The Nobel Peace Prize committee is again drawing criticism after awarding the world’s highest honor based on expectations and not necessarily achievement.
Recalling the 2009 award for President Barack Obama, the 2016 Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos for his efforts to end a half-century of war – despite the Colombians’ rejection of the agreement he struck with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, better known as the FARC.
In announcing the award, committee chair Kaci Kullmann Five said the group hopes Santos will not let the failed public referendum deter his work.
“The committee hopes that the peace prize will give him the strength to succeed in this demanding task,” she said. “Further, it is the committee’s hope that in the year’s to come, the Colombian people will reap the fruits of the reconciliation process.”
The award is likely to be added to the list of most controversial winners.
After the announcement, Santos sought to appear humble and deflected the praise he received from Latin American and world leaders. But online, as often happens, criticism is festering about whether the Nobel Peace Prize has lost its meaning.
The committee hopes that the peace prize will give him the strength to succeed in this demanding task.
Nobel Committee chair Kaci Kullmann
The Nobel Peace Prize is meant to recognize significant impact, and not just good intentions, critics contend. Getting an “E for effort” doesn’t actually happen in real life.
“Always count on the Nobel Peace Prize to continue to be a strong argument for its own irrelevance,” author and Arab Spring activist Iyad El-Baghdadi wrote on Twitter Friday morning.