Members of the Nobel committee lauded six decades of reconciliation
among enemies who fought Europe’s bloodiest wars while simultaneously
warning against the hazards of the present. The decision sounded at
times like a plea to support the endangered institution at a difficult
hour.
“We see already now an increase of extremism and nationalistic
attitudes,” said Thorbjorn Jagland, the former Norwegian prime minister
who is chairman of the panel awarding the prize, in an interview after
announcing the award. “There is a real danger that Europe will start
disintegrating. Therefore, we should focus again on the fundamental aims
of the organization.”
Yet on the very day that the award was announced in Oslo, leading
European policy makers again publicly bickered over how to deal with
Greece’s bailout. Germany’s finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble,
rejected calls from the French head of the International Monetary Fund,
Christine Lagarde, to give Greece more time to make additional spending
cuts to rein in deficits.
The intractable debt troubles in Greece have been at the heart of the
financial crisis that has gone on for years and has taken a tremendous
toll on Europe’s economy, breeding ill will between the suffering
periphery and officials in Germany, who have called for painful
austerity as the price of continued German support for the rising debt.
“The leader of the E.U. is Germany, which is in an economic war with
southern Europe,” said Stavros Polychronopoulos, 60, a retired lawyer in
Athens. “I consider this war equal to a real war. They don’t help
peace.”
Mr. Polychronopoulos stood Friday in the central Syntagma Square in
Athens, where residue from tear gas fired by the police during
demonstrations on Tuesday to protest a visit by the German chancellor,
Angela Merkel, still clung to the sidewalks.
In light of the recent upheaval, the Nobel announcement was greeted with
surprise, perplexity and, from some corners, even mockery. “The Nobel
committee is a little late for an April Fool’s joke,” said Martin
Callanan, a British member of the European Parliament and the leader of
the European Conservatives and Reformists Group. “The E.U.’s policies
have exacerbated the fallout of the financial crisis and led to social
unrest that we haven’t seen for a generation.”
Before making its choice, the Norwegian panel — located, as it happens,
in an oil-rich kingdom whose population of five million people has
steadfastly resisted membership of the 27-nation European Union —
weighed 231 nominations. One committee member, a Socialist critical of
the union, had a stroke recently and was replaced by a more
Europe-friendly moderate, ensuring the committee’s tradition of
unanimous decisions.
The peace prize is associated with diplomats or heads of state who have
ended wars, or individuals like Mother Teresa and Archbishop Desmond M.
Tutu fighting poverty or injustice. Last year’s peace prize was shared
by President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia; a Liberian antiwar
activist, Leymah Gbowee; and Tawakkol Karman, a democracy activist in
Yemen. The 2010 peace prize winner was Liu Xiaobo, a Chinese human
rights campaigner.
But as it has in the past, notably in bestowing the 2009 peace prize on
President Obama less than one year after he took office, the selection
by the highly politicized committee sometimes reflects hope as much as
achievement, seeking to bolster good intentions with a prestigious
accolade that provides an unparalleled, if often contentious, global
imprimatur.
Ms. Merkel called the award “an inducement and an obligation at the same
time.” The announcement was taken by the European Union elite in
Brussels — and by its surviving founders — as a moment of profound
vindication. José Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission,
said the award proved that the European body was “something very
precious.” Alan Cowell reported from Paris, and Nicholas Kulish from Berlin.
Reporting was contributed by Walter Gibbs from Oslo, Stephen Castle from
London, James Kanter from Brussels, Rachel Donadio from Athens, Victor
Homola from Berlin, and Scott Sayare and Maïa de la Baume from Paris.
It is justified recognition for a unique project that works for the
benefit of its citizens and also for the benefit of the world,” he said.
“The award today by the Nobel committee shows that even in these
difficult times, the European Union remains an inspiration for countries
and people all over the world and that the international community
needs a strong European Union.”
For all the talk of unity, however, a variety of signals suggested the
opposite. European officials immediately raised the question of who
would accept the peace prize on behalf of the bloc’s often bickering
members, divided by tensions between its more affluent north and its
struggling south. They are also frequently at odds over personality
differences and critical questions, like whether Turkey should be
admitted and whether the euro zone should include more countries than
its current 17.
At its headquarters in Brussels, several figureheads compete for
prominence, including Mr. Barroso, the president of the European
Commission, which enforces European treaties, and Herman Van Rompuy, the
president of the European Council, which represents heads of European
Union governments.
Additionally, the president of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz,
said in a statement that his institution expected to be part of the
award ceremony.
The rivalries recalled a remark ascribed to Henry A. Kissinger, the
former United States secretary of state: “Who do I call if I want to
call Europe?”
The differences extend beyond the Continent’s many languages to broader
questions of commitment to the European integration project. Some
Europeans asked whether the bloc’s dismal track record in dealing with
the Balkan wars of the 1990s and its performance in the current economic
crisis justified a prize for spreading peace.
At the news conference in Oslo to announce the award, Mr. Jagland said
the committee had “no ambitions” that the $1.2 million prize would solve
the multibillion-euro crisis. “The stabilizing part played by the E.U.
has helped to transform most of Europe from a continent of war to a
continent of peace,” he said. “The union and its forerunners have for
over six decades contributed to the advancement of peace and
reconciliation, democracy and human rights in Europe.”
He added: “The dreadful suffering in World War II
demonstrated the need for a new Europe. Over a 70-year period, Germany
and France had fought three wars. Today, war between Germany and France
is unthinkable.”
He also cited the admission of Greece, Spain and Portugal in the 1980s
after they emerged from dictatorships, with democracy as a condition for
membership, as well as the ending of the divisions between east and
west after the fall of the Berlin Wall, as successes for the European Union.
“The admission of Croatia as a member next year, the opening of
membership negotiations with Montenegro, and the granting of candidate
status to Serbia all strengthen the process of reconciliation in the
Balkans,” he said.
Maurice Faure, the last living French signatory to the 1957 Treaty of
Rome, which established the European Economic Community, a precursor to
the modern union, called the prize “the finest reward, the official
recognition of what we developed, notably peace.” Alan Cowell reported from Paris, and Nicholas Kulish from Berlin.
Reporting was contributed by Walter Gibbs from Oslo, Stephen Castle from
London, James Kanter from Brussels, Rachel Donadio from Athens, Victor
Homola from Berlin, and Scott Sayare and Maïa de la Baume from Paris.
“The European Union remains a work in progress,” he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment