Recent Blog Posts

The Next Nobel

Editorial of The New York Sun | October 10, 2007

Vice President Gore is being mooted for the Nobel Peace Prize, but our nominee is General Petraeus. This is only a slight departure from our annual editorial calling for the Norwegians to award the prize to GI Joe. We've been advancing that idea ever since reading about it in an essay by Neil Kressel, a professor in New Jersey. It has seemed to us that the American GI is the greatest force for peace in the world today, and we say that without the slightest bit of irony. GI Joe and GI Jane always go overseas for reasons not of conquest but of liberation, to secure the hope of democracy, and always with the intent of returning home.

We advance the name of General Petraeus this year because he has come to personify the GI Joes and GI Janes of whom he is in command. He has breasted an extraordinary amount of obloquy on behalf of their, and our country's, cause and courage. This was put into sharp relief during his appearance last month before the Congress, where his honor and patriotism were questioned. The circumstances present an opportunity to the Nobel committee to underscore the point that however controversial our policies may be, the world recognizes — and we haven't the slightest doubt that it does — the risks that our GIs, and their generals, take for all of us.

It is true that General Petraeus doesn't seem to hate President Bush, which in recent years has seemed to be one of the pre-requisites for winning the prize. He hasn't bribed the dictator of North Korea, as had the 2000 winner, Kim Dae Jong. Nor did General Petraeus ever head a terrorist organization as did the 1994 co-winner of the prize, Yasser Arafat. Neither, for that matter, did Mr. Petraeus idle as the first wave of Islamo-fascism swept through Iran, as did the prize recipient in 2002, President Carter. General Petraeus today is not doing his best to stave off international sanctions on the Iranians for building an A-Bomb as is the 2005 winner, Mohamed ElBaradei.

No, General Petraeus is just trying to save the nation of Iraq from the competing death cults of fanatical Shiism and fanatical Sunnism. He has already achieved something that had eluded his predecessors in command — he's winning a war against Al Qaeda, working with local tribes toward preventing a confessional civil war from escalating and protecting whole neighborhoods in Baghdad from ethnic cleansers. His accomplishments make the commander of multinational forces in Iraq uniquely qualified for a prize given in the name of peace, and now would be the time to salvage the real legacy of Alfred Nobel, the inventor of dynamite so horrified by his invention that he created an international peace prize with the profits he reaped from it.

Lest we sound cynical about the prize itself, let us just say that we recognize it has had many magnificent recipients, from Theodore Roosevelt and Menachem Begin and Henry Kissinger and Elie Wiesel to the founder of the Grameen Bank, Muhammad Yunus, the Iranian human rights lawyer, Shirin Ebadi, and the Burmese freedom fighter, Aung San Suu Kyi. General Petraeus's accomplishments are in the tradition of George C. Marshall, Lech Walesa, and Andrei Sakharov. These men did not seek peace at any price or without any cost. They took enormous personal risks. They stood on principle. They understood that true peace is earned in victory.


Reader comments on this article

Comment By Date

Is there a link to Neil Kressel's essay? [MORE]

rich 

Oct 10, 2007 09:26

Bravo! I'll bet that General Petraeus feels a minor swell of pride that the New York Sun has suggested that... [MORE]

Steve Sf 

Oct 10, 2007 10:23

Ummm, just a few questions; Who wrote this? What kind of drugs is this person on? Are they 'over-the-counter' meds,... [MORE]

ASanePerson 

Oct 12, 2007 13:14

Why not indeed? General Petraeus in his brief address and for the questions posed by his congressional critics he answered... [MORE]

RAJA MANDAKALATHOOR VENKATARAGHAVAN 

Oct 10, 2007 13:39

The Sun continues it's cultlike worship of General Petraeus based on wishful hopes. I'm guessing you would have published a... [MORE]

Yoda 

Oct 10, 2007 13:54

Even though the committee would never consider them, You are 100% right to say the american soldier is the greatest... [MORE]

mark healey 

Oct 10, 2007 16:25

Not a bad idea, but I really think the prize should go to Burma's monks this year. They really risked... [MORE]

Dominic Jerry Nardi Jr. 

Oct 10, 2007 23:15

1) Do you know what "peace" means? 2) No, seriously - do you know what it means? [MORE]

LemmyHavit 

Oct 11, 2007 16:41

...that it means "the absence of war." We should've gone alone with Mr. Chamberlain, shouldn't we? All that war back in... [MORE]

fool 

Oct 12, 2007 18:02

American forces are in Iraq for one reason and one reason only, to secure American access to Iraqi oil. Only... [MORE]

KennethC 

Oct 11, 2007 16:59

The Left continually trots out this "we're only there for the oil" cr*p. Leaving aside for a moment the notion... [MORE]

fool 

Oct 12, 2007 17:59

Let's see: A theocratic dictator who kills civilians because his god personally told him to do so is never a... [MORE]

Canadian 

Oct 11, 2007 18:25

I welcome this nominee in General David Petraeus. He is an honorable American who is working hard in spite of... [MORE]

Robert 

Oct 11, 2007 20:36

A war monger winning the peace price...?Righhhhht.....Why not propose Osama or the Myanmar general while you're at it? [MORE]

JD 

Oct 12, 2007 04:42

I applaud the Sun for their recommendation and I'm proud to call myself a reader. The U.S. military has... [MORE]

rhino_itall 

Oct 12, 2007 07:48

Well, I guess you can say.....'another loss for the Neocons.....and....Bushie Backers'.....why don't you finally realize....you're beating a 'dead horse'....with the... [MORE]

Mortyboy 

Oct 12, 2007 08:44

You would have to sponsor your own award in order for the logic you cite to be applied. You can... [MORE]

Patrick S Pattillo 

Oct 12, 2007 08:56

No one could seriously consider the unprovoked invasion of a country, destruction of its infrastructure and wholesale torture and massacre... [MORE]

NormanW 

Oct 12, 2007 11:49

on the other hand, henry kissinger is a nobel "peace" prize laureate. so why not a mediocre neo-con tool like... [MORE]

arch stanton 

Oct 12, 2007 14:54

I would have never though to nominate a military general for the Nobel Peace Prize. Yes, with war can come... [MORE]

Trevor 

Oct 12, 2007 15:11

Why shouldn't George W. Bush be nominated? He's doing more than the general!According to most of the people in the... [MORE]

Thomas 

Oct 12, 2007 15:15

You take yourself seriously with this story? Petraeus was put in command specifically for his views which are, like this... [MORE]

Netmonger 

Oct 14, 2007 01:07