An unworthy recipient

On October 12, 2007, Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for "their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change." While Gore was "deeply honoured" by the coveted award, others were less than impressed with the decision.

For some, the choice was "undeserved" and "degraded the image of the prize." It seemed to me that the Committee was more concerned with propaganda and political agenda than actual peace.

In Alfred Nobel's will, he stated that the Peace Prize was to be awarded to "the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."

In my opinion, Al Gore did not meet any of these stipulations. Sure, he raised awareness on the important issue of global warming, but does this qualify as being the best work? Absolutely not.

What of the Burmese monks who risked their lives in defiance of the military junta? In the name of peace, these Buddhist monks silently protested and suffered atrocious brutalizations at the hands of the government. Yet the hundreds of deaths which resulted were not deemed the "best work."

Or, what about Oscar Biscet? The Cuban physician and advocate for human rights and democracy in his country has been in jail for the past eight years for supposed "disorderly conduct." While jailed, Biscet has been subjected to horrible living conditions while being tortured, beaten and denied the chance to practice his profession. Despite all this, however, he remains firm on promoting peaceful democratic change.

To me, both of these better embody what the Nobel Peace Prize is about. Nobel's will doesn't say anything about catering to political agendas or the politicians who speak out against global warming whilst flying in their private jets and burning 12 to 20 times more electricity in their mansions than the average family home. Sounds a little hypocritical, doesn't it?

I'm not saying Al Gore should not be commended for his efforts. The issues he speaks so passionately about are undoubtedly important and relevant to our society today; however, I feel Gore hasn't done enough to garner all the accolades he has received. Compared to the aforementioned monks and Oscar Biscet, Al Gore has certainly not risked his life for others. He's simply been a talking-head, spewing out information, and for him, this is just another day on the job.