Nobel Peace Prize winner Malala Yousafzai says she has pined for her home in Pakistan's picturesque Swat Valley, even as she recalled two years living in fear under the Taliban's harsh interpretation of Islamic law.

Visiting her homeland for the first time since a Taliban gunman shot her in the head over her blog advocating girls'&nbsp;education, 20-year-old Yousafzai also contradicted Pakistani critics who accuse her of promoting an ideology at odds with the country's Islamic values.

"I am proud of my religion, and I am proud of my country," she told Reuters in an interview at her hotel on Friday.&nbsp;

Wearing a rose-printed headscarf and flowing tunic and trousers - one of many outfits family and friends brought her from Pakistan to Britain, where she is studying at Oxford University - Yousafzai said she was elated at being home.&nbsp;

"I had never been so excited for anything. I've never been so happy before," she said.

On Saturday, Yousafzai flew by helicopter to visit her childhood home in Swat Valley amid heavy security.

"I miss everything about Pakistan ... right from the rivers, the mountains, to even the dirty streets and the garbage around our house, and my friends and how we used to have gossip and talk about our school life, to how we used to fight with our neighbours."

She said she has wanted to return before but, aside from security concerns, there was the hectic pace of school and her entry exams to Oxford, where she began studying last year for a degree in politics, philosophy and economics.

Nobel Prize

Yousafzai's journey to becoming the youngest ever Nobel winner began with the local branch of the hardline Taliban movement taking over her hometown in Swat, about 250 km (160 miles) from the capital, Islamabad, in 2007, when she was 9 years old.

The Tehreek e Taliban Pakistan (TTP) banned television, music and girls'&nbsp;education, and burned about 200 schools, following the example of the 1990s Taliban government in neighbouring Afghanistan, which forcibly excluded women from nearly every aspect of public life.

"I still remember each and every moment, right from the fear while sleeping at night that you might not be alive the next day," Yousafzai said. "The fear that if you are going to school, someone might stop you and throw acid in your face."

Her father was a teacher in a school that educated girls and managed to stay open until early 2009.&nbsp;

After the Pakistani army drove out the Taliban in mid-2009 she became a symbol for girls'&nbsp;education through a blog she wrote for the BBC's Urdu service, which started while the Taliban were still in power, and a documentary "Class Dismissed", that profiled her.

It made her a target. In 2012, a masked gunman boarded her school bus, singled her out and shot her. The Taliban later said it had carried out the attack for her promotion of liberalism.

She was flown to Britain for surgery and has remained abroad since, co-writing a best-selling book "I Am Malala" and starting a foundation advocating girls'&nbsp;education worldwide. 
In 2014 she was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, along with an Indian activist.

Polarizing figure

Though she is perhaps the world's best-known Pakistani, Yousafzai - known almost universally as just "Malala" - is polarizing figure at home, beloved by many but reviled by others.

A group of private schools in Pakistan declared Friday to be "I Am Not Malala Day", for what its spokesman described as her "anti-Islam and anti-Pakistan ideology". That description puzzles Malala.

"I just don't know anything I've said that makes me anti-Pakistan or anti-Islam," she said. "Islam has taught me the importance of peace. Islam has taught me the importance of education. The first word of Islam, or the first word of the Koran, is 'Iqra'&nbsp;which means 'read'."

Government commitment to education was one of the subjects of her meeting on Thursday with Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, whose government, along with the army, helped arrange her trip, including providing security.

"We did talk about education and I appreciated what he has done, but I think there is a lot more that needs to be done. The government promised 4 percent of GDP for education but only so far has increased it to 2.7," she said.

Meetings with the prime minister - as well as other world leaders - might seem a far cry from a schoolgirl's life in the Swat Valley, but Malala said some aspects of her life, like attending Oxford, were longtime dreams.

"My initial plan was that I would continue my education, I would continue speaking out for the girls who cannot go to school ... and one day once I finish my secondary education, I will apply to Oxford," she said.

"So it was in my plan ... I did not know that this attack would happen and I would move to the UK, but I wanted to focus on Pakistan and continue to do as much as I could for girls education."

Roads leading to the 20-year-old education activist's childhood home in Mingora were blocked off earlier in the day, and a helicopter was seen landing at a government guest house about 1 km (half a mile) from her house

Nobel Peace Prize winner Malala Yousafzai says she has pined for her home in Pakistan's picturesque Swat Valley, even as she recalled two years living in fear under the Taliban's harsh interpretation of Islamic law. Visiting her homeland for the first time since a Taliban gunman shot her in the head over her blog advocating girls' education, 20-year-old Yousafzai also contradicted Pakistani critics who accuse her of promoting an ideology at odds with the country's Islamic values. "I am proud of my religion, and I am proud of my country," she told Reuters in an interview at her hotel on Friday. Wearing a rose-printed headscarf and flowing tunic and trousers - one of many outfits family and friends brought her from Pakistan to Britain, where she is studying at Oxford University - Yousafzai said she was elated at being home. "I had never been so excited for anything. I've never been so happy before," she said. On Saturday, Yousafzai flew by helicopter to visit her childhood home in Swat Valley amid heavy security. "I miss everything about Pakistan ... right from the rivers, the mountains, to even the dirty streets and the garbage around our house, and my friends and how we used to have gossip and talk about our school life, to how we used to fight with our neighbours." She said she has wanted to return before but, aside from security concerns, there was the hectic pace of school and her entry exams to Oxford, where she began studying last year for a degree in politics, philosophy and economics. Nobel Prize Yousafzai's journey to becoming the youngest ever Nobel winner began with the local branch of the hardline Taliban movement taking over her hometown in Swat, about 250 km (160 miles) from the capital, Islamabad, in 2007, when she was 9 years old. The Tehreek e Taliban Pakistan (TTP) banned television, music and girls' education, and burned about 200 schools, following the example of the 1990s Taliban government in neighbouring Afghanistan, which forcibly excluded women from nearly every aspect of public life. "I still remember each and every moment, right from the fear while sleeping at night that you might not be alive the next day," Yousafzai said. "The fear that if you are going to school, someone might stop you and throw acid in your face." Her father was a teacher in a school that educated girls and managed to stay open until early 2009. After the Pakistani army drove out the Taliban in mid-2009 she became a symbol for girls' education through a blog she wrote for the BBC's Urdu service, which started while the Taliban were still in power, and a documentary "Class Dismissed", that profiled her. It made her a target. In 2012, a masked gunman boarded her school bus, singled her out and shot her. The Taliban later said it had carried out the attack for her promotion of liberalism. She was flown to Britain for surgery and has remained abroad since, co-writing a best-selling book "I Am Malala" and starting a foundation advocating girls' education worldwide. In 2014 she was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, along with an Indian activist. Polarizing figure Though she is perhaps the world's best-known Pakistani, Yousafzai - known almost universally as just "Malala" - is polarizing figure at home, beloved by many but reviled by others. A group of private schools in Pakistan declared Friday to be "I Am Not Malala Day", for what its spokesman described as her "anti-Islam and anti-Pakistan ideology". That description puzzles Malala. "I just don't know anything I've said that makes me anti-Pakistan or anti-Islam," she said. "Islam has taught me the importance of peace. Islam has taught me the importance of education. The first word of Islam, or the first word of the Koran, is 'Iqra' which means 'read'." Government commitment to education was one of the subjects of her meeting on Thursday with Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, whose government, along with the army, helped arrange her trip, including providing security. "We did talk about education and I appreciated what he has done, but I think there is a lot more that needs to be done. The government promised 4 percent of GDP for education but only so far has increased it to 2.7," she said. Meetings with the prime minister - as well as other world leaders - might seem a far cry from a schoolgirl's life in the Swat Valley, but Malala said some aspects of her life, like attending Oxford, were longtime dreams. "My initial plan was that I would continue my education, I would continue speaking out for the girls who cannot go to school ... and one day once I finish my secondary education, I will apply to Oxford," she said. "So it was in my plan ... I did not know that this attack would happen and I would move to the UK, but I wanted to focus on Pakistan and continue to do as much as I could for girls education."

'I've never been so happy': Nobel laureate Malala Yousafzai on visiting hometown in Pakistan

Has Donald Trump really been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize? The Norwegian Nobel Institute said Wednesday it had filed a police report after receiving a seemingly fraudulent nomination for the US president.

&quot;We have good reason to believe that a nomination we received concerning Trump has been falsified,&quot; Nobel Institute director Olav Njolstad told AFP. He refused to provide further details, saying it was for the police to give more information.

Each year, nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize must be submitted by January 31. Among those entitled to propose names are members of parliament and government, former laureates and some university professors.

While the list of candidates is kept secret for at least 50 years, those who nominate are however allowed to disclose their choice.

The Peace Research Institute of Oslo (Prio) said in early February that Trump&#39;s name was on the list.

Like last year, Trump was nominated for his &quot;ideology of peace by force&quot; by an American who did not want his identity revealed, according to Prio, a body independent of the Nobel organisation which closely monitors the nominations revealed publicly.

It is possible that this nomination was submitted by a person suspected of committing identity fraud to appear eligible to nominate.

The Nobel Institute said it had received 329 valid nominations for the 2018 Peace Prize. The five members of the Nobel committee that selects the winner are also allowed to submit names during their first meeting of the year, which was held on Monday.

The name of the 2018 winner will be announced in early October.

Has Donald Trump really been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize?

Has Donald Trump really been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize? The Norwegian Nobel Institute said Wednesday it had filed a police report after receiving a seemingly fraudulent nomination for the US president. "We have good reason to believe that a nomination we received concerning Trump has been falsified," Nobel Institute director Olav Njolstad told AFP. He refused to provide further details, saying it was for the police to give more information. Each year, nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize must be submitted by January 31. Among those entitled to propose names are members of parliament and government, former laureates and some university professors. While the list of candidates is kept secret for at least 50 years, those who nominate are however allowed to disclose their choice. The Peace Research Institute of Oslo (Prio) said in early February that Trump's name was on the list. Like last year, Trump was nominated for his "ideology of peace by force" by an American who did not want his identity revealed, according to Prio, a body independent of the Nobel organisation which closely monitors the nominations revealed publicly. It is possible that this nomination was submitted by a person suspected of committing identity fraud to appear eligible to nominate. The Nobel Institute said it had received 329 valid nominations for the 2018 Peace Prize. The five members of the Nobel committee that selects the winner are also allowed to submit names during their first meeting of the year, which was held on Monday. The name of the 2018 winner will be announced in early October.

Is Trump's Nobel Peace Prize nomination fake?

Olympic officials played down a suggestion that the unified Korean ice hockey team could be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize on Tuesday and said there had been &quot;no formal discussion&quot; about proposing IOC chief Thomas Bach for the honour.

Mark Adams, a spokesman for the International Olympic Committee, said there had been &quot;no consideration whatsoever&quot; within the body of nominating the joint Korean team, following a suggestion by American IOC member Angela Ruggiero.

&quot;From an IOC administrative level, there&#39;s been no consideration whatsoever of this. Obviously, members are able to have their own personal views... but there&#39;s been no discussion,&quot; he said.

When asked if Bach should be proposed for the prize, after helping broker North Korea&#39;s attendance, Adams said: &quot;There&#39;s no formal discussion yet at all.&quot;

Bach is scheduled to visit North Korea after the Games, where their athletes marched together with South Korea at the opening ceremony. The two Koreas also formed their first unified Olympic team in the women&#39;s ice hockey.

