Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook

Nobel Peace Prize: "The idea is to make possession of the nuclear weapon shameful"

Marc Semo of the "World" deciphers the award of the Nobel to the international Campaign for the Abolition of Nuclear weapons (ICAN).

- 15 reads.

Nobel Peace Prize:
The Nobel Peace Prize 2017 was awarded on Friday, 6 October, to international campaign to Abolish nuclear Weapons (ICAN) for its efforts against se weapons of mass destruction, at heart of International tensions in Iran and North Korea. In a chat, Marc Semo, world's diplomatic correspondent, responded to interrogations of Internet users.

Felipe: In a world where all institutions are challenged, does Nobel continue to be authoritative, in your opinion?

Marc Semo: The Nobel Prize has a moral range that remains strong even if it varies according to prices ... more contested in literature than on physics or medicine. However, it is still very real for Nobel Peace Prize, which has already often rewarded actors involved in fight against proliferation such as International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in 2005.

READ also full chat: Nobel peace: Ask your questions about choice of ICAN anti-nuclear organization

Tricottons: Is denuclearization a realistic goal?

Marc Semo: The idea of proponents of ban campaign is to make possession of nuclear weapon shameful for countries that are endowed with it and which, not signing or ratifying Treaty of Prohibition decided in July by 122 countries, are not required to apply Clauses. It is same stigma strategy that has been used in anti-personnel mine ban conventions.

But it is unlikely that it will work for nuclear, considered a central element in strategy of countries possessing nuclear weapons ( five permanent members of UN Security Council) or illegally (India, Pakistan, Israel, Korea Of north, but also for countries that benefit from American nuclear umbrella, those of NATO, but also Japan, which refused to sign treaty.

In Face of dangers of proliferation recalled by North Korea, possession of nuclear weapon or guarantee of being protected by that of Washington remains essential.

READ ALSO: The Nobel Peace Prize awarded to International Coalition for Abolition of nuclear weapons

Josh: Can you give details on this famous treaty on banning of nuclear weapons signed at UN? What's he saying?

Marc Semo: This ten-page text prohibits "in all circumstances from developing, testing, producing, acquiring, possessing or storing nuclear weapons or or explosive nuclear devices". It is based first and foremost on a moral argument: any use of nuclear weapons would have "inhumane consequences", even though such weapons are not very much used in face of new threats – including terrorism – that are weighing on ir holders.

-Geoffrey: Hello, does Nobel Prize committee not weaken this distinction by attributing it to a coalition, only result of which is a treaty that will have no effect or than symbolic, instead of rewarding people or an organization whose Will actions really have contributed to peace or to help people who are victims of armed conflict (White Helmets in Syria, etc.)?

-Pax Questionus: Hello, Nobel Prize has always seemed to reward individuals (one or more), is it common for a legal person to receive this kind of prize? Does that not go against very principle of distinction?

Marc Semo: There have already been many award-winning organizations, from International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to Organization for Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), through Doctors Without Borders. And it has already happened to m, in particular by attributing Nobel to Barack Obama even before he has done anything concrete to deserve it, to yield to a desire to COM ' and to pressure of public opinion without rewarding real concrete action. This may be reminiscent of Briand-Kellogg pact, which came into force in July 1929 to make war illegal ...

-Yannick: Is award of this Nobel not only guided by idea of weighing negotiations with North Korea? Were or organizations not more deserving? -Joseph: Who should feel most titillated by this price? Trump? Macron? Kim Jong-Un?

Marc Semo: The Nobel committee, I think, has mostly wanted to recall an emergency. That is what chair of committee says: "We live in a world where risk of nuclear weapons use is greater than it has ever been in a long time." And we cannot give m wrong when we see flight ahead of Pyongyang regime defying Washington, which threatens to annihilate m but also to question agreement of 2015 with Tehran putting under control for ten years its nuclear program.

Pax Questionus: To extent that five permanent members of United Nations Security Council have nuclear weapons, does it not make any hope of ever seeing nuclear weapon permanently banned from our society? It is hard to see se five states depriving mselves of ir main deterrent/negotiation force ...

Marc Semo: Absolutely ... But most optimistic hope that, as with chemical or biological weapons – finally completely banned respectively in 1993 and 1972 – will happen when it becomes shameful to hold nuclear weapon, which remains only weapon of destruction Still legal in light of international law.

ColdFact: In past, nuclear system was supposed to be held by deterrence between arms-holding countries. Today risk of using weapon seems more important. Does this make it, in your opinion, more necessary or less necessary for a country to own it?

Marc Semo: Proponents of ban claim that non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) has failed to make its commitments to a world without nuclear weapons, even though it has more or less avoided wild proliferation. But we do not see how this treaty would impress North Korean-type states who want to endow m at all costs. And so it is necessary to keep means to answer m.

Tarass: Shouldn't Ukrainian precedent incite anyone to denuclearize? Kiev agreed in 1994 to make nuclear weapons that were on its ground in exchange for a guarantee of its borders by several countries, including Russia. We know rest ...

Marc Semo: That is a very good point. This is even more true for dictators like Saddam Hussein or Muammar Gaddafi who, by abandoning forced and coerced nuclear, n lost power. The North Korean leader, Kim Jong-UN, refore sees a life insurance policy in nuclear system.

Rocket man: Is re not a great hypocrisy on part of Western leaders? One recalls Barack Obama who had won Nobel Peace Prize for his commitment to non-proliferation, but in fact he had accentuated his country's nuclear military policy ...

Marc Semo: The problem is not Westerners but Nobel committee, who had rewarded Obama on words and a picture and without any specific fact ...

-Nobel no gain: is award of Nobel Prize to ICAN accompanied by a financial boost for this association? -Josh: Hello, what is "price" strictly speaking? Is re an endowment for Nobel Prize?

Marc Semo: The endowment of this prize is around one million euros. Obama had repaid whole to charitable organizations. The ICAN has indicated that y are pleased with new ways in which y can continue to fight.

Warning!

You have to login for comment. If you are not a member? Register now.

Login Sign Up