Klikk her for Norsk versjon  

The Nobel peace prize – short list - August 2013

Nobel dedicated his prize to “the “champions of peace” (not to “peace” in general). Not many of the over 250 nominated for 2013 are qualified, but a select few are eligible, like the American Professor Richard Falk, Norwegian Ambassador Gunnar Garbo, American David Krieger of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, the former Director General of UNESCO Federico Mayor, Spain, Swedish peace scientist and organizer Jan Oberg, American Professor of peace education Betty Reardon. These clearly are the kind of “champions of peace” described in Nobel’s will, working for global disarmament based on global law. Among qualified organizations nominated for 2013 are the International Peace Bureau, the Transnational Foundation, UNESCO, and the Womens´ International League for Peace and Freedom.

Others are dedicated peacemakers or have courageously exposed the dangers of militarism, but they may not pursue the vision of general and complete disarmament that Nobel saw as essential for world peace. Examples of such nominees are Norwegian Steinar Bryn, Americans Bradley Manning, Edward Snowden (not nominated within 2013 deadline), Israeli Mordechai Vanunu, and Abolition 2000, the global nuclear disarmament network.

Full list and comments HERE

2012: Norway again awards its own peace prize in Nobel´s name

(AFP) – Nov 29, 2012:

Desmond Tutu rejects Nobel Peace Prize for EU

Three Nobel Peace Prize winners have blasted the decision to give this year’s award to the European Union. In an open letter, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Northern Ireland’s Mairead Maguire and Adolfo Perez Esquivel from Argentina say that the EU is ‘clearly not one of the “champions of peace” Alfred Nobel had in mind’ when he created the prize in 1895. They insist the 27-nation bloc’s values do not match those associated with the prize, and say the prize money of £750,000 should be withheld.

Stating that the EU condones ‘security based on military force and waging wars rather than insisting on the need for an alternative approach’, they add that it has failed to ‘realise Nobel’s demilitarised global peace order’.
‘The Norwegian Nobel committee has redefined and remodelled the prize in a manner that is not consistent with the law,’ their letter asserts, adding that the committee should respect the original wishes of the prize’s founder, who died in 1896.

The trio behind the letter are among the award’s most respected winners.
Their letter was also signed by the Geneva-based International Peace Bureau, which won the award in 1910, and several authors, lawyers and peace activists.

EU has as its ambition is to be a strong regional power, with rapid deployment forces, strong arms production and arms trade, it possesses nuclear capabilities via two countries - it is a union for use of force, not for demilitarization of international affairs. The committee has not made the slightest effort to explain how the winner has contributed to the peace vision of Nobel. The 2012 prize adds to a great scandal, Jagland is not using honest language and should leave the Nobel committee, and the Council of Europe should also examine what his handling of the Nobel prize during 3 years has to say about his suitability as Secretary General of a body with a main responsibility for promoting democracy and rule of law in the European area.

An order from Swedish authorities in March 2012 has far-reaching consequences for the Norwegian awarders. The order required the Norwegian Nobel committee to read the will, follow Nobel´s intentions not their own, and placed the Oslo Nobel awarders under strict supervision of the Swedish Nobel Foundation in Stockholm.
The 2012 prize was “business as usual”, if not worse.

Al Jazeera "Inside story" 25 minutes discussion with author Heffermehl: http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestory/2012/12/201212118934990961.html

DEMOCRACY NOW, Amy Goodman interview with author      

Immediate comment on announcement day 121012 by Heffermehl

The Nobel peace prize still Norwegian? The Stortinget must review its position

Swedish authorities have decided that the intentions of Nobel must be respected. In a letter September 6, 2012, Heffermehl requested the Storting to review a number of questions on the Norwegian role. According to the Swedish Länsstyrelsen the Nobelkomiteen is subject to instructions from the Swedish Nobel Foundation whose Board has an obligation to refuse to pay out prizes that fall outside the legal mandate.


March 2012:
In a decision March 21, 2012, the Swedish Foundation Authority (Länsstyrelsen i Stockholm) ordered the Nobel committee to respect the purpose Nobel had in mind, promote the Nobel peace vision, not their own ideas on peace. Its mandate is to award the the prize to "the champions of peace" Nobel had in mind, the Nobel vision of peace, not promote their own ideas of peace. The Nobel Foundation Board of Directors (Stockholm) has the superior responsibility also for the peace prize and was ordered to ascertain what Nobel intended and issue guidelines to ensure that the Nobel Committee (Oslo) respects the purpose.

