|
Opinion
The Reverse Reward of 2009
by Pramod Khilery
Why not Mayawati be conferred upon with Bharat Ratna? Not
only will it help her bring down the compass of her
corruption and megalomania to a degree to which the needle
of her wobbling state administration can point to without
breaking completely but also make her realize her true role
in ‘revolutionizing’ Dalits and identity politics provided
her thick skin can let her conscience a day off. Of course
Barack Obama is in altogether different league. But logic
remains the same. Award as recognition off and as moral
burden on.
As the political pundits are busy justifying the abhorrent
act of bestowing this year’s Noble peace award upon American
President Barack Obama by citing the ways in which enormous
moral burden of the prize can put some checks and balances
on the working of world’s most important man. This new idea
of ‘reverse reward’ as propagated by Noble Peace Committee
may have got some cheers along with guaranteed jeers but it
defies all the sane conclusions of utter absurditism.
Every
award regardless of its stature is a byproduct of one’s
stupendous work in any field emboldening one to keep going
on implicitly implying the robust justification of path
chosen. But it is necessary for winner to have covered some
distance to be able to become worth it. But now latest
justifications tell us quite contrary. Though Mr. Thorbjorn
Jagland, chairperson of the Norwegian Noble Committee
asserts that award is for what Obama has done in the past
not what Obama can do in the future.
If we go by this preposition then next year’s award too
awaits Obama for only some major insane decision on his part
can prevent him from being a Noble laureate for second time
or who knows even third or fourth. He will be doing the same
things in the same capacity perhaps with more success and
vigor. In contrast to Mr. Jagland’s assertions pundits
believe this award to be a moral police on the faculties of
BlackBerry Obama. Now every step of Obama will bear the
stamp of this award. The free spirited Obama stands to be
smothered under a loving but disciplinarian and martinet
father in the form of a prize that so ironically is called
Peace Prize. Why can’t we endow our esteemed Bharat Ratna
with the disposition of such a father? Who knows where our
CBI and CID failed this loving but fastidious father may
work! Congrats Mr. Jagland for pioneering a ‘new beginning’
in the award world. Let great deeds hatch under the weight
of the egg of the award.
While Oslo seems over enthusiastic in narrowing down the gap
between Washington and the rest of the world it appears to
have forgotten that the distance between itself and
Stockholm is increasing. But Stockholm too is not far
behind. If Oslo takes one step in east Stockholm takes two
steps in west to match its facetiousness. More than the
merit politics looms over at least two categories of Noble
awards. I love reading Turkish author Orhan Pamuk who won
the Noble award for literature in 2006 but I doubt his
literary merit would have had any role to play in the
consideration of award committee if it were not for Pamuk’s
domestic problems and controversies. Same is true for
English playwright and poet and political activist Harold
Pinter and of course the latest laureate Herta Muller whose
Romanian roots were watered in troubled political ground.
Not to say that these authors don’t deserve the award but it
was the role of politics in their life most often in its
ugly form that played a crucial part in winning them their
recognitions not their impeccable literary distinction.
Noble peace prize too afflicts from the same endemic.
When Gandhi ji was nominated for the fifth time and short
listed for third time in 1948 the committee adviser Seip had
this to say, “Gandhi, through his course of life, had put
his profound mark on an ethical and political attitude which
would prevail as a norm for a large number of people both
inside and outside India. In this respect Gandhiji can only
be compared to the founders of religions.” Unfortunately
Gandhiji died two days before the nominations closed but
still there were ways which could have had this Prize
attached with its most deserving candidate as one of the
committee’s advisors lawyer Ole Torleif Roed had suggested.
But for Gandhi ji end result turned out to be same as it was
on previous occasions. The then chairman Gunnar Jahn wrote
in his diary: “To me it seems beyond doubt that a posthumous
award would be contrary to the intentions of the testator.”
No one was given Noble Peace award that for the want of
suitable candidate. Is it just a coincidence that up to 1960
no Asian or African was deemed able enough to be called
Noble Peace laureate?
Coming back to 2009 its not that Obama had not been eying
this award. He must have set his eyes on this prized catch
to add splendor and longevity to his post presidential
years some eight years after or who knows even four years as
shadow of Hilary Clinton bulks large. But this soon! It was
unexpected. It must have embarrassed poor President for this
award being such a sweet pill that neither resisting nor
gulping it will be easy since he is such a conscientious
person. Giving full display of his intellect Obama has said
that he would be accepting the award as a call to action, a
call for all nations to confront the challenges of the 21st
century. We don’t know what this mercurial Norwegian
committee factored in before arriving at such a ludicrous
decision and depriving a deserving candidate or organization
of its due but it seems in Obama they had a candidate who
risked devaluing the award for his apparent hitherto non
deservedly accomplishments wiz a wiz the prestige of Noble
award but at the same time guaranteed it a super publicity.
So what could be the consequences of the award? Will it help
Mr Obama make his voice even shriller and worth hearing? I
doubt it. On the contrary this burden of award has in it to
bend his back for now he had been told that he is not only
the president of USA and hence a world dominating figure but
also an apostle of peace for whom everything contrary to
‘superficial peace’ would be blasphemous. It is not easy to
cook wearing silk. If Obama ends up falling in this trap he
will be doing a great disservice to his job and mankind
ethically and legally.
Our present world may not be any more violent than the times
gone by but the caustic truth of present day violence being
greater in range, densely dark in depth and more
sophisticated than ever throws up the gauntlets that cannot
be met from behind the barricades of fake peace. There are
challenges and these will have to be taken head on. The
dynamics of the world today are so complex that the country
of Mahatma Gandhi the greatest apostle of peace in twentieth
century whom Obama has hailed as his hero on countless
occasions faces an almost insuperable challenge of treading
on the path of non violence. As for India we will get to see
the alphabets of CTBT and NPT from more closer and global
warming may no longer be a foreign term. The word Peace may
remind him of Kashmir even more quickly.
This year’s Noble peace prize has mocked the very idea of
awards. The concept of ‘reverse reward’ that it has espoused
embeds into the spirit of recipient more fear and guilt and
pressure to ‘perform’ as Obama’s predicament evinces than
the sense of achievement the winner so righteously deserves.
Every time a Gandhi is overlooked for being “committed to
belligerent” and a newbie or… say, a Kissinger is awarded
for their contribution to world peace it eats into the
faiths of those for whom an award is an heartening and
honest cheering for their deeds and an acknowledgement of
their beliefs.
October 18, 2009
Top
|
