The world and the political chessboard

(Baonghean) - Politics is the catalyst that connects and governs all relationships: between fields, interest groups, countries... Even seemingly independent fields such as science cannot completely remove that connection. The political chessboard - the center that governs the world and in return, also reflects the movement of this world.

Mr. Thorbjorn Jagland, Former Chairman of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee.

Nobel and politics: really independent?

On Tuesday, March 3, Thorbjorn Jagland, the President of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee and also Secretary General of the Council of Europe, was replaced by Kaci Kullmann Five, a member of the Nobel Committee since 2003. This event has pushed the Nobel Peace Prize Committee into a political "battle", and is also seen as a move to shorten the gap with China.

Former Chairman Thorbjorn Jagland, a former Norwegian Labour Prime Minister, was nominated to head the Nobel Committee in 2009. Meanwhile, the person chosen to replace him is a former head of the Conservative Party. The decision received mixed reactions in Oslo, Norway. Asle Sveen, a Nobel “historian,” commented: “This is the first time in history that a Chairman of the Committee has been asked to leave the position against his will.” Aftenposten editor-in-chief Harald Stanghelle commented: “The Nobel Committee has gambled on its independence and written an unprecedented page in history by officially linking the organization to the Norwegian presidential election.” Abid Raja, a member of the Liberal Party, said bluntly: “We all know that the Nobel Prize Committee is Norway’s face on the international stage and this event has made us a laughingstock for the whole world.” He also shares the view of many that behind this decision, there is a certain influence of China.

According to Asle Sveen, the dismissal of Mr. Jagland can be seen as a move to “appease” China. “The Chinese will certainly see this as a move to get closer to China on the political table,” because in 2010, the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Liu Xiaobo. Mr. Liu is a Chinese human rights activist and intellectual, who was arrested in 2008 for participating in writing Charter 08, and was deprived of political rights for 2 years from December 25, 2009. The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Mr. Liu was strongly opposed by the Beijing government, on the grounds that this event would send out distorted messages and have a negative impact on Chinese and international politics. Most recently, in May 2014, the Dalai Lama's visit to Norway to celebrate the 25th anniversary of his receiving the Nobel Peace Prize also upset the Beijing government, although Norway's new left-wing government was careful not to have any official meetings with the guest.

The reason why the change of the head of the Nobel Committee has attracted so much attention is because it is a testament to the influence and domination of politics on the Nobel Peace Prize. Although the Nobel Committee itself and the Norwegian Parliament and government have always declared that the activities of this Committee are completely independent of Oslo's political circles. The daily newspaper Dagbladet criticized: "By changing the head of the Nobel Committee, the majority of the Committee members have simultaneously confirmed the close connection between the Committee and political agencies and organizations."

The Commission consists of five members, elected by the main parties in the Norwegian Parliament for a term of six years. Currently, the Commission has two members from the Labour Party, two from the Conservative Party, and one from the Progressive Party, a left-wing, anti-immigration movement. In theory, the Norwegian Parliament has the right to promote former politicians or ordinary Norwegian citizens. In the fall of 2014, the Commission's majority changed its political color when Henrik Syse, a philosopher and researcher, was chosen by the Conservative Party to replace a member representing the right-wing Socialist Party on the Commission. This event mirrored the change in majority in the September 2013 Constitutional Election. Since that election, a government has been established in which the Conservative and Progressive Parties "live together" and share power.

These are examples of the influence of politics on the activities of the Nobel Committee. On the contrary, in 2009, the Nobel Prize was awarded to Barack Obama just a few months after his election, causing much controversy, because many opinions said that it was too early to judge whether the results he achieved were worthy of the Nobel Prize. Some also said that Mr. Jagland took advantage of his influence to create advantages for Mr. Obama in the international arena. Or in 2012, when the Nobel Prize was awarded to the European Union while Mr. Jagland was holding the position of Secretary General of the Council of Europe. The fact that Mr. Jagland took office as Chairman of the Committee while still holding the position of President of the Parliament also shows the close connection between the Nobel Committee and Norwegian politics.

Israel challenges US President

On Tuesday, March 3, the Israeli Prime Minister, in his speech before the US Congress, proposed to "stop" the nuclear deal with Tehran. This has put the special relationship between the two countries at risk of tension.

Before Mr. Netanyahu, only the legendary British Prime Minister Winston Churchill had the honor of speaking three times before the US Congress. However, Mr. Churchill never took the opportunity to condemn the White House's foreign policy and called on his audience to oppose it. According to Mr. Netanyahu, if the negotiation process with Iran continues on its current course, the outcome will be exactly what the US wants to avoid: the self-proclaimed Islamic State (IS) will possess nuclear weapons. He also described the portrait of IS as an organization that threatens "not only Israel but also world peace", "an unprecedented extremist organization", has "torn apart" four countries: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen and will "always be the enemy of America". He also warned the US that if it is not careful in its foreign policy, "the enemy of your enemy will also be your enemy".

Netanyahu's speech focused on defending the view that the signing of the Geneva agreements between Tehran and major powers would ensure that Iran would join hands with IS in a war of destruction, with nuclear weapons in hand. He expressed skepticism about a deal that would not require Iran to dismantle its nuclear reactors. In the event of a rift with its partners, Iran could still quickly concentrate nuclear weapons. He also did not trust the monitoring or prevention measures if Iran showed signs of violating the agreement. He asserted: "I do not believe that the regime will change, on the contrary. This agreement will not be goodbye to weapons, but goodbye to arms control." Therefore, according to him, this negotiation is "a failed exchange."

The speech immediately created a rift. A quarter of the Democratic Congress decided to boycott the speech because of its lack of sensitivity to the President. As soon as Mr. Netanyahu finished his speech, the Democratic minority representative of the House - Ms. Nancy Pelosi criticized the "humiliation" of the United States by the guest from the Middle East. That same morning, the US President's schedule was supplemented with a virtual conference with senior European leaders on the issue of Ukraine - at the same time Mr. Netanyahu addressed the Congress. The US President only responded to the Israeli Prime Minister two hours later without any formality.

He stressed that this was not the first time Mr. Netanyahu had issued similar warnings, after a preliminary agreement was signed in November 2013. Accordingly, none of the "prophecies" actually happened and this time, his speech did not bring anything new, did not propose a possible alternative. "We have not signed the agreement yet and it is entirely possible that Iran will refuse. I have always said that no agreement is better than a bad agreement. But if that happens, this is the best option to prevent Iran from possessing an atomic bomb," he declared. Mr. Netanyahu's pressure on US foreign policy through the Republican-majority Congress did not seem to have shaken Mr. Obama, he coldly repeated the provisions of the US Constitution: "In our system, foreign policy is under the authority of the executive and the President and not through any other channel."

Thuc Anh(According to Le monde)