The public inquiry was requested by Heffermehl and based on his book in Swedish (Nobels fredspris. Visionen som försvann. (Leopard, 2012)). What Nobel intended is clearly and indisputably documented in the book: A global peace order based on co-operation on global rule of law, "creating a brotherhood of nations." Loyal implementation of the decision will result in a complete change, both of the composition of the Nobel Committee and the peace prize.

Documentation of the Swedish authority decision here.

Buch des Monats, Rezension Dieter Deiseroth Rezension in Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik:

"Die Gründe für die Fehlentwicklung der letzten Jahrzehnte sieht der Autor vor allem in einem Versagen des norwegischen Parlaments. Dieses habe seit 1948 die fünf Sitze des Nobel-Komitees nach Parteienproporz aufgeteilt."

September 27.-28, 2011 in Stockholm: An expanded and updated version appears in Swedish. Fredrik S. Heffermehl "Nobels fredspris. Visionen som försvann (The vision thatdisappeared)."

Februrary 28, 2011: 64 known nominations for the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize (list compiled by author,
Fredrik S. Heffermehl).
Ten of the known Nobel nominees qualify as "champions of peace" as defined in Nobel's will:

1. Richard Falk , 2. Douglas Roche, 3. Gunnar Garbo, 4. Federico Mayor, 5. Betty Reardon, 6. Mordechai Vanunu,
7. Gene Sharp /Albert Einstein Institution, AEI, 8. Hiroshima Mayor Tadatoshi Akiba, 9. IALANA – International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms, 10. David Krieger / Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.

See the complete list with evaluations here.

January 2011: 诺贝尔和平图书在中国 Chinese version launched in Beijing; more here

115 years later Nobel’s approach to peace and security is a more urgent necessity than ever before. The error of the Nobel committee is not in adapting to a modern age, but in failing to understand the point of departure for this exercise. What they should have developed was Nobel’s idea of peace, not their own.

(Fredrik S. Heffermehl in The Nobel Peace Prize, p. 39)

New book: The Nobel Peace Prize (Praeger, 2010)

In his newest book, The Nobel Peace Prize (2010), Norwegian lawyer and author Fredrik S. Heffermehl, shows how far the custodians of Nobel´s prize for "the champions of peace" have moved the prize away from the testator´s actual intentions. Part I offers the first known legal analysis of the testament Nobel wrote in 1895, and in Part II an analysis of the political methods used by official Norway to stonewall the truth about the mismanagement of Nobel´s great vision of peace. The book, in part a case study of democracy and the rule of law in Norway, takes us from the inception of the prize 115 years ago to the present, including a riveting dissection of the 2009 award to US president Barack Obama. It explains how the military sector – in all nations – undermines human security and welfare, preferring to pursue narrow self-interest to solving the real security needs of the world.
For the first time The Nobel Peace Prize provides access to the highly secretive Nobel committee room, by publishing the revealing private diaries of the longest sitting chair of the Nobel committee, Gunnar Jahn.



What happened to the Nobel Peace Prize?

The Nobel Peace Prize. What Nobel really wanted (Praeger, 2010), offers undisputable evidence that Nobel intended to support the "Champions of peace", those struggling to replace militarism with an international order based on law and abolition of national military forces; the power of the law must replace the law of power. Since 1948 the parties in the Norwegian parliament have delegated the appointment of the Nobel committee to the major parties who misuse the attractive seats as a reward to their party veterans, people lacking not only insight but also loyalty to the peace ideas that Nobel wished to support. In fact the committee members are opposed to the idea of the prize! People who believe in security by military means have taken charge of a prize meant to support a demilitarized world order.
The prize has long ago ceased to challenge the forces it intended to combat and instead been used to promote Norwegian policies and business interests.
Claiming that the Norwegian parliament and the Nobel committee have violated the law for six decades, the book also becomes an illuminating case study of how elites in the advanced Scandinavian societies circumvent the basic tenets of democracy and the rule of law.