North Korea&#39;s participation has triggered a burst of reconciliation with South Korea, including a visit by Kim Jong Un&#39;s sister Kim Yo Jong and an invitation to Pyongyang for South Korean leader Moon Jae-in.

Ruggiero, who is head of the IOC athletes commission and a former Olympic ice hockey gold medallist, said it was a personal opinion that the Korean team should be nominated.

&quot;I have heard a lot of support from other members just saying this is symbolic, this is what the Olympics is all about,&quot; she said.&nbsp;

&quot;It&#39;s not about an individual or&nbsp;sport&nbsp;or country. I&#39;m happy that it&#39;s resonated that way and it&#39;s starting the conversation and encouraged to have that dialogue with other members and all stakeholders for that matter.&quot;

Despite the rapid warming of ties -- which follows months of missile tests and threats of war -- some South Koreans are sceptical and US Vice-President Mike Pence warned the North was trying to &quot;hijack&quot; the Games.

In an interview with AFP on Monday, Bach dismissed fears North Korea was using the Games for political purposes, calling their participation a purely sporting matter.

&quot;This is about the sport&nbsp;and this the IOC made very clear,&quot; Bach said. &quot;This is about the role of&nbsp;sport&nbsp;to build bridges, to open doors and nothing more.&quot;

At the joint team&#39;s opening match -- an 8-0 thrashing by Switzerland -- Bach sat with Moon to his right and the North Korean delegation to his left, and addressed the players afterwards.

&quot;You&#39;ve given everything, you&#39;ve fought well and tomorrow you&#39;ll come to understand the full importance and significance of this,&quot; Adams quoted Bach as telling the team.

&nbsp;

Unified Korean ice hockey team could be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize

Olympic officials played down a suggestion that the unified Korean ice hockey team could be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize on Tuesday and said there had been "no formal discussion" about proposing IOC chief Thomas Bach for the honour. Mark Adams, a spokesman for the International Olympic Committee, said there had been "no consideration whatsoever" within the body of nominating the joint Korean team, following a suggestion by American IOC member Angela Ruggiero. "From an IOC administrative level, there's been no consideration whatsoever of this. Obviously, members are able to have their own personal views... but there's been no discussion," he said. When asked if Bach should be proposed for the prize, after helping broker North Korea's attendance, Adams said: "There's no formal discussion yet at all." Bach is scheduled to visit North Korea after the Games, where their athletes marched together with South Korea at the opening ceremony. The two Koreas also formed their first unified Olympic team in the women's ice hockey. North Korea's participation has triggered a burst of reconciliation with South Korea, including a visit by Kim Jong Un's sister Kim Yo Jong and an invitation to Pyongyang for South Korean leader Moon Jae-in. Ruggiero, who is head of the IOC athletes commission and a former Olympic ice hockey gold medallist, said it was a personal opinion that the Korean team should be nominated. "I have heard a lot of support from other members just saying this is symbolic, this is what the Olympics is all about," she said. "It's not about an individual or sport or country. I'm happy that it's resonated that way and it's starting the conversation and encouraged to have that dialogue with other members and all stakeholders for that matter." Despite the rapid warming of ties -- which follows months of missile tests and threats of war -- some South Koreans are sceptical and US Vice-President Mike Pence warned the North was trying to "hijack" the Games. In an interview with AFP on Monday, Bach dismissed fears North Korea was using the Games for political purposes, calling their participation a purely sporting matter. "This is about the sport and this the IOC made very clear," Bach said. "This is about the role of sport to build bridges, to open doors and nothing more." At the joint team's opening match -- an 8-0 thrashing by Switzerland -- Bach sat with Moon to his right and the North Korean delegation to his left, and addressed the players afterwards. "You've given everything, you've fought well and tomorrow you'll come to understand the full importance and significance of this," Adams quoted Bach as telling the team.

Bach for Nobel peace prize? No 'formal discussion' says IOC

On January 30th, 1948, Gandhiji was killed. This year marks his 70th death anniversary. Twice every year, on Gandhi&#39;s birthday on 2nd October and his death anniversary on 30 January, the country remembers the &#39;Father of the Nation&#39;. Both these dates are celebrated amidst much fanfare; there are seminars and conferences across the country. Long lectures abound. Intellectuals and politicians prepare notes of their speeches based on Gandhi&#39;s ideas.&nbsp;

But, sadly, soon with the end of these occasions, Gandhi&#39;s ideas are put into the freezer.&nbsp;

India respects Gandhi but ignores his message

Gandhiji&#39;s unifying role in bringing together a country as diverse as India is beyond question. However, his contribution has been largely forgotten by the state and the society. This collective amnesia is best proven in instances where government employees, unhesitatingly, take bribes in front of the framed pictures of Mahatma Gandhi which adorns almost all government offices of India.

The blood of the common men of India fills up the pocket of these corrupt officials. They lie, prepare incorrect reports and fool the citizens of the nation.

Possibly, all the major crossings of the country have a statue of Gandhiji. But that does not deter anyone from committing some of the heinous crimes on the roads and streets of India.&nbsp;

Gandhi said, see no evil, speak no evil and don&#39;t listen to evil. However, we have learned not to pay heed to the most basic tenets of Gandhi&#39;s teachings. We continue, unhindered, to witness, speak and listen to evil.&nbsp;

The civil society stands in full support whenever it feels the freedom of expression is threatened but no one is willing to take responsibility for expressing the ideas concerned.&nbsp;

Gandhi&#39;s global influence

In the history of human civilisation, Gandhi is unique for devising an unprecedented strategy of protest. He proved that one can oppose a powerful and oppressive regime without shedding a drop of blood. Without hurting anyone physically, through the most peaceful of means, one can bring about a change.&nbsp;

Gandhi&#39;s ideas of non-violence and non-cooperation were an inspiration to the rest of the world. The human rights activist Martin Luther King who fought civil rights of the African-Americans took his political and ideological lessons from Gandhi.

Similarly, South Africa&#39;s Nelson Mandela infused his politics with Gandhi&#39;s ideas and action plans.&nbsp;

It is undeniable, how 70 years after his death, Gandhi continues to be relevant to the rest of the world.&nbsp;

Barack Obama, the former US president, acknowledged Gandhi&#39;s influence on him. We will hardly find a political leader in India who ends his speech without mentioning or quoting Gandhi.&nbsp; Not to mention, one political family in India who retained power through decades using their &#39;Gandhi&#39; surname.

Notwithstanding the profound influence that Gandhi had across space and time, he did not receive the Nobel prize. Perhaps, Gandhi was bigger than the prize. But another question crops up whether there was a secret agenda that denied Gandhi of the Nobel Peace Prize. After all, the politics surrounding the Nobel Prize is pretty well known to anyone who cares to explore.&nbsp;

Why did Gandhi not get the Nobel Peace Prize?

Now, the committee responsible for awarding the Nobel prize regrets that they did not give Gandhi the award when he was alive and fighting for India&#39;s freedom against a mighty opponent. What people, generally, think is that Norway&#39;s Nobel Prize Committee did not want to upset the Britishers who were India&#39;s colonial master.&nbsp;

But in reality, appeasement was not the only reason.

Gandhi was nominated 5 times for the Nobel prize: in 1937, 1938, 1939, 1947 and in 1948.

In the first instance, a member of Norway&#39;s Parliament proposed Gandhi&#39;s name but it was overlooked by the committee.

Our research revealed a letter written by Prof. Jacob Worm-Muller who served as a consultant advisor to the committee. Reading the letter makes it very clear that Worm-Muller praised Gandhi but he also mentioned that he can not trust the latter&#39;s personality.

&quot;He is undoubtedly a good, noble and ascetic person &mdash; a prominent man who is deservedly honored and loved by the masses of India. But there are sharp turns in his policies, which can hardly be satisfactorily explained by his followers. He is a freedom fighter and a dictator, an idealist and a nationalist. He is frequently a Christ, but then, suddenly, an ordinary politician&quot;

Jacob Muller presented his thought in the year 1937 in front of the Committee. There were a lot of people at that time who were unable to understand Gandhi&#39;s ideology. Because, on the one hand, he was living a life of a saint, on the other hand, he was a lawyer. Gandhi while speaking about truth, non-violence and morality, was also fully aware of the working of the colonial machinery. This knowledge of the colonial system enabled Mahatma to counter the colonial rule like a seasoned politician. This is what the Nobel Committee, perhaps, found confusing. Is Gandhi a saint or a politician.

Prof. Muller also wrote that Gandhi was not completely non-violent. Muller said that Gandhi&#39;s nationalism is limited to the Indians. Even in South Africa, Gandhi&#39;s action was limited to the Indian communities living there.&nbsp;

What Prof. Muller mentioned about Gandhiji was unfortunate as Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King got the Nobel prize. And they were themselves a follower of Gandhi. It is very surprising that those who were inspired by Gandhi got the Nobel prize, but Gandhi did not.

Though Gandhi never expected any prize as an acknowledgment for his work.

After 1937, Gandhi was nominated in 1938 and 1939, but his name was not even shortlisted.

In 1947, it was expected that Gandhi will receive the Nobel but again the committee did not consider him.

It was happening because there were many powerful forces that were influencing the decisions of the Nobel Committee and there were some international media houses too behind this who acted against Gandhi&#39;s nomination.

Jens Arup Seip, the advisor of Nobel Prize Committee, supported Gandhi&#39;s case in 1947 but even then he did not receive the prize.&nbsp;

&nbsp;Seip&#39;s report gives a detailed account of the events that happened during 1937 to 1947. In 1947, Gandhiji was one among other 6 listed candidates but over Gandhi&#39;s name, there was a huge conflict among the jury members.

During that time, Gandhiji said in a rally that, &quot;If such practice would continue that India might declare war against Pakistan&quot;

This report was published in Britain&#39;s newspaper &quot;The Times&quot; which went against Gandhi. Consequently, 3 of 5 jury members voted against him and Gandhi did not receive the Nobel Prize.

While the Nobel Committee kept itself busy trying to find violence in the non-violent politics of Mahatma, it did not hesitate to award the Nobel Peace Prize to Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt, a US president, had been a career soldier. He had participated in several wars but Nobel Committee chose to forget all that and focused only on Roosevelt&#39;s effort to stop the war between Russia and Japan in 1905.

In the year 1948, Gandhiji had a huge chance of winning the Nobel prize but 2 days before the announcement, Gandhi was assassinated. There had been no tradition of posthumous awarding of Nobel prize. Even then there was a buzz that Gandhi might be the first one to receive it after death but in absence of a trust or organisation which could have taken the prize in Gandhi&#39;s absence, the idea was aborted.&nbsp;

That year the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to no one. On Gandhi&#39;s 70th death anniversary, the Nobel Committee paid its tribute to Gandhi, stating &quot;That year, the Nobel Committee decided to make no award on the grounds that &quot;there was no suitable living candidate&quot;. This definitely implies that Gandhi was the chosen candidate in 1948 and death robbed him of that honour.&nbsp;

In 1989, while awarding Dalai Lama of the Nobel Peace Prize, the Committee openly admitted that it was a mistake not to award Gandhiji.&nbsp;

Gandhiji, history has proven, does not need the Nobel Prize to exercise his influence across the world. But the Nobel Committee needs Gandhiji to enhance its stature. If the Nobel Committee wants, it can rectify its past mistake easily. Even new laws can be brought about to honour a great man like Gandhiji. Perhaps, it is about time that the Nobel Committee considers Mahatma Gandhi as the first posthumous awardee of the Nobel Prize.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)&nbsp;&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Colonial politics of the time, particularly the prejudice of the Nobel Committee and its lack of understanding of the many contradiction of Gandhi's political career robbed Mahatma Gandhi of Nobel Peace Prize.

