoritarian Russia is a European problem.
But there are justified concerns about every major European state - not least, about Britain. Europe used to have sleepless nights over something called 'the German question'. Twenty years on, a bigger worry should be the British question.
It's in Britain that the leader of a far-right, nationalist, xenophobic party, the British National Party, controversially appears on the BBC's Question Time, a mainstream television show. It's Britain that has a discredited parliament, a constitutional mess, the erosion of civil liberties and a chronic identity problem. It's Britain that still can't work out where it belongs in the world, and what kind of country it wants to be.
The writer is professor of European Studies at Oxford University and a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Twenty years on, we can see clearly how Trevor-Roper was right and Mrs Thatcher wrong. None of her nightmares has been realised. United Germany is not lording it over Europe. Even a severe economic recession has not driven German voters to the far right. When Mrs Angela Merkel announces her new government, it will be a moderate liberal-conservative coalition of Christian Democrats and Free Democrats: the very model of a modern centrist democracy.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Bactrian Gold
Archaeologist Victor Sarianidi receives highest award of Afghanistan
The prominent Russian archaeologist, Viktor Sarianidi, was honored with the medal of the President of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. The Ambassador of Afghanistan to Russia, Zalmay Aziz, handed the highest award to the scientist during the celebration of the Independence Day of Afghanistan in Moscow on August 19.
According to information portal "Afganistan.ru", Zalmay Aziz thanked the legendary archaeologist for the help in exploring the history of Afghanistan and wished him successes in his work to the benefit of the Russian-Afghan relations.
"I am grateful to the great country for high appreciation of my humble work," Victor Sarianidi said in turn.
It should be recalled that in 1978 the Soviet-Afghan expedition under the leadership of Victor Sarianidi found in northern Afghanistan the so-called "gold of Bactria" - about twenty thousand pieces of gold jewelry dated back to 1000 A.C. It is for this discovery that Sarianidi was once named "Shliman of the East". Gold of Afghanistan was exhibited in major museums around the world, and in 2011 the exhibition will come to Russia.
Professor, Doctor of History Victor Sarianidi is heading for over half a century the Turkmen-Russian archeological expedition in Mary province of Turkmenistan where it unearthed a large settlement of Gonur-Depe from the Bronze Age (III-II centuries B.C.), which is presumably an ancient capital of Margush country that scientists believe to be the birthplace of Zoroastrianism and the fifth center of world civilization, along with civilizations of Egypt, Mesopotamia, India and China.
Victor Sarianidi is an honorary citizen of Turkmenistan, Honorary Ambassador of Hellenism, winner of the International Prize of Turkmenistan named after Makhtumkuli and the medal of "Civilian Valor" of Greece, as well as numerous awards and commemorative medals of various universities of the world
Tillya tepe, Tillia tepe or Tillā tapa ( Pashto and Persian: طلا تپه) or (literally "Golden Hill" or "Golden Mound") is an archaeological site in northern Afghanistan near Sheberghan, surveyed in 1979 by a Soviet-Afghan mission of archaeologists led by Victor Sarianidi, a year before the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
The heavily fortified town of Yemshi-tepe, just five kilometres to the northeast of modern Sheberghan on the road to Akcha, is only half a kilometre from the now-famous necropolis of Tillia-tepe.
The hoard is a collection of about 20,000 gold ornaments that was found in six graves (five women and one man) with extremely rich jewelry, dated to around the 1st century BCE. Altogether several thousand pieces of fine jewelry were recovered, usually made of gold, turquoise and/or lapis-lazuli. The ornaments include coins, necklaces set with gems, belts, medallions and crowns. A new museum in Kabul is being planned where the Bactrian gold will eventually be kept.
Some of the most spectacular finds are presently on display until Sept. 7th, 2008 at the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C. From Oct. 24th, 2008 to Jan. 25th, 2009 the collection will be at the Asian Art Museum of San Francisco. From there they are due to be displayed from February 22 to May 17, 2009 at The Museum of Fine Arts, Houston and then the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York from June 23 to Sept. 20th, 2009.
Monday, October 12, 2009
At war over Obama's peace prize - ST Oct 11 2009
The gold medallion given to recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize does not come with a ribbon, but the award could still end up being a weight around US President Barack Obama's neck.
In much of the avalanche of reactions during the weekend, a key message came through: The award was given too soon, and it now places a greater burden on the 48-year-old President to live up to the high expectations.
Over the weekend, the announcement of Mr Obama's win drew starkly contrasting reactions within the United States and the rest of the world.
It was met with joy in Kenya, which has a special regard for Mr Obama, as he is the son of a Kenyan economist.
Scathing criticism lay at the other extreme. Taleban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid told Reuters that it was absurd to give a peace award to a man who had sent 21,000 extra troops to Afghanistan.
Mr Obama 'should have won the 'Nobel Prize for escalating violence and killing civilians',' he said.
Such reactions were likely expected by the five-member Norwegian Nobel committee, which spent seven months winnowing the dossiers on dissident monks, human rights advocates, field surgeons and other nominees - 205 names in all, most of them obscure - before deciding on Mr Obama.
While in recent decades the selection process has produced many winners better known for their suffering or their environmental zeal than for peacemaking, the panel's new chairman Thorbjorn Jagland said the members this year took a more practical approach in their unanimous vote for Mr Obama.
'It's important for the committee to recognise people who are struggling and idealistic,' Mr Jagland said in an interview after the prize was announced, 'but we cannot do that every year. We must from time to time go into the realm of realpolitik.
'It is always a mix of idealism and realpolitik that can change the world.'
The committee is overtly political, as the Swedish dynamite tycoon Alfred Nobel must have intended when, in his will, he instructed the Norwegian Parliament to appoint the selection committee.
Mr Geir Lundestad, who as executive director of the Norwegian Nobel Institute has handled the committee's administrative affairs since 1990, said the panel met six or seven times this year, starting several weeks after the nomination deadline, Feb 1.
Any member of a national legislature, any professor of the social sciences and several other categories of people are free to submit nominations, and someone usually puts forward the name of the American president.
This year the panel did not settle on a winner until Monday, Mr Lundestad said.
The committee took a chance in choosing Mr Obama, who not only is in his freshman year as president, but also is directing two wars. Should his presidency descend into a military quagmire, as former president Lyndon B. Johnson's did during the Vietnam War, the decision could prove an embarrassment.
Some in Oslo said the Nobel committee had put the integrity of the award at stake. But Mr Jagland seemed to savour the risk. He said no one could deny that 'the international climate' had suddenly improved, and that Mr Obama was the main reason.
Of the President's future, he said: 'There is great potential. But it depends on how the other political leaders respond. If they respond negatively, one might have to say he failed. But at least we want to embrace the message that he stands for.'
AP, Reuters, AFP
In much of the avalanche of reactions during the weekend, a key message came through: The award was given too soon, and it now places a greater burden on the 48-year-old President to live up to the high expectations.
Over the weekend, the announcement of Mr Obama's win drew starkly contrasting reactions within the United States and the rest of the world.
It was met with joy in Kenya, which has a special regard for Mr Obama, as he is the son of a Kenyan economist.
Scathing criticism lay at the other extreme. Taleban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid told Reuters that it was absurd to give a peace award to a man who had sent 21,000 extra troops to Afghanistan.
Mr Obama 'should have won the 'Nobel Prize for escalating violence and killing civilians',' he said.
Such reactions were likely expected by the five-member Norwegian Nobel committee, which spent seven months winnowing the dossiers on dissident monks, human rights advocates, field surgeons and other nominees - 205 names in all, most of them obscure - before deciding on Mr Obama.
While in recent decades the selection process has produced many winners better known for their suffering or their environmental zeal than for peacemaking, the panel's new chairman Thorbjorn Jagland said the members this year took a more practical approach in their unanimous vote for Mr Obama.
'It's important for the committee to recognise people who are struggling and idealistic,' Mr Jagland said in an interview after the prize was announced, 'but we cannot do that every year. We must from time to time go into the realm of realpolitik.
'It is always a mix of idealism and realpolitik that can change the world.'
The committee is overtly political, as the Swedish dynamite tycoon Alfred Nobel must have intended when, in his will, he instructed the Norwegian Parliament to appoint the selection committee.
Mr Geir Lundestad, who as executive director of the Norwegian Nobel Institute has handled the committee's administrative affairs since 1990, said the panel met six or seven times this year, starting several weeks after the nomination deadline, Feb 1.
Any member of a national legislature, any professor of the social sciences and several other categories of people are free to submit nominations, and someone usually puts forward the name of the American president.
This year the panel did not settle on a winner until Monday, Mr Lundestad said.
The committee took a chance in choosing Mr Obama, who not only is in his freshman year as president, but also is directing two wars. Should his presidency descend into a military quagmire, as former president Lyndon B. Johnson's did during the Vietnam War, the decision could prove an embarrassment.
Some in Oslo said the Nobel committee had put the integrity of the award at stake. But Mr Jagland seemed to savour the risk. He said no one could deny that 'the international climate' had suddenly improved, and that Mr Obama was the main reason.
Of the President's future, he said: 'There is great potential. But it depends on how the other political leaders respond. If they respond negatively, one might have to say he failed. But at least we want to embrace the message that he stands for.'
AP, Reuters, AFP
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)