Short sample texts

Nobel entrusted the bestowal of one of his five prizes to a five-member committee to be appointed by Norway´s parliament. The Nobel committees, misunderstanding their task, have used the prizes to serve their own ideas of "peace," instead of honoring "the champions of peace", the expression Nobel actually used to describe the recipients.
Interpreting a will is to seek what the testator actually intended. The point of departure is the text of the will, but a number of other circumstances can provide clues to understanding Nobel´s thinking at the exact point of time when he signed his will. The book sums up its analysis of the correct interpretation of the will of Alfred Nobel (page 37-38):

Interpretation—the determining factors
To sum up: the goal of the interpretation of a will is to find out what the testator intended, the purpose he or she had in mind. To describe the recipients he had in mind Nobel created a Swedish word, fredsförfäktare (‘‘champions of peace’’). Under the law it is both improper and illegal for the Nobel Committee to ignore the specific expression that Nobel actually used, champions of peace, and instead give its own content to the much less specific term ‘‘peace prize.’’ The committee is guilty of an unauthorized change of its mandate.

Read more here


In his will Alfred Nobel entrusted to the Norwegian parliament to award his prize for "the champions of peace" (by which he meant the peace movement). The concept is elaborated in Chapters 8 and 14:

Nobel clearly specified the recipients

The truth is that many of the grassroots activists, after decades of work in the field of disarmament, often know the themes and the political situation better than diplomats who keep changing their job. People in the peace movement monitor national positions, talk more freely, move more freely, and think more freely on possible solutions. In this way, they can be of invaluable assistance to the diplomats. Following is a selection of just some of those individuals who have taken the future on their shoulders and dedicated their lives to the struggle against nuclear weapons: …

Read more here

The meeting hall at the Nobel Peace Center was packed with people, listening to ForUM (Forum for Environment and Development) launching a political report on moral dilemmas in Norwegian foreign policy, not least between arms exports and peacemaking. When one of the four panelists, in a senior military position, defended the burgeoning arms exports of Norway—the ''Peace Nation''—I felt I had to confront him, saying that the military was selling an illusion of security at an exorbitant price, placing the continuation of life on earth in constant jeopardy.…

Read more here



Heffermehl - Nobel book in 6 languages:

The Nobel Peace Prize (Praeger, USA, 2010), contains, as Part I, a legal and historical analysis of Alfred Nobel´s will and the content of the peace prize, and in an added Part II an account of the methods used by Norway´s political elite to stonewall the truth about their breach of trust. Heffermehl´s conclusions concur with a number of earlier scholarly works on what Nobel had in mind. The book also includes a case study of democracy and the rule of law in Norway, as well as discussions of the 2008 and 2009 Nobel awards, a riveting dissection of the Nobel speech of Obama, and the previously unpublished secrets contained in the private diaries of the longest sitting chair of the Nobel committee, Gunnar Jahn - secrets that show amateurism and a number of manifestly wrong decisions.


On January 9, 2011, the Foreign Languages Press, a leading Chinese publishing house, launched a translation into Chinese (Simplified) of the American original. The launch of the book, with a completely rewritten Preface and a special added Epilogue, took place at the Beijing (internal) Book Fair.



A forerunner to The Nobel Peace Prize was published in 2008 (by Vidarforlaget, Oslo). Even if this book, Nobels vilje [Nobel´s will], appeared in Norwegian only it became known all over the world within three days of its publication! - Despite the devastating analysis of how the Nobel committee and Norway´s Parliament had illegally appropriated for their own purposes the prize entrusted to their care, the Norwegian power elites continued as before, stonewalling the criticism; it was business as usual.




Three new translations will be published in the autumn of 2011:

Nobelin rauhanpalkinto: julkaistaan ​​07 joulukuu 2011.

Книга "Нобелевская премия мира" будет опубликована осенью 2011 года.

Boken Nobels fredspris. Visionen som försvann blev publicerad i oktober 2011.


In the media:

Al Jazeera 9.10 2010, Inside Story on the Nobel Peace Prize

The decline of Nobel´s prize

The book contains an evaluation of the reasons given by the committee for each of the 121 prizes awarded 1901–2010 with tables like the two following to illustrate the trends:

Table 4.2
Number of (total) awarded and not justified Nobel Peace Prizes by decade

Justified (%)


Table 6.1
Number of awarded and not justified Nobel Peace Prizes by committee chair

Justified (%)
1901– 1921 Jørgen Løvland
1922–1941 Fredrik Stang
1942–1966 Gunnar Jahn
1967 Bernt Ingvaldsen
1968–1978 Aase Lionæs
1979–1981 John Sannes
1982–1989 Egil Aarvik
1990 Gidske Anderson
1991–1999 Francis Sejerstad
2000–2002 Gunnar Berge
2003–2008 Ole Danbolt Mjøs
2009–(2011) Torbjørn Jagland1

For a number of decades the prize has been Nobel´s only in name, in reality it has been the prize of the Norwegian parliament. As documented by Heffermehl in his book the prize has been appropriated and used to serve national political and commercial interests as well as the private views and prestige of the parliamentarians. 13 of the 14 prizes awarded from 2003 to 2011 have not been properly justified as respectful, loyal to Nobel and his peace vision of a demilitarized world, a fail rate of 93%.

How to nominate / Nobel nomination rules

The American version of the book contains, in Annex 1, a practical guide, "How to earn
the Nobel Peace Prize," with list of people entitled to nominate, practical examples of the
types of activities that qualify, address to use and time limit. See more here.

Peace prize quiz

The task and the obligatory mandate of the Nobel committee is to be loyal defenders of Nobel and his peace vision, of a changed international system, establishing a global agreement on global co-operation on global law and disarmament. Here you can guess whether the committee did right to Nobel or made its own prize - and compare with how the author, Heffermehl, concluded in his book on the Nobel [Champions of] Peace Prize:

Year prize winners Prize loyal to Nobel Committee failed Heffermehl's evaluation: did the Committee fail?2
1960 Albert Lutuli
1961 Dag Hammarskjöld
1962 Linus Pauling
1963 International Committee of the Red Cross,
League of Red Cross Societies
1964 Martin Luther King
1965 United Nations Children's Fund
1968 René Cassin
1969 International Labour Organization
1970 Norman Borlaug
1971 Willy Brandt
1973 Henry Kissinger,
Le Duc Tho
1974 Seán MacBride,
Eisaku Sato
1975 Andrei Sakharov
1976 Betty Williams,
Mairead Corrigan
1977 Amnesty International
1978 Anwar al-Sadat,
Menachem Begin
1979 Mother Teresa
1980 Adolfo Pérez Esquivel
1981 Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
1982 Alva Myrdal,
Alfonso García Robles
1983 Lech Walesa
1984 Desmond Tutu
1985 International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War
1986 Elie Wiesel
1987 Oscar Arias Sánchez
1988 United Nations Peacekeeping Forces
1989 The 14th Dalai Lama
1990 Mikhail Gorbachev
1991 Aung San Suu Kyi
1992 Rigoberta Menchú Tum
1993 Nelson Mandela
F.W. de Klerk
1994 Yasser Arafat,
Shimon Peres,
Yitzhak Rabin
1995 Joseph Rotblat, Pugwash
Conferences on Science and World Affairs
1996 Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo,
José Ramos-Horta
1997 International Campaign to Ban Landmines,
Jody Williams
1998 John Hume,
David Trimble
1999 Médecins Sans Frontières
2000 Kim Dae-jung
2001 United Nations
2002 Jimmy Carter
2003 Shirin Ebadi
2004 Wangari Maathai
2005 International Atomic Energy Agency
2005 Mohamed ElBaradei
2006 Muhammad Yunus,
Grameen Bank
2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),
Albert Arnold (Al) Gore Jr.
2008 Artti Ahtisaari
2009 Barack Obama
2010 Liu Xiaobo
20111 Ellen Johnson Sirleaf
Leymah Gbowee
Tawakull Karman
2012 European Union

Buy the book via Internet, or from your regular supplier, or fill in below and we will send you the book/s, you wish.
Bulk discount negotiable.

I wish to order:

Language Number of copies
English 35US$
Chinese 20US$
Swedish US$
Finnish ?
Russian ?
Norwegian US$
10% postage will be added to bill


1The evaluation for 2011, to three outstanding women, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Leymah Gbowee, and
Tawakkul Karman, is illustrative. The list is an evaluation of the committee, not of the candidates. The question asked is whether the committee has shown loyalty to Nobel. The committee should each year explain in what way the prizes contribute to the peace vision Nobel intended to support. In 2011, listening to chairperson Jagland you could easily believe that he was awarding a prize for women´s rights and democracy. In 2011 the prize for Gbowee seems particularly easy to defend, but Johnson Sirleaf had disqualified herself by inviting a USA military command to her country, Liberia. Again there is every reason to ask: Why is the committee so eager to keep Nobel and his antimilitaristic purpose a secret? Could it be because they are opposed to Nobel and have no vision of a world without arms, power and war?

2 The evaluation is not of the candidate, but whether the Nobel
committee has shown reasons justifying the award under the will.