On January 30th, 1948, Gandhiji was killed. This year marks his 70th death anniversary. Twice every year, on Gandhi's birthday on 2nd October and his death anniversary on 30 January, the country remembers the 'Father of the Nation'. Both these dates are celebrated amidst much fanfare; there are seminars and conferences across the country. Long lectures abound. Intellectuals and politicians prepare notes of their speeches based on Gandhi's ideas. But, sadly, soon with the end of these occasions, Gandhi's ideas are put into the freezer. India respects Gandhi but ignores his message Gandhiji's unifying role in bringing together a country as diverse as India is beyond question. However, his contribution has been largely forgotten by the state and the society. This collective amnesia is best proven in instances where government employees, unhesitatingly, take bribes in front of the framed pictures of Mahatma Gandhi which adorns almost all government offices of India. The blood of the common men of India fills up the pocket of these corrupt officials. They lie, prepare incorrect reports and fool the citizens of the nation. Possibly, all the major crossings of the country have a statue of Gandhiji. But that does not deter anyone from committing some of the heinous crimes on the roads and streets of India. Gandhi said, see no evil, speak no evil and don't listen to evil. However, we have learned not to pay heed to the most basic tenets of Gandhi's teachings. We continue, unhindered, to witness, speak and listen to evil. The civil society stands in full support whenever it feels the freedom of expression is threatened but no one is willing to take responsibility for expressing the ideas concerned. Gandhi's global influence In the history of human civilisation, Gandhi is unique for devising an unprecedented strategy of protest. He proved that one can oppose a powerful and oppressive regime without shedding a drop of blood. Without hurting anyone physically, through the most peaceful of means, one can bring about a change. Gandhi's ideas of non-violence and non-cooperation were an inspiration to the rest of the world. The human rights activist Martin Luther King who fought civil rights of the African-Americans took his political and ideological lessons from Gandhi. Similarly, South Africa's Nelson Mandela infused his politics with Gandhi's ideas and action plans. It is undeniable, how 70 years after his death, Gandhi continues to be relevant to the rest of the world. Barack Obama, the former US president, acknowledged Gandhi's influence on him. We will hardly find a political leader in India who ends his speech without mentioning or quoting Gandhi. Not to mention, one political family in India who retained power through decades using their 'Gandhi' surname. Notwithstanding the profound influence that Gandhi had across space and time, he did not receive the Nobel prize. Perhaps, Gandhi was bigger than the prize. But another question crops up whether there was a secret agenda that denied Gandhi of the Nobel Peace Prize. After all, the politics surrounding the Nobel Prize is pretty well known to anyone who cares to explore. Why did Gandhi not get the Nobel Peace Prize? Now, the committee responsible for awarding the Nobel prize regrets that they did not give Gandhi the award when he was alive and fighting for India's freedom against a mighty opponent. What people, generally, think is that Norway's Nobel Prize Committee did not want to upset the Britishers who were India's colonial master. But in reality, appeasement was not the only reason. Gandhi was nominated 5 times for the Nobel prize: in 1937, 1938, 1939, 1947 and in 1948. In the first instance, a member of Norway's Parliament proposed Gandhi's name but it was overlooked by the committee. Our research revealed a letter written by Prof. Jacob Worm-Muller who served as a consultant advisor to the committee. Reading the letter makes it very clear that Worm-Muller praised Gandhi but he also mentioned that he can not trust the latter's personality. "He is undoubtedly a good, noble and ascetic person — a prominent man who is deservedly honored and loved by the masses of India. But there are sharp turns in his policies, which can hardly be satisfactorily explained by his followers. He is a freedom fighter and a dictator, an idealist and a nationalist. He is frequently a Christ, but then, suddenly, an ordinary politician" Jacob Muller presented his thought in the year 1937 in front of the Committee. There were a lot of people at that time who were unable to understand Gandhi's ideology. Because, on the one hand, he was living a life of a saint, on the other hand, he was a lawyer. Gandhi while speaking about truth, non-violence and morality, was also fully aware of the working of the colonial machinery. This knowledge of the colonial system enabled Mahatma to counter the colonial rule like a seasoned politician. This is what the Nobel Committee, perhaps, found confusing. Is Gandhi a saint or a politician. Prof. Muller also wrote that Gandhi was not completely non-violent. Muller said that Gandhi's nationalism is limited to the Indians. Even in South Africa, Gandhi's action was limited to the Indian communities living there. What Prof. Muller mentioned about Gandhiji was unfortunate as Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King got the Nobel prize. And they were themselves a follower of Gandhi. It is very surprising that those who were inspired by Gandhi got the Nobel prize, but Gandhi did not. Though Gandhi never expected any prize as an acknowledgment for his work. After 1937, Gandhi was nominated in 1938 and 1939, but his name was not even shortlisted. In 1947, it was expected that Gandhi will receive the Nobel but again the committee did not consider him. It was happening because there were many powerful forces that were influencing the decisions of the Nobel Committee and there were some international media houses too behind this who acted against Gandhi's nomination. Jens Arup Seip, the advisor of Nobel Prize Committee, supported Gandhi's case in 1947 but even then he did not receive the prize. Seip's report gives a detailed account of the events that happened during 1937 to 1947. In 1947, Gandhiji was one among other 6 listed candidates but over Gandhi's name, there was a huge conflict among the jury members. During that time, Gandhiji said in a rally that, "If such practice would continue that India might declare war against Pakistan" This report was published in Britain's newspaper "The Times" which went against Gandhi. Consequently, 3 of 5 jury members voted against him and Gandhi did not receive the Nobel Prize. While the Nobel Committee kept itself busy trying to find violence in the non-violent politics of Mahatma, it did not hesitate to award the Nobel Peace Prize to Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt, a US president, had been a career soldier. He had participated in several wars but Nobel Committee chose to forget all that and focused only on Roosevelt's effort to stop the war between Russia and Japan in 1905. In the year 1948, Gandhiji had a huge chance of winning the Nobel prize but 2 days before the announcement, Gandhi was assassinated. There had been no tradition of posthumous awarding of Nobel prize. Even then there was a buzz that Gandhi might be the first one to receive it after death but in absence of a trust or organisation which could have taken the prize in Gandhi's absence, the idea was aborted. That year the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to no one. On Gandhi's 70th death anniversary, the Nobel Committee paid its tribute to Gandhi, stating "That year, the Nobel Committee decided to make no award on the grounds that "there was no suitable living candidate". This definitely implies that Gandhi was the chosen candidate in 1948 and death robbed him of that honour. In 1989, while awarding Dalai Lama of the Nobel Peace Prize, the Committee openly admitted that it was a mistake not to award Gandhiji. Gandhiji, history has proven, does not need the Nobel Prize to exercise his influence across the world. But the Nobel Committee needs Gandhiji to enhance its stature. If the Nobel Committee wants, it can rectify its past mistake easily. Even new laws can be brought about to honour a great man like Gandhiji. Perhaps, it is about time that the Nobel Committee considers Mahatma Gandhi as the first posthumous awardee of the Nobel Prize. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: Why Gandhiji did not get the Nobel Prize

Sunday night annual Nobel banquet was a stylish event with ice-themed dinner -- florists, lighting designers and chefs flew in for the special occasion.

The night was kept a secret from the attendees as they got surprised when they reached the venue,&nbsp;Stockholm&#39;s Bl&aring; Hallen (Blue Hall).

The grand hall is generally used for state visits, balls and other large events.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
At the Nobel Prize banquet in Stockholm City Hall this evening. 
 
Photos: Alexander Mahmoud/Nobel Media <a href="https://t.co/0b3ZDVMIU3">pic.twitter.com/0b3ZDVMIU3</a>
&mdash; The Nobel Prize (@NobelPrize) <a href="https://twitter.com/NobelPrize/status/939993103825596416?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 10, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Backstage and on stage at the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NobelPrize?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#NobelPrize</a> award ceremony! 
 
Photos: Alexander Mahmoud / Nobel Media. <a href="https://t.co/S54Pe19tXP">pic.twitter.com/S54Pe19tXP</a>
&mdash; The Nobel Prize (@NobelPrize) <a href="https://twitter.com/NobelPrize/status/939918740526952449?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 10, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Watch John Legend perform at this year&#39;s prize distribution ceremony:&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Did you catch <a href="https://twitter.com/johnlegend?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@johnlegend</a> performing at this year&#39;s Nobel Peace Prize award ceremony? Watch his performance of Bob Marley&#39;s Redemption Song <a href="https://t.co/QgXARopjJf">https://t.co/QgXARopjJf</a> <a href="https://t.co/39DQuaCcw8">pic.twitter.com/39DQuaCcw8</a>
&mdash; The Nobel Prize (@NobelPrize) <a href="https://twitter.com/NobelPrize/status/939904550068215809?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 10, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

While there was experimentation in food style and cuisine including offering culinary variations inspired by the northern lights and ice, the florists and decorators were&nbsp;also inspired by this Nordic theme.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Watch the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NobelPrize?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#NobelPrize</a> Banquet&rsquo;s starter be carefully crafted! 
 
Pressed and dried Jerusalem artichoke is served with kohlrabi flowers flavoured with ginger and lightly roasted cabbage broth, composed by chef Tom Sj&ouml;stedt. <a href="https://t.co/NF6dqeAenu">pic.twitter.com/NF6dqeAenu</a>
&mdash; The Nobel Prize (@NobelPrize) <a href="https://twitter.com/NobelPrize/status/939929338069291009?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 10, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

The event started at 19:00 on Sunday and concluded with awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo.&nbsp;&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Bare brick interior was turned into the stylish venue for Sunday's annual banquet

Sunday night annual Nobel banquet was a stylish event with ice-themed dinner -- florists, lighting designers and chefs flew in for the special occasion. The night was kept a secret from the attendees as they got surprised when they reached the venue, Stockholm's Blå Hallen (Blue Hall). The grand hall is generally used for state visits, balls and other large events. At the Nobel Prize banquet in Stockholm City Hall this evening. Photos: Alexander Mahmoud/Nobel Media pic.twitter.com/0b3ZDVMIU3 — The Nobel Prize (@NobelPrize) December 10, 2017 × Backstage and on stage at the #NobelPrize award ceremony! Photos: Alexander Mahmoud / Nobel Media. pic.twitter.com/S54Pe19tXP — The Nobel Prize (@NobelPrize) December 10, 2017 × Watch John Legend perform at this year's prize distribution ceremony: Did you catch @johnlegend performing at this year's Nobel Peace Prize award ceremony? Watch his performance of Bob Marley's Redemption Song https://t.co/QgXARopjJf pic.twitter.com/39DQuaCcw8 — The Nobel Prize (@NobelPrize) December 10, 2017 × While there was experimentation in food style and cuisine including offering culinary variations inspired by the northern lights and ice, the florists and decorators were also inspired by this Nordic theme. Watch the #NobelPrize Banquet’s starter be carefully crafted! Pressed and dried Jerusalem artichoke is served with kohlrabi flowers flavoured with ginger and lightly roasted cabbage broth, composed by chef Tom Sjöstedt. pic.twitter.com/NF6dqeAenu — The Nobel Prize (@NobelPrize) December 10, 2017 × The event started at 19:00 on Sunday and concluded with awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo.

