Entry details

Chirol
Author

Chirol

Date

October 10th, 2005

Tags

,

Comments

9 Comments so far.
Add yours.

More Nobel Prize Controversy

Shortly before I set off for Syria, I noted the latest of many tests for Turkish democracy with regard to it entering the European Union. Turkish author Orhan Pamuk, who wrote Snow and My Name is Red, was charged with “public denigrating of Turkish identity” for discussing the alleged Armenian genocide and the ongoing Kurdish insurgency both of which are strictly kept outside the realm of national debate.

Nobel Committee Split Because Of Pamuk

HURRIYET- It has been claimed that the Nobel committee was divided into two because of Orhan Pamuk and couldn’t give the Nobel Literature Prize.

The British Observer newspaper claimed that the committee which awards the Nobel Prize for literature has delayed their decision for at least a week amid reports of a split over honoring the controversial Orhan Pamuk

With Turkey having finally started official EU accession talks, this at least comes after the decision. As I previously mentioned, charging such a prominent author with such outlandish offenses is not only petty and undemocratic, but it provides exactly the kind of ammunition the right wing in Europe is looking for to support their anti-Turkish views. Yet, the fact that Turkey will indeed officially begin accession talks virtualy ensures this case will be thrown out, though Turkey does have a nasty habit of shooting itself in the foot over and over.

Additionally, should Pamuk actually be awarded the Nobel Prize it will put tremendous pressure on the Turkish government to make sure such cases are not repeated in the future. Though stories such as Pamuk’s have proven to be embarassing for the Turkish government, they can also be equally helpful. During a time when Turkey has been jumping through fiery hoops to get into the European Union, such incidents also provide a golden opportunity for Turkey to reaffirm its commitment to democracy and freedom in a very public way while international observers are keenly looking on and many waiting for Turkey to slip up.

The European Union’s website on enlargement has more information on Turkey and the EU.

Comments to this entry

snow
October 10, 2005
1:24 pm
Is it just the right wing that is against Turkey joining the EU? What do the leftists think?
Chirol
October 10, 2005
1:31 pm
It's hard to give an answer to a broad question like that as it's directed at an entire continent. However, I do believe that the spectrum of people who are against Turkey's joining the EU is indeed broad and crosses party lines. There's a wide range of reasons people disapprove of Turkey.

You have the more conservative Christian groups within Europe that are against Turkey's membership for more religious, cultural and moral reasons as well as left wing groups who concentrate more on human rights and democracy issues. Thus, I don't think it's correct to paint only one side of the political spectrum as opposing Turkey's eventual membership. Perhaps I should have made that clear in the post. Excellent question!
Curzon
October 10, 2005
2:21 pm
The Nobel Prize Committee is really pissing me off. Gone is the goal of awarding the best contribution in whatever field they're honoring -- if a political point can be made, do it!

Just look at the peace prize. Carter in 2002 and Mohamed Elbaradei in 2005 were picked to thumb their nose at Bush. (And what was up with 2002 and 2003? Picking Wangari Maathai and Shirin Ebadi for their contribution to "democracy." Give me a break.) There was a time when the Nobel Committee actually picked the best contributor to peace, but they've abandoned that after the Cold War. I'm appalled that this bizarre mission is now overflowing into literature.

Maybe Orhan Pamuk is a good writer, but why do I have the feeling that half the people giving this award have never read him. My feelings here were confirmed when I look to Google News and found this:

"EU enlargement chief meets with Orhan Pamuk":http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2005/10/09/64761.html

The European Union enlargement chief met with Turkish writer Orhan Pamuk at his home in Istanbul, where the two discussed freedom of expression ahead of Pamuk's December trial for allegedly insulting the Turkish identity.
Alfred Russel Wallace
October 10, 2005
5:53 pm
Come on Curzon - its not clear that there is any significant record of the Nobel Peace prize Committee actually picking the best contributor to peace.... even at best it seems to be wishful thinking
1976 Betty Williams, Mairead Corrigan for Northern Ireland
1991 Aung San Suu Kyi for Burma
2000 Kim Dae-jung

At least Le Duc Tho declined the prize given to Kissinger in 1973 - I guess he knew what was coming (Surely Kissinger did too.....)

http://nobelprize.org/peace/laureates/index.html
Curzon
October 10, 2005
6:27 pm
Yeah, it's not a perfect record, but let's not forget the many laudable figures they've awarded for genuine achievements. Just look at this list (even removing Kissinger, who well deserved it, IMO) of people who actually contributed to peace in this world

1993 Nelson Mandela, F.W. de Klerk
1990 Mikhail Gorbachev
1986 Elie Wiesel
1984 Desmond Tutu
1983 Lech Walesa
1978 Anwar al-Sadat, Menachem Begin
1968 René Cassin
1964 Martin Luther King
1957 "Lester Bowles Pearson":http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lester_B._Person
1953 George C. Marshall

I actually have a theory as to why it's gone downhill since the 1994 award went to Arafat. The selection was so controversial that a number of committee members resigned, saying he was a terrorist. With conservatives, realists, and even moderates gone, the committee has becoming increasingly focused on selecting obscure people following highly suspect causes. That woman from Kenya in 2004 who got the award for "democracy and sustainable development" but who thinks AIDS is a conspiracy by white people to wipe out blacks is the biggest case in point.

Finally, the selection of Aung San Suu Kyi might have been wishful thinking, but it was based on present-day, realist thinking about who was making a contribution to peace. It was not retrospective (Carter) or imaginary hope (Kim Daejung), or meant to send a message to western leaders (lots, particularly this year's IAEA).

Who would have been better candidates for this year? How about the leaders of the DR Congo who brought that war to an end, or Mussharaf for normalizing relations with Israel, or the South Asian leaders for the reduction of tensions in Kashmir, the leaders of Iraq, or anyone else who made a real contribution to peace? On the bright side, at least the award didn't go to Bono.
profbones
October 30, 2005
4:31 am
when carter got his prize, the committee said it was because g w bush was so pro war. yet, later when north korea admitted that it never stopped developing nuclear reactors, carters's prize was never revoked or recalled. what gives with that?
Artyom
November 13, 2005
3:55 pm
The Armenian Genocide is anything but alleged. How many scholars and have to write about the veracity of the Armenian Genocide so it is not alleged anymore, you people? Don't you freaking have your own brains and just check out a couple of books from the local library and educate your ignoramious selves.
snow
November 14, 2005
10:06 am
Chill out Artyom. I think you will find that most of the posters to this site are certainly sympathetic to Armenians. 'Alleged' was mentioned only once, in the lead article, and it would be better to simply ask Chirol why he used this word, rather than shooting your mouth off and insulting people. Cool your emotions and ask for clarification and then respectfully (or at least reasonably, disagree). That way readers will listen to and respect your opinions if you show some modicum of respect.
artyom
November 14, 2005
4:47 pm
I am just all too tired of that word alleged, when it comes to something as horrible as the Armenian Genocide, which my grandparents survived and a student of which I am. My frustrations stem from the fact that a lot of people take advantage of how insignificant a country Armenia is, just iamgine using the word alleged vis-a-vis the Jewish experience, all sheol will break loose and you may even end up defending yourself in a court with the dictionary in hand. I did indeed get emotional for which I do apologize.