Watch: Inside the grand, ice-themed Nobel Peace Prize banquet

Mankind&#39;s destruction caused by a nuclear war is just one &quot;impulsive tantrum away&quot;, the winners of the Nobel Peace Prize, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), warned on Sunday as the United States and North Korea exchange threats over the nation&#39;s nuclear tests.

&quot;Will it be the end of nuclear weapons, or will it be the end of us?&quot; ICAN head Beatrice Fihn said in a speech after receiving the peace prize on behalf of the anti-nuclear group.

Tensions on the Korean peninsula have spiralled as Pyongyang has in recent months ramped up its number of missiles and nuclear tests.

North Korea&#39;s leader Kim Jong-Un has exchanged warlike threats with US President Donald Trump, who has ordered a military show of force.

&quot;The only rational course of action is to cease living under the conditions where our mutual destruction is only one impulsive tantrum away,&quot; Fihn added.&nbsp;

ICAN, a coalition of hundreds of NGOs around the world, has worked for a treaty banning nuclear weapons which was adopted in July by 122 countries.

The text was weakened by the absence of the nine nuclear powers among the signatories.

In an apparent snub of the ICAN-backed treaty, the three western nuclear powers -- the US, France and Britain -- broke with tradition by sending second-ranking diplomats rather than their ambassadors to Sunday&#39;s ceremony.

&#39;Bruised ego&#39;

Supporters of nuclear weapons argue that they serve as a deterrent for starting a major conflict as it would guarantee mutual destruction for the nations involved.&nbsp;

&quot;They are a madman&#39;s gun held permanently to our temple,&quot; Fihn said.

&quot;These weapons were supposed to keep us free, but they deny us our freedoms.&quot;

Berit Reiss-Andersen, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, said in her lecture during the ceremony that ICAN&#39;s &quot;message resonates with millions of people who perceive that the threat of nuclear war is greater than it has been for a long time, not least due to the situation in North Korea.&quot;

Senior UN envoy Jeffrey Feltman on Saturday warned there was a grave risk that a miscalculation could trigger conflict with Pyongyang and urged the reclusive state to keep communication channels open.

Kim and Trump have taunted each other in recent months, with the US President pejoratively dubbing his rival &quot;Little Rocket Man&quot; and a &quot;sick puppy&quot;.

&quot;A moment of panic or carelessness, a misconstrued comment or bruised ego could easily lead us unavoidably to the destruction of entire cities,&quot; Fihn said.

Hiroshima remembered&nbsp;

Several survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombings, which killed more than 220,000 people 72 years ago, attended the ceremony in the Oslo City Hall.

One of them, Setsuko Thurlow, received the Nobel on behalf of ICAN jointly with Fihn.&nbsp;

Speaking to AFP ahead of the ceremony, Thurlow recalled the horrific aftermath of the first atomic bomb in Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, when she was 13 years old.

Thurlow described corpses lying on the ground, the injured and dying calling for help and the survivors looking like &quot;a procession of ghosts&quot;.

&quot;The hair was standing up and they were all burned on the skin and their flesh was hanging from their bones,&quot; she said.

&quot;Some were carrying their eyeballs. It just was like hell on earth,&quot; added the 85-year-old who now lives in Canada and uses a wheelchair.

&#39;Heed our warning&#39;&nbsp;

Although the number of nuclear weapons has dropped since the end of the Cold War, there are still around 15,000 atomic bombs on earth.

&quot;Listen to our testimony. Heed our warning. And know that your actions are consequential,&quot; Thurlow said during her speech at the ceremony, referring to the leaders of nuclear-armed nations.

The Nobel prizes in literature, physics, chemistry, medicine and economics were to be awarded later on Sunday at a separate ceremony in Stockholm.

Each prize consists of a diploma, a gold medal and a cheque for nine million Swedish kroner (900,000 euros).

'Will it be the end of nuclear weapons, or will it be the end of us?' ICAN head Beatrice Fihn said in a speech Sunday after receiving the peace prize

Mankind's destruction caused by a nuclear war is just one "impulsive tantrum away", the winners of the Nobel Peace Prize, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), warned on Sunday as the United States and North Korea exchange threats over the nation's nuclear tests. "Will it be the end of nuclear weapons, or will it be the end of us?" ICAN head Beatrice Fihn said in a speech after receiving the peace prize on behalf of the anti-nuclear group. Tensions on the Korean peninsula have spiralled as Pyongyang has in recent months ramped up its number of missiles and nuclear tests. North Korea's leader Kim Jong-Un has exchanged warlike threats with US President Donald Trump, who has ordered a military show of force. "The only rational course of action is to cease living under the conditions where our mutual destruction is only one impulsive tantrum away," Fihn added. ICAN, a coalition of hundreds of NGOs around the world, has worked for a treaty banning nuclear weapons which was adopted in July by 122 countries. The text was weakened by the absence of the nine nuclear powers among the signatories. In an apparent snub of the ICAN-backed treaty, the three western nuclear powers -- the US, France and Britain -- broke with tradition by sending second-ranking diplomats rather than their ambassadors to Sunday's ceremony. 'Bruised ego' Supporters of nuclear weapons argue that they serve as a deterrent for starting a major conflict as it would guarantee mutual destruction for the nations involved. "They are a madman's gun held permanently to our temple," Fihn said. "These weapons were supposed to keep us free, but they deny us our freedoms." Berit Reiss-Andersen, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, said in her lecture during the ceremony that ICAN's "message resonates with millions of people who perceive that the threat of nuclear war is greater than it has been for a long time, not least due to the situation in North Korea." Senior UN envoy Jeffrey Feltman on Saturday warned there was a grave risk that a miscalculation could trigger conflict with Pyongyang and urged the reclusive state to keep communication channels open. Kim and Trump have taunted each other in recent months, with the US President pejoratively dubbing his rival "Little Rocket Man" and a "sick puppy". "A moment of panic or carelessness, a misconstrued comment or bruised ego could easily lead us unavoidably to the destruction of entire cities," Fihn said. Hiroshima remembered Several survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombings, which killed more than 220,000 people 72 years ago, attended the ceremony in the Oslo City Hall. One of them, Setsuko Thurlow, received the Nobel on behalf of ICAN jointly with Fihn. Speaking to AFP ahead of the ceremony, Thurlow recalled the horrific aftermath of the first atomic bomb in Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, when she was 13 years old. Thurlow described corpses lying on the ground, the injured and dying calling for help and the survivors looking like "a procession of ghosts". "The hair was standing up and they were all burned on the skin and their flesh was hanging from their bones," she said. "Some were carrying their eyeballs. It just was like hell on earth," added the 85-year-old who now lives in Canada and uses a wheelchair. 'Heed our warning' Although the number of nuclear weapons has dropped since the end of the Cold War, there are still around 15,000 atomic bombs on earth. "Listen to our testimony. Heed our warning. And know that your actions are consequential," Thurlow said during her speech at the ceremony, referring to the leaders of nuclear-armed nations. The Nobel prizes in literature, physics, chemistry, medicine and economics were to be awarded later on Sunday at a separate ceremony in Stockholm. Each prize consists of a diploma, a gold medal and a cheque for nine million Swedish kroner (900,000 euros).

Nobel Peace Prize winners warn nuclear war is an 'impulsive tantrum away'

Pope Francis will hold talks with Myanmar&#39;s leader Aung San Suu Kyi on Tuesday, a key moment of a tour aimed at alleviating religious and ethnic hatreds that have driven huge numbers of Muslim Rohingya from the country.&nbsp;

Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, has been ostracised by a global rights community that once adored her but is now outraged at her tepid reaction to the plight of the Rohingya.

After the talks in the capital Naypyidaw, the pontiff will address Suu Kyi and diplomats there -- his first opportunity to speak publicly about the conflict that looms over his trip.

The 80-year-old pontiff late Monday received a &quot;courtesy visit&quot; from the powerful army chief Min Aung Hlaing -- whose troops, according to the UN and US, have waged a campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Rohingya from Rakhine state.&nbsp;

General Min Aung Hlaing has firmly denied allegations of widespread brutality by his forces, despite the flight to Bangladesh since late August of 620,000 Rohingya who have recounted widespread cases of rape, murder and arson.

His office said he told the pope there was &quot;no discrimination&quot; in Myanmar, and praised his military for maintaining &quot;the peace and stability of the country&quot;.

The pope has repeatedly spoken out from afar about the crisis, standing up for what he has called his Rohingya &quot;brothers and sisters&quot;.

A similar approach in Myanmar is fraught with danger -- using the term &quot;Rohingya&quot; is unacceptable in a mainly Buddhist country where the Muslim minority are denied citizenship and branded illegal &quot;Bengali&quot; immigrants.

The country is listening closely to see if Francis will use the word &quot;Rohingya&quot; on Myanmar soil, and risk provoking the outrage of Buddhist nationalists.

Early Tuesday, day two of his four-day visit, the pontiff met leaders from Buddhist, Muslim, Baptist and Jewish faiths in Yangon.

The conversation centred around themes of unity in diversity, with the pope sharing a prayer and giving a &quot;very, very beautiful speech&quot;, according to Sammy Samuels, a representative from the small Jewish community.&nbsp;

Francis flies up to Naypyidaw Tuesday afternoon to meet Aung San Suu Kyi.

The Lady, as she is fondly known in Myanmar, finally came to power after elections in 2015 but has fallen from grace internationally for not doing more to stand up to the army in defence of the Rohingya -- whose name she will not publicly utter.

Rights groups have clamoured for Suu Kyi to be stripped of her peace prize. Oxford, the English city she once called home, on Monday removed her Freedom of the City award for her &quot;inaction&quot; in the face of oppression of the Rohingya.

Catholics congregate

So far, the pontiff has received a warm welcome to the majority Buddhist nation.

Myanmar&#39;s Catholic community numbers just over one percent of the country&#39;s 51 million people.

But some 200,000 Catholics are pouring into the commercial capital Yangon from all corners of the country ahead of a huge, open-air mass on Wednesday.

Zaw Sai, 52, from Kachin state, found space for himself and his family to camp out in a churchyard.&nbsp;

&quot;We feel very pleased because we are from different ethnicities but are one in our religion,&quot; he told AFP. &nbsp;

Just days before the papal visit, Myanmar and Bangladesh signed a deal to start repatriating Rohingya refugees within two months.

But details of the agreement -- including the use of temporary shelters for returnees, many of whose homes have been burned to the ground -- raise questions for Rohingya fearful of returning without guarantees of basic rights.

Francis will travel on to Bangladesh on Thursday. 
&nbsp;

Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, has been ostracised by a global rights community that once adored her but is now outraged at her tepid reaction to the plight of the Rohingya

Pope Francis will hold talks with Myanmar's leader Aung San Suu Kyi on Tuesday, a key moment of a tour aimed at alleviating religious and ethnic hatreds that have driven huge numbers of Muslim Rohingya from the country. Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, has been ostracised by a global rights community that once adored her but is now outraged at her tepid reaction to the plight of the Rohingya. After the talks in the capital Naypyidaw, the pontiff will address Suu Kyi and diplomats there -- his first opportunity to speak publicly about the conflict that looms over his trip. The 80-year-old pontiff late Monday received a "courtesy visit" from the powerful army chief Min Aung Hlaing -- whose troops, according to the UN and US, have waged a campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Rohingya from Rakhine state. General Min Aung Hlaing has firmly denied allegations of widespread brutality by his forces, despite the flight to Bangladesh since late August of 620,000 Rohingya who have recounted widespread cases of rape, murder and arson. His office said he told the pope there was "no discrimination" in Myanmar, and praised his military for maintaining "the peace and stability of the country". The pope has repeatedly spoken out from afar about the crisis, standing up for what he has called his Rohingya "brothers and sisters". A similar approach in Myanmar is fraught with danger -- using the term "Rohingya" is unacceptable in a mainly Buddhist country where the Muslim minority are denied citizenship and branded illegal "Bengali" immigrants. The country is listening closely to see if Francis will use the word "Rohingya" on Myanmar soil, and risk provoking the outrage of Buddhist nationalists. Early Tuesday, day two of his four-day visit, the pontiff met leaders from Buddhist, Muslim, Baptist and Jewish faiths in Yangon. The conversation centred around themes of unity in diversity, with the pope sharing a prayer and giving a "very, very beautiful speech", according to Sammy Samuels, a representative from the small Jewish community. Francis flies up to Naypyidaw Tuesday afternoon to meet Aung San Suu Kyi. The Lady, as she is fondly known in Myanmar, finally came to power after elections in 2015 but has fallen from grace internationally for not doing more to stand up to the army in defence of the Rohingya -- whose name she will not publicly utter. Rights groups have clamoured for Suu Kyi to be stripped of her peace prize. Oxford, the English city she once called home, on Monday removed her Freedom of the City award for her "inaction" in the face of oppression of the Rohingya. Catholics congregate So far, the pontiff has received a warm welcome to the majority Buddhist nation. Myanmar's Catholic community numbers just over one percent of the country's 51 million people. But some 200,000 Catholics are pouring into the commercial capital Yangon from all corners of the country ahead of a huge, open-air mass on Wednesday. Zaw Sai, 52, from Kachin state, found space for himself and his family to camp out in a churchyard. "We feel very pleased because we are from different ethnicities but are one in our religion," he told AFP. Just days before the papal visit, Myanmar and Bangladesh signed a deal to start repatriating Rohingya refugees within two months. But details of the agreement -- including the use of temporary shelters for returnees, many of whose homes have been burned to the ground -- raise questions for Rohingya fearful of returning without guarantees of basic rights. Francis will travel on to Bangladesh on Thursday.

Pope to meet Myanmar leader Suu Kyi today

Irish Musician and activist Bob Geldof said he will return his Freedom of The City of Dublin award.

The decision of returning the awards came in protest over his fellow recipient Aung San Suu Kyi&#39;s response to the repression of Rohingya.

&quot;Her association with our city shames us all and we should have no truck with it, even by default. We honored her, now she appalls and shames us&nbsp;In short, I do not wish to be associated in any way with an individual currently engaged in the mass ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya people of North West Burma&quot; Gedolf said in a statement. Reported by Reuters

Suu Kyi was given Freedom of Dublin in 199 while she was held under house arrest by Myanmar&#39;s the military government but received it later in 2012 at a reception in Ireland.

Similar honour by the British university city of Oxford, where she was an undergraduate was also taken away last month.

Aung San Suu Kyi was heavily criticized for failing to speak out against the atrocities on Rohingya. People criticizing her also called for her to be stripped of the Nobel Peace Prize that she won in 1991

Other&nbsp;recipients of the Freedom of Dublin include John F. Kennedy, Nelson Mandela, and Mikhail Gorbachev.

More than 600,00 Muslims from Myanmar&#39;s Rakhine state have fled to refugee camps in Bangladesh after military operations described by the United Nations as ethnic cleansing.

Irish Musician and activist Bob Geldof said he will return his Freedom of The City of Dublin award

Irish Musician and activist Bob Geldof said he will return his Freedom of The City of Dublin award. The decision of returning the awards came in protest over his fellow recipient Aung San Suu Kyi's response to the repression of Rohingya. "Her association with our city shames us all and we should have no truck with it, even by default. We honored her, now she appalls and shames us In short, I do not wish to be associated in any way with an individual currently engaged in the mass ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya people of North West Burma" Gedolf said in a statement. Reported by Reuters Suu Kyi was given Freedom of Dublin in 199 while she was held under house arrest by Myanmar's the military government but received it later in 2012 at a reception in Ireland. Similar honour by the British university city of Oxford, where she was an undergraduate was also taken away last month. Aung San Suu Kyi was heavily criticized for failing to speak out against the atrocities on Rohingya. People criticizing her also called for her to be stripped of the Nobel Peace Prize that she won in 1991 Other recipients of the Freedom of Dublin include John F. Kennedy, Nelson Mandela, and Mikhail Gorbachev. More than 600,00 Muslims from Myanmar's Rakhine state have fled to refugee camps in Bangladesh after military operations described by the United Nations as ethnic cleansing.

Geldof will return his Freedom of The City of Dublin award in protest of Aung San Suu Kyi

The Nobel Peace Prize for 2017 was awarded to the&nbsp;International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons an advocacy group that has worked to draw attention to their &ldquo;catastrophic humanitarian consequences.&rdquo;

Every year, the winners of the Nobel Prizes are announced to great fanfare. And none receives more scrutiny than the&nbsp;Nobel Peace Prize.

With good reason. The other Nobel Prizes are given to people who have already changed our world &ndash; for their remarkable accomplishments. But, in the case of the Nobel Peace Prize, the hope of the Nobel Committee is to change the world through its very conferral. It, therefore, rewards&nbsp;aspiration more than achievement.

Francis Sejersted, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee from 1991-1999, once noted&nbsp;with pride the Nobel Peace Prize&rsquo;s political ambitions:

<blockquote>
&ldquo;The Committee also takes the possible positive effects of its choices into account [because] &hellip; Nobel wanted the Prize to have political effects. Awarding a Peace Prize is, to put it bluntly, a political act.&rdquo;
</blockquote>

So, has the Nobel Peace Prize changed the world?

Expecting the prize to bring world peace would be an unfair standard to apply. However, my research shows that the winners and their causes have rarely profited from the award. Even worse, the prize has at times made it harder for them to make the leap from aspiration to achievement.

History of the peace award

The Nobel Peace Prize was first awarded in 1901, five years after Alfred Nobel&rsquo;s death. Nobel&rsquo;s will&nbsp;defined peace narrowly and focused on candidates&rsquo; accomplishments: The prize was to be awarded &ldquo;to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.&rdquo;

The committee initially remained true to Nobel&rsquo;s charge. Between 1901 and 1945, over three-quarters of the prizes (33 of 43) went to those who promoted interstate peace and disarmament.

Since the Second World War, however, less than one-quarter of the prizes have gone to promoting interstate peace and disarmament. Just seven of the 37 winners since 1989 fall into this category. Another 11 awards have sought to encourage ongoing peace processes.

But many of these processes had borne little fruit at the time or still had a long road ahead. Consider that three of the most prominent winners in this category were then Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Yasser Arafat, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. Nonetheless, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process is <a href="https://www.vox.com/cards/israel-palestine/peace-process">today in a coma</a>.

Perhaps for this reason, in the last decade, the committee has given just two awards to encourage peace processes. In 2008 Martti Ahtisaari, former president of Finland, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his various achievements in Namibia, Kosovo and Aceh. In 2016, Colombia&rsquo;s President Juan Manuel Santos&nbsp;was honored with the Nobel in the hope that the prize would help push through his peace deal with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) rebels, even though a popular referendum had just rejected it, and thereby end his country&rsquo;s half-century-long civil war.

The striking change since the 1970s, and especially since the end of the Cold War, has been the Nobel Peace Prize&rsquo;s growing focus on promoting domestic political change.

<figure class="align-left "><img alt="" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/files/188805/width237/file-20171004-6724-16mw6mf.jpg" />
<figcaption>Albert Luthuli, winner of the 1960 Nobel Peace Prize. AP Photo</figcaption>
</figure>

&nbsp;

Between 1946 and 1970, the prize was awarded just twice to dissidents and activists like the South African leader Albert Luthuli, who led a nonviolent struggle against apartheid in the 1960s, and the&nbsp;American civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr..&nbsp;Between 1971 and 1988, such figures received the prize five times. Between 1989 and 2016, more than 40 percent of all winners fell into this category.

The rate has been even higher in the last decade: 57 percent of Nobel Peace Prize laureates since 2007 have been activists and advocates for equality, liberty and human development like educating women and stopping child labor.

These are admirable values. But their connection to interstate, and intrastate, conflict is indirect at best and tenuous at worst.

Does it bring global attention to issues?

The Nobel Peace Prize&rsquo;s defenders insist that the prize works in subtle but perceptible ways to advance the winners&rsquo; causes. They say it attracts media attention, bolsters the winners and their supporters, and even focuses international pressure.

But there&rsquo;s little evidence that the Nobel Peace Prize brings sustained global attention.

First of all, in many instances it is hard to tell whether the prize has made any difference, because the media glare was already intense. For example, in 2005, when the committee honored the International Atomic Energy Agency and its director general, Mohammed El Baradei, nuclear proliferation was already of great concern. In other cases &ndash; such as South Africa&rsquo;s transition from apartheid, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or the troubles in Northern Ireland &ndash; the prize made little noticeable difference to international media coverage.

It is true that in those few cases where coverage was not already strong, there have been occasional successes. For instance, I found&nbsp;that the committee&rsquo;s decision to hand the award to Aung San Suu Kyi in 1991 did draw attention to the plight of Myanmar.

But, in general, my research found little evidence that winning the Nobel Peace Prize boosts international media coverage of the winner&rsquo;s cause beyond the short run.

Putting activists in peril

Of greater concern is that, when the Nobel Peace Prize goes to promote political and social change &ndash; as it has so often in recent decades &ndash; it can have very real and detrimental effects on the movements and causes it celebrates.

Powerful authoritarian regimes will not liberalize just because the Nobel Committee has chosen to honor a dissident. This is not because regimes dismiss it as a silly award given out by international do-gooders. In fact, they take it very seriously. Fearing that domestic activists would take heart, they have <a href="http://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-165X.2009.tb00660.x">ramped up repression</a>, shrunk the space for political opposition and cracked down harder than ever.

This is what happened in Tibet and Myanmar after the Dalai Lama and after Aung San Suu Kyi received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989 and 1991, respectively. Similarly, the Iranian lawyer and human rights activist <a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east-july-dec03-nobel_10-10/">Shirin Ebadi</a> has been forced to lived in <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/26/world/la-fg-iran-lawyers-20110726">exile</a> in Britain since 2009. In China, the peace award did not make the release of the dissident <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/13/world/asia/liu-xiaobo-dead.html">Liu Xiaobo</a> from prison more likely.

The same is true when it comes to social change. Patriarchal societies, with their deeply entrenched gender roles, will not change just because some people in the West think they should and to that end name a women&rsquo;s rights activist a Nobel laureate.

What&rsquo;s at stake?

The Nobel Committee&rsquo;s intentions are honorable, but the results, I argue, can be tragic. The award raises the spirits of reformers, but it also mobilizes forces that are far greater in opposition.

Every October, many the world over hail the Nobel Committee for its brave and inspired choice. But it is the truly brave activists on the ground who are left to bear the consequences when anxious leaders bring the state&rsquo;s terrible power down on them.

And what happens when the Nobel Peace Prize actually helps to promote political change? As state counsellor (prime minister) of Myanmar, Aung San Suu Kyi has presided over the bloody persecution of the Rohingya and a swiftly mounting international refugee crisis. The admired dissident has, in power, turned out&nbsp;&nbsp;not&nbsp;to be so great a promoter of peace and tolerance.

<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84758/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" width="1" />The Nobel Peace Prize Committee&rsquo;s choices have been noble &ndash; but, as my research suggests, also sometimes na&iuml;ve.

&nbsp;

This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" nofollow="" rel="">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-nobel-peace-prize-brings-little-peace-84758" nofollow="" rel="">original article</a>.

&nbsp;

The winners and their causes have rarely profited from the Nobel Peace Prize.

The Nobel Peace Prize for 2017 was awarded to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons an advocacy group that has worked to draw attention to their “catastrophic humanitarian consequences.” Every year, the winners of the Nobel Prizes are announced to great fanfare. And none receives more scrutiny than the Nobel Peace Prize. With good reason. The other Nobel Prizes are given to people who have already changed our world – for their remarkable accomplishments. But, in the case of the Nobel Peace Prize, the hope of the Nobel Committee is to change the world through its very conferral. It, therefore, rewards aspiration more than achievement. Francis Sejersted, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee from 1991-1999, once noted with pride the Nobel Peace Prize’s political ambitions: “The Committee also takes the possible positive effects of its choices into account [because] … Nobel wanted the Prize to have political effects. Awarding a Peace Prize is, to put it bluntly, a political act.” So, has the Nobel Peace Prize changed the world? Expecting the prize to bring world peace would be an unfair standard to apply. However, my research shows that the winners and their causes have rarely profited from the award. Even worse, the prize has at times made it harder for them to make the leap from aspiration to achievement. History of the peace award The Nobel Peace Prize was first awarded in 1901, five years after Alfred Nobel’s death. Nobel’s will defined peace narrowly and focused on candidates’ accomplishments: The prize was to be awarded “to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.” The committee initially remained true to Nobel’s charge. Between 1901 and 1945, over three-quarters of the prizes (33 of 43) went to those who promoted interstate peace and disarmament. Since the Second World War, however, less than one-quarter of the prizes have gone to promoting interstate peace and disarmament. Just seven of the 37 winners since 1989 fall into this category. Another 11 awards have sought to encourage ongoing peace processes. But many of these processes had borne little fruit at the time or still had a long road ahead. Consider that three of the most prominent winners in this category were then Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Yasser Arafat, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. Nonetheless, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process is today in a coma. Perhaps for this reason, in the last decade, the committee has given just two awards to encourage peace processes. In 2008 Martti Ahtisaari, former president of Finland, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his various achievements in Namibia, Kosovo and Aceh. In 2016, Colombia’s President Juan Manuel Santos was honored with the Nobel in the hope that the prize would help push through his peace deal with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) rebels, even though a popular referendum had just rejected it, and thereby end his country’s half-century-long civil war. The striking change since the 1970s, and especially since the end of the Cold War, has been the Nobel Peace Prize’s growing focus on promoting domestic political change. Albert Luthuli, winner of the 1960 Nobel Peace Prize. AP Photo Between 1946 and 1970, the prize was awarded just twice to dissidents and activists like the South African leader Albert Luthuli, who led a nonviolent struggle against apartheid in the 1960s, and the American civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.. Between 1971 and 1988, such figures received the prize five times. Between 1989 and 2016, more than 40 percent of all winners fell into this category. The rate has been even higher in the last decade: 57 percent of Nobel Peace Prize laureates since 2007 have been activists and advocates for equality, liberty and human development like educating women and stopping child labor. These are admirable values. But their connection to interstate, and intrastate, conflict is indirect at best and tenuous at worst. Does it bring global attention to issues? The Nobel Peace Prize’s defenders insist that the prize works in subtle but perceptible ways to advance the winners’ causes. They say it attracts media attention, bolsters the winners and their supporters, and even focuses international pressure. But there’s little evidence that the Nobel Peace Prize brings sustained global attention. First of all, in many instances it is hard to tell whether the prize has made any difference, because the media glare was already intense. For example, in 2005, when the committee honored the International Atomic Energy Agency and its director general, Mohammed El Baradei, nuclear proliferation was already of great concern. In other cases – such as South Africa’s transition from apartheid, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or the troubles in Northern Ireland – the prize made little noticeable difference to international media coverage. It is true that in those few cases where coverage was not already strong, there have been occasional successes. For instance, I found that the committee’s decision to hand the award to Aung San Suu Kyi in 1991 did draw attention to the plight of Myanmar. But, in general, my research found little evidence that winning the Nobel Peace Prize boosts international media coverage of the winner’s cause beyond the short run. Putting activists in peril Of greater concern is that, when the Nobel Peace Prize goes to promote political and social change – as it has so often in recent decades – it can have very real and detrimental effects on the movements and causes it celebrates. Powerful authoritarian regimes will not liberalize just because the Nobel Committee has chosen to honor a dissident. This is not because regimes dismiss it as a silly award given out by international do-gooders. In fact, they take it very seriously. Fearing that domestic activists would take heart, they have ramped up repression, shrunk the space for political opposition and cracked down harder than ever. This is what happened in Tibet and Myanmar after the Dalai Lama and after Aung San Suu Kyi received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989 and 1991, respectively. Similarly, the Iranian lawyer and human rights activist Shirin Ebadi has been forced to lived in exile in Britain since 2009. In China, the peace award did not make the release of the dissident Liu Xiaobo from prison more likely. The same is true when it comes to social change. Patriarchal societies, with their deeply entrenched gender roles, will not change just because some people in the West think they should and to that end name a women’s rights activist a Nobel laureate. What’s at stake? The Nobel Committee’s intentions are honorable, but the results, I argue, can be tragic. The award raises the spirits of reformers, but it also mobilizes forces that are far greater in opposition. Every October, many the world over hail the Nobel Committee for its brave and inspired choice. But it is the truly brave activists on the ground who are left to bear the consequences when anxious leaders bring the state’s terrible power down on them. And what happens when the Nobel Peace Prize actually helps to promote political change? As state counsellor (prime minister) of Myanmar, Aung San Suu Kyi has presided over the bloody persecution of the Rohingya and a swiftly mounting international refugee crisis. The admired dissident has, in power, turned out not to be so great a promoter of peace and tolerance. The Nobel Peace Prize Committee’s choices have been noble – but, as my research suggests, also sometimes naïve. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Why the Nobel Peace Prize brings little peace

Colombia&#39;s FARC rebels begin disarming Wednesday under a historic peace deal, beginning the delicate transition from guerrilla army to political party after more than half a century at war.

After weeks of mustering its troops at designated disarmament zones, the FARC, or Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, was set to begin an inventory of its weapons and destroying munitions under United Nations supervision.

&quot;I&#39;m abandoning my rifle for a broom,&quot; said guerrilla Maritza Gonzalez at the FARC&#39;s hot, dusty camp in San Jose de Oriente, in northern Colombia.

Three armed guerrillas in combat fatigues guarded the entrance to the rudimentary camp, where a steady stream of trucks delivered bags of cement and workers scrambled to finish building a kitchen, mess hall, bathrooms and a laundry area.

Gonzalez, 54, has been a guerrilla since the age of 14. She said she was hopeful for the future and planned to reunite with her five brothers and four sisters.

&quot;Let&#39;s hope this leads to peace,&quot; she told AFP.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Maritza Gonzalez, 54, has been a guerrilla since the age of 14. She said she was hopeful for the future and planned to reunite with her five brothers and four sisters. &#39;Let&#39;s hope this leads to peace&#39;</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Maritza Gonzalez, 54, has been a guerrilla since the age of 14. She said she was hopeful for the future and planned to reunite with her five brothers and four sisters. 'Let's hope this leads to peace'" target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

President Juan Manuel Santos, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in October for his efforts to end the country&#39;s 53-year conflict, called the disarmament &quot;historic news for Colombians&quot; in a tweet.

FARC leader Rodrigo &quot;Timochenko&quot; Londono tweeted that the leftist rebels were laying down their guns &quot;with enthusiasm.&quot;

The disarmament of the country&#39;s largest guerrilla army will leave rival movement ELN -- currently engaged in rocky peace talks with the government -- as the only rebel group still waging a multi-sided war that has killed 260,000 people.

The Cold War-era conflict, which has also left 60,000 people missing and uprooted 6.9 million, is the last major armed conflict in the Americas.

Colombia, South America&#39;s third economy and the world&#39;s biggest cocaine producer, has been torn since the 1960s by fighting that has drawn in multiple leftist rebel groups, right-wing paramilitary units, drug cartels and the army.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/in-colombia-peace-is-elusive-7095">Also</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/in-colombia-peace-is-elusive-7095"> read: In Colombia, peace is elusive</a>

Santos is hoping to seal a &quot;complete peace&quot; with both the FARC and the ELN.

Both leftist rebel groups took up arms against the government in 1964, in the aftermath of a crushed peasant uprising.

Next challenge: the ELN 
The FARC has some 6,900 guerrillas.

It signed a peace deal with the government in November after four years of negotiations in Cuba, but implementation is running slightly behind schedule.

Under the deal, the FARC was originally due to surrender 30 percent of its weapons to the UN by Wednesday. But that can only happen once the inventory is complete.

The government&#39;s high commissioner for peace, Sergio Jaramillo, said Tuesday that the 180-day deadline for the rebels to fully disarm would be maintained, however.

The UN said in a statement that the FARC has until May 29 to disarm.

The first to surrender their weapons will be the 322 FARC members taking part in a joint monitoring commission with the government and the UN.

Separate talks with the ELN, or National Liberation Army, took a hit this week when the rebels claimed responsibility for a series of recent attacks -- a bloody reminder of the violence Colombia still faces.

Experts warn the ELN could be a tougher negotiating partner than the FARC because it has more hardline demands for sweeping social change.

It also has a decentralized command structure that could make it harder to convince the rank and file to accept an eventual deal.&nbsp;

(AFP)

They now begin the delicate transition from guerrilla army to political party after more than half a century at war

Colombia's FARC rebels begin disarming Wednesday under a historic peace deal, beginning the delicate transition from guerrilla army to political party after more than half a century at war. After weeks of mustering its troops at designated disarmament zones, the FARC, or Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, was set to begin an inventory of its weapons and destroying munitions under United Nations supervision. "I'm abandoning my rifle for a broom," said guerrilla Maritza Gonzalez at the FARC's hot, dusty camp in San Jose de Oriente, in northern Colombia. Three armed guerrillas in combat fatigues guarded the entrance to the rudimentary camp, where a steady stream of trucks delivered bags of cement and workers scrambled to finish building a kitchen, mess hall, bathrooms and a laundry area. Gonzalez, 54, has been a guerrilla since the age of 14. She said she was hopeful for the future and planned to reunite with her five brothers and four sisters. "Let's hope this leads to peace," she told AFP. Maritza Gonzalez, 54, has been a guerrilla since the age of 14. She said she was hopeful for the future and planned to reunite with her five brothers and four sisters. 'Let's hope this leads to peace' × President Juan Manuel Santos, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in October for his efforts to end the country's 53-year conflict, called the disarmament "historic news for Colombians" in a tweet. FARC leader Rodrigo "Timochenko" Londono tweeted that the leftist rebels were laying down their guns "with enthusiasm." The disarmament of the country's largest guerrilla army will leave rival movement ELN -- currently engaged in rocky peace talks with the government -- as the only rebel group still waging a multi-sided war that has killed 260,000 people. The Cold War-era conflict, which has also left 60,000 people missing and uprooted 6.9 million, is the last major armed conflict in the Americas. Colombia, South America's third economy and the world's biggest cocaine producer, has been torn since the 1960s by fighting that has drawn in multiple leftist rebel groups, right-wing paramilitary units, drug cartels and the army. Also read: In Colombia, peace is elusive Santos is hoping to seal a "complete peace" with both the FARC and the ELN. Both leftist rebel groups took up arms against the government in 1964, in the aftermath of a crushed peasant uprising. Next challenge: the ELN The FARC has some 6,900 guerrillas. It signed a peace deal with the government in November after four years of negotiations in Cuba, but implementation is running slightly behind schedule. Under the deal, the FARC was originally due to surrender 30 percent of its weapons to the UN by Wednesday. But that can only happen once the inventory is complete. The government's high commissioner for peace, Sergio Jaramillo, said Tuesday that the 180-day deadline for the rebels to fully disarm would be maintained, however. The UN said in a statement that the FARC has until May 29 to disarm. The first to surrender their weapons will be the 322 FARC members taking part in a joint monitoring commission with the government and the UN. Separate talks with the ELN, or National Liberation Army, took a hit this week when the rebels claimed responsibility for a series of recent attacks -- a bloody reminder of the violence Colombia still faces. Experts warn the ELN could be a tougher negotiating partner than the FARC because it has more hardline demands for sweeping social change. It also has a decentralized command structure that could make it harder to convince the rank and file to accept an eventual deal. (AFP)

Colombia's FARC rebels begin to disarm

After pushing a revised peace deal with the FARC rebels through Congress, Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos got down to a far bigger challenge on Thursday: implementing it.

The lower house&#39;s unanimous vote in favour of the deal set off a countdown to end a conflict that has burned for over half a century and killed more than 260,000 people. &quot;Today we can say the war has officially ended,&quot; Santos said in a speech. &quot;We all have to continue making sacrifices, but I hope we will do so together.&quot;

Interior minister Juan Fernando Cristo told a news conference that Colombia now faces &quot;an enormous challenge&quot; to implement the accord.

Within five days, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, must begin demobilising and surrendering their weapons. Under the deal, the process must be complete within six months. The FARC will relaunch as a political party.

The next step, Cristo said, would be to present Congress with an amnesty for FARC members, the most contested part of the accord.

&nbsp;

Amnesty

Santos, who won this year&#39;s Nobel Peace Prize, said &quot;D-Day begins&quot; on Thursday. The delicate transition to peace will take place amid bitter opposition to the deal, which Santos&#39;s rivals say is too soft on the leftist guerrillas.

Voters rejected an earlier version of the deal in a referendum last month. That sent peace negotiators back to the drawing board after nearly four years of talks.

Rather than risk a second referendum, the government and rebels decided to have the revised deal ratified in Congress. Opponents say the new version includes only token changes.

The deal passed unanimously in both houses of Congress, where Santos has a majority. His top opponent, former president Alvaro Uribe, led a walkout by his right-wing party, the Democratic Center.

&quot;How is the Congress going to approve what the Colombian people rejected?&quot; Oscar Ivan Zuloaga, a former presidential candidate for Uribe&#39;s party, said during the House debate.

Uribe and his allies argue the deal grants impunity to rebels guilty of war crimes, giving them seats in Congress rather than sending them to jail.

The biggest bone of contention is an agreement for non-custodial sentences for FARC members who admit to their crimes. Under the deal, rebel leaders will be able to hold public office while still serving their sentences.

&nbsp;

Fragile ceasefire

Lawmakers must now approve a series of bills to implement the peace accord, beginning with the amnesty for the guerrillas.

&quot;A first set of pardons is currently being prepared,&quot; government peace delegate Sergio Jaramillo told the news conference. &quot;Meanwhile, an amnesty law will be submitted to the legislative process.&quot;

A ceasefire has been in effect since August, shaken by violence in recent weeks. Two guerrillas died in what the authorities described as a clash with the army. A wave of assassinations and attacks has also targeted community leaders in conflict areas.

&nbsp;

Disarmament

The FARC&#39;s 5,700 fighters are to gather in disarmament zones, laying down their weapons under UN supervision.

&quot;If that process goes well and without problems, it could change the political balance of power created by the plebiscite and the opposition&#39;s rejection of the accord,&quot; said Kyle Johnson, an analyst with the International Crisis Group.

But there are still &quot;challenges related not only to the politics but to the implementation on the ground,&quot; he added.

&nbsp;

US pleased&nbsp;

US Secretary of State John Kerry welcomed the accord in a statement urging its critics &quot;to continue their principled commitment to peace in the coming implementation phase.&quot;

United Nations and the&nbsp;European Union officials also hailed the deal. The conflict has drawn in various guerrilla forces, right-wing paramilitaries and drug gangs over the years.

The government is still seeking to salvage talks with a smaller rebel group, the National Liberation Army (ELN). Talks were suspended last month before they started when the rebels failed to release a hostage.

(Agencies)

Nobel Peace Prize winner Santos said 'the war is officially over', but a minister said bringing peace about was 'an enormous challenge'

After pushing a revised peace deal with the FARC rebels through Congress, Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos got down to a far bigger challenge on Thursday: implementing it. The lower house's unanimous vote in favour of the deal set off a countdown to end a conflict that has burned for over half a century and killed more than 260,000 people. "Today we can say the war has officially ended," Santos said in a speech. "We all have to continue making sacrifices, but I hope we will do so together." Interior minister Juan Fernando Cristo told a news conference that Colombia now faces "an enormous challenge" to implement the accord. Within five days, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, must begin demobilising and surrendering their weapons. Under the deal, the process must be complete within six months. The FARC will relaunch as a political party. The next step, Cristo said, would be to present Congress with an amnesty for FARC members, the most contested part of the accord. Amnesty Santos, who won this year's Nobel Peace Prize, said "D-Day begins" on Thursday. The delicate transition to peace will take place amid bitter opposition to the deal, which Santos's rivals say is too soft on the leftist guerrillas. Voters rejected an earlier version of the deal in a referendum last month. That sent peace negotiators back to the drawing board after nearly four years of talks. Rather than risk a second referendum, the government and rebels decided to have the revised deal ratified in Congress. Opponents say the new version includes only token changes. The deal passed unanimously in both houses of Congress, where Santos has a majority. His top opponent, former president Alvaro Uribe, led a walkout by his right-wing party, the Democratic Center. "How is the Congress going to approve what the Colombian people rejected?" Oscar Ivan Zuloaga, a former presidential candidate for Uribe's party, said during the House debate. Uribe and his allies argue the deal grants impunity to rebels guilty of war crimes, giving them seats in Congress rather than sending them to jail. The biggest bone of contention is an agreement for non-custodial sentences for FARC members who admit to their crimes. Under the deal, rebel leaders will be able to hold public office while still serving their sentences. Fragile ceasefire Lawmakers must now approve a series of bills to implement the peace accord, beginning with the amnesty for the guerrillas. "A first set of pardons is currently being prepared," government peace delegate Sergio Jaramillo told the news conference. "Meanwhile, an amnesty law will be submitted to the legislative process." A ceasefire has been in effect since August, shaken by violence in recent weeks. Two guerrillas died in what the authorities described as a clash with the army. A wave of assassinations and attacks has also targeted community leaders in conflict areas. Disarmament The FARC's 5,700 fighters are to gather in disarmament zones, laying down their weapons under UN supervision. "If that process goes well and without problems, it could change the political balance of power created by the plebiscite and the opposition's rejection of the accord," said Kyle Johnson, an analyst with the International Crisis Group. But there are still "challenges related not only to the politics but to the implementation on the ground," he added. US pleased US Secretary of State John Kerry welcomed the accord in a statement urging its critics "to continue their principled commitment to peace in the coming implementation phase." United Nations and the European Union officials also hailed the deal. The conflict has drawn in various guerrilla forces, right-wing paramilitaries and drug gangs over the years. The government is still seeking to salvage talks with a smaller rebel group, the National Liberation Army (ELN). Talks were suspended last month before they started when the rebels failed to release a hostage. (Agencies)

Colombia embarks on implementing FARC peace deal

Colombia&#39;s Congress approved a new peace deal with FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia) rebels late on Wednesday, despite objections from former president and now senator Alvaro Uribe, who said it was still too lenient on the insurgents who have battled the government for 52 years.

The agreement was approved in the lower house by 130-0, a day after the Senate ratified it 75-0. Lawmakers from Uribe&#39;s Democratic Center party left the floors of both houses in protest just before voting began.

The ratification - and signing last week - begins a six-month countdown for the 7,000-strong FARC, which started as a rebellion fighting rural poverty, to abandon weapons and form a political party.

President Juan Manuel Santos and rebel leader Rodrigo Londono signed the revised accord last week in a sober ceremony after the first deal was rejected in a national plebiscite.

Santos, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in October for his peace efforts, wants to get the deal implemented as quickly as possible to maintain a fragile ceasefire.

Uribe&#39;s supporters argued the deal offered too many concessions to&nbsp;FARC, and did not serve as a deterrent for other groups involved in crime.

&quot;Let&#39;s not forget what we are doing today, we&#39;re trying to end more than 50 years of war,&quot; government negotiator Sergio Jaramillo said.

The new agreement to end Latin America&#39;s longest insurgency was put together in just over a month after the original pact, which allowed the rebels to hold public office and skip jail, was narrowly and unexpectedly defeated in an October 2 referendum.

While the government says the accord includes most of the proposals put forward by those who rejected it, the new document did not alter those two key provisions. That angered many among Colombia&#39;s largely conservative population, who are also furious that Santos decided to ratify the deal in Congress instead of holding another plebiscite.

The government and FARC worked together in Cuba for four years to negotiate an end to the region&#39;s longest-running conflict that has killed more than 220,000 and displaced millions in the Andean nation.

An end to the war with FARC is unlikely to end violence in Colombia as the lucrative cocaine business has given rise to criminal gangs and traffickers.

(Reuters)

The agreement was approved in the lower house by 130-0, a day after the Senate ratified it 75-0

Colombia's Congress approved a new peace deal with FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia) rebels late on Wednesday, despite objections from former president and now senator Alvaro Uribe, who said it was still too lenient on the insurgents who have battled the government for 52 years. The agreement was approved in the lower house by 130-0, a day after the Senate ratified it 75-0. Lawmakers from Uribe's Democratic Center party left the floors of both houses in protest just before voting began. The ratification - and signing last week - begins a six-month countdown for the 7,000-strong FARC, which started as a rebellion fighting rural poverty, to abandon weapons and form a political party. President Juan Manuel Santos and rebel leader Rodrigo Londono signed the revised accord last week in a sober ceremony after the first deal was rejected in a national plebiscite. Santos, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in October for his peace efforts, wants to get the deal implemented as quickly as possible to maintain a fragile ceasefire. Uribe's supporters argued the deal offered too many concessions to FARC, and did not serve as a deterrent for other groups involved in crime. "Let's not forget what we are doing today, we're trying to end more than 50 years of war," government negotiator Sergio Jaramillo said. The new agreement to end Latin America's longest insurgency was put together in just over a month after the original pact, which allowed the rebels to hold public office and skip jail, was narrowly and unexpectedly defeated in an October 2 referendum. While the government says the accord includes most of the proposals put forward by those who rejected it, the new document did not alter those two key provisions. That angered many among Colombia's largely conservative population, who are also furious that Santos decided to ratify the deal in Congress instead of holding another plebiscite. The government and FARC worked together in Cuba for four years to negotiate an end to the region's longest-running conflict that has killed more than 220,000 and displaced millions in the Andean nation. An end to the war with FARC is unlikely to end violence in Colombia as the lucrative cocaine business has given rise to criminal gangs and traffickers. (Reuters)

New Colombia peace deal approved, hopefully ends 52-year war

The Norwegian Nobel Committee today announced that Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize this year for &quot;his resolute efforts to bring the country&rsquo;s more than 50-year-long civil war to an end&quot;.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

The war has cost the lives of at least 220,000 Colombians and displaced close to six million people, the committee observed.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allowfullscreen="true" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="400" scrolling="no" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fnobelprize%2Fvideos%2F10153952800369103%2F&amp;show_text=0&amp;width=400" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" width="400"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&quot;The award should also be seen as a tribute to the Colombian people who, despite great hardships and abuses, have not given up hope of a just peace, and to all the parties who have contributed to the peace process. This tribute is paid, not least, to the representatives of the countless victims of the civil war,&quot; the committee said in an official statement.

&nbsp;

The award came despite voters&#39; shock rejection of the terms of a historic deal Santos reached last month with FARC chief Rodrigo Londono, alias Timoleon &quot;Timochenko&quot; Jimenez, after nearly four years of talks, AFP observed.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&quot;The fact that a majority of the voters said `no` to the peace accord does not necessarily mean that the peace process is dead. The referendum was not a vote for or against peace. What the &quot;No&quot; side rejected was not the desire for peace, but a specific peace agreement,&quot; committee chairwoman Kaci Kullmann Five was quoted as saying by AFP.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&quot;There is a real danger that the peace process will come to a halt and that civil war will flare up again. This makes it even more important that the parties, headed by President Santos and FARC guerrilla leader Rodrigo Londono, continue to respect the ceasefire,&quot; &nbsp;she said as she announced the award.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&quot;By awarding this year&rsquo;s Peace Prize to President Juan Manuel Santos, the Norwegian Nobel Committee wishes to encourage all those who are striving to achieve peace, reconciliation and justice in Colombia,&quot; the committee further said in an official statement.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Santos accepts the award on behalf of all Colombians&nbsp;

Santos accepted the award on behalf of all Colombians, especially those who have perished in the country&#39;s conflict, Reuters reported.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&quot;This morning, very early, my son Martin woke me to tell me the decision that of the committee in Norway to grant me the Nobel Peace Prize. I have infinite gratitude, with all my heart, for this honourable distinction. I don&#39;t receive this in my name, but in the name of all Colombians, especially the millions of victims from this conflict we have been suffering for more than 50 years. Colombians, this is for you. It&#39;s for the victims, so there&#39;s not even one more victim. No one else should die. We should reconcile, come together, to culminate this process and start to contruct a stable and lasting peace,&quot; he said while speaking in Bogota.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="596" scrolling="no" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fnobelprize%2Fposts%2F10153952754484103%3A0&amp;width=500" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" width="500"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

The award excluded FARC guerrilla leader Rodrigo Londono, better known by his nom de guerre Timochenko, who signed the peace accord with Santos in Cartagena on September 26.

&nbsp;

Santos has promised to revive the plan even though Colombians narrowly rejected it in a referendum on Sunday. Many voters believed it was too lenient on the FARC guerrillas, according to Reuters.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&quot;The award the Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize Commission is making to President Juan Manuel Santos is the world&#39;s voice of support for our country. It is the recognition they are making to his leadership, to his persistence, to the victims who participated in the process, representing more than seven million victims who have endured the continent&#39;s longest armed conflict. This gives us strength to continue forward. This award gives us strength,&quot; lead government negotiator Humberto de la Calle was quoted as saying by Reuters.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Colombia&#39;s government and Marxist FARC rebels said on Friday they were willing to listen to proposals to alter their peace accord.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

(WION with inputs from agencies)&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

The award came despite rejection of the terms of a historic peace deal Santos reached last month with FARC chief Rodrigo Londono

The Norwegian Nobel Committee today announced that Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize this year for "his resolute efforts to bring the country’s more than 50-year-long civil war to an end". The war has cost the lives of at least 220,000 Colombians and displaced close to six million people, the committee observed. × "The award should also be seen as a tribute to the Colombian people who, despite great hardships and abuses, have not given up hope of a just peace, and to all the parties who have contributed to the peace process. This tribute is paid, not least, to the representatives of the countless victims of the civil war," the committee said in an official statement. The award came despite voters' shock rejection of the terms of a historic deal Santos reached last month with FARC chief Rodrigo Londono, alias Timoleon "Timochenko" Jimenez, after nearly four years of talks, AFP observed. "The fact that a majority of the voters said `no` to the peace accord does not necessarily mean that the peace process is dead. The referendum was not a vote for or against peace. What the "No" side rejected was not the desire for peace, but a specific peace agreement," committee chairwoman Kaci Kullmann Five was quoted as saying by AFP. "There is a real danger that the peace process will come to a halt and that civil war will flare up again. This makes it even more important that the parties, headed by President Santos and FARC guerrilla leader Rodrigo Londono, continue to respect the ceasefire," she said as she announced the award. "By awarding this year’s Peace Prize to President Juan Manuel Santos, the Norwegian Nobel Committee wishes to encourage all those who are striving to achieve peace, reconciliation and justice in Colombia," the committee further said in an official statement. Santos accepts the award on behalf of all Colombians Santos accepted the award on behalf of all Colombians, especially those who have perished in the country's conflict, Reuters reported. "This morning, very early, my son Martin woke me to tell me the decision that of the committee in Norway to grant me the Nobel Peace Prize. I have infinite gratitude, with all my heart, for this honourable distinction. I don't receive this in my name, but in the name of all Colombians, especially the millions of victims from this conflict we have been suffering for more than 50 years. Colombians, this is for you. It's for the victims, so there's not even one more victim. No one else should die. We should reconcile, come together, to culminate this process and start to contruct a stable and lasting peace," he said while speaking in Bogota. × The award excluded FARC guerrilla leader Rodrigo Londono, better known by his nom de guerre Timochenko, who signed the peace accord with Santos in Cartagena on September 26. Santos has promised to revive the plan even though Colombians narrowly rejected it in a referendum on Sunday. Many voters believed it was too lenient on the FARC guerrillas, according to Reuters. "The award the Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize Commission is making to President Juan Manuel Santos is the world's voice of support for our country. It is the recognition they are making to his leadership, to his persistence, to the victims who participated in the process, representing more than seven million victims who have endured the continent's longest armed conflict. This gives us strength to continue forward. This award gives us strength," lead government negotiator Humberto de la Calle was quoted as saying by Reuters. Colombia's government and Marxist FARC rebels said on Friday they were willing to listen to proposals to alter their peace accord. (WION with inputs from agencies)

Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos wins Nobel Peace Prize for 'resolute' efforts to end civil war

Activist and writer Elie Wiesel, the World War II death camp survivor who won a Nobel Peace Prize for becoming the life-long voice of millions of Holocaust victims, has died, Israel&#39;s Holocaust memorial Yad Vashem said on Saturday. 
 
Wiesel, a philosopher, speaker, playwright and professor who also campaigned for the tyrannised and forgotten around the world, was 87. 
 
The Romanian-born Wiesel lived by the credo expressed in &quot;Night,&quot; his landmark story of the Holocaust - &quot;to forget the dead would be akin to killing them a second time&quot;. 
 
In awarding the Peace Prize in 1986, the Nobel Committee praised Wiesel as a &quot;messenger to mankind&quot; and &quot;one of the most important spiritual leaders and guides in an age when violence, repression and racism continue to characterise the world.&quot; 
 
Wiesel was 16-years-old when he emerged from the newly liberated Buchenwald concentration camp in 1945. He had been orphaned by the Nazis and their identification number, A-7713, was tattooed on his arm as a physical manifestation of his broken faith and the nightmares that would haunt him throughout his life. 
 
Wiesel and his family had first been taken by the Nazis from the village of Sighetu Marmatiei in the Transylvania region of Romania to Auschwitz, where his mother and one of his sisters died. Wiesel and his father, Shlomo, ended up in Buchenwald, where Shlomo died. 
 
A few years after winning the peace prize, he established the Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity, which, in addition to Israeli and Jewish causes, campaigned for Miskito Indians in Nicaragua, Cambodian refugees, victims of South African apartheid and of famine and genocide in Africa. 
 
Wiesel became close to US President Barack Obama but the friendship did not deter him from criticising US policy on Israel. He spoke out in favour of Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem and pushed the United States and other world powers to take a harder stance against Iran over its nuclear programme. Wiesel attended the joint session of the US Congress in 2015 when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke on the dangers of Iran&#39;s programme. 
 
Wiesel and wife, Marion, married in 1969 and their son, Elisha, was born in 1972 
 
(Reuters)

In awarding the Peace Prize in 1986, the Nobel Committee praised Wiesel as a 'messenger to mankind'

Activist and writer Elie Wiesel, the World War II death camp survivor who won a Nobel Peace Prize for becoming the life-long voice of millions of Holocaust victims, has died, Israel's Holocaust memorial Yad Vashem said on Saturday. Wiesel, a philosopher, speaker, playwright and professor who also campaigned for the tyrannised and forgotten around the world, was 87. The Romanian-born Wiesel lived by the credo expressed in "Night," his landmark story of the Holocaust - "to forget the dead would be akin to killing them a second time". In awarding the Peace Prize in 1986, the Nobel Committee praised Wiesel as a "messenger to mankind" and "one of the most important spiritual leaders and guides in an age when violence, repression and racism continue to characterise the world." Wiesel was 16-years-old when he emerged from the newly liberated Buchenwald concentration camp in 1945. He had been orphaned by the Nazis and their identification number, A-7713, was tattooed on his arm as a physical manifestation of his broken faith and the nightmares that would haunt him throughout his life. Wiesel and his family had first been taken by the Nazis from the village of Sighetu Marmatiei in the Transylvania region of Romania to Auschwitz, where his mother and one of his sisters died. Wiesel and his father, Shlomo, ended up in Buchenwald, where Shlomo died. A few years after winning the peace prize, he established the Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity, which, in addition to Israeli and Jewish causes, campaigned for Miskito Indians in Nicaragua, Cambodian refugees, victims of South African apartheid and of famine and genocide in Africa. Wiesel became close to US President Barack Obama but the friendship did not deter him from criticising US policy on Israel. He spoke out in favour of Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem and pushed the United States and other world powers to take a harder stance against Iran over its nuclear programme. Wiesel attended the joint session of the US Congress in 2015 when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke on the dangers of Iran's programme. Wiesel and wife, Marion, married in 1969 and their son, Elisha, was born in 1972 (Reuters)

Holocaust survivor, Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel dies

nobel-peace-prize

Nobel Peace Prize, News on Nobel Peace Prize, stories on Nobel Peace Prize, articles on Nobel Peace Prize, Nobel Peace Prize stories at Wion, Nobel Peace Prize news, Nobel Peace Prize latest news

nobel peace-prize