2022 NOBEL PEACE PRIZE – HUMAN RIGHTS SHADOWED BY WAR
On December 10, Ukrainians, Russians and Belarusians will claim the Nobel Peace Prize. Against war. In the name of human rights and the memory of Stalinism victims. Will the defence of common values become a bridge between societies divided by bloody conflict?
On December 10, on the anniversary of the death of Alfred Nobel and on Human Rights Day, this year’s Nobel Prizes will be awarded. Among them the biggest controversies are raised by this year’s committee decision on Peace Prize. It was awarded to three organisations: Ukrainian Center for Civil Liberties, Russian Memorial and Ales Bialiatski who is a Belarusian oppositionst and a representative of “Viasna” organisation.
All the winners have made a great contribution to defend the human rights. From 2007, the Center for Civil Liberties shall monitor and document human rights violation and from 2014, when the war with Russia begun, also the crimes against civilian population. Aleś Bialacki had been carrying out the activities for the freedom and democracy since he was 20 years old. He is one of the founders of the Viasna Human Rights Center. Russian Memorial commemorates testimonies of the crimes of the totalitarina regime in the countries of the former USSR since 1989.
There are no doubts that all of the rewarded deserve the Nobel distinction. However, applying it when Ukraine fends off Russian invasion raised big controversies, both in Russia and Ukraine. Why? What are the public reactions? How Kremlin propaganda put things? We have asked the reaserchers from the University of Wrocław.
– At first, Russian propaganda did not know what to do, at all – says dr hab. Jędrzej Morawiecki, journalist, writer and professor of the Institute of Journalism and Social Communication at the University of Wrocław. – Next to the news agency’s information, there was a note saying that Memorial was an organisation recognised in Russia as an agent of foreign influence. One day later, it was written about “mean purpose of the Nobel Peace Prize and the winners who “did not lift a finger for peace but fight against the Russian state”. I think that such a reaction from the propaganda shows how important this prize is.
Dr Anna Ursulenko, translator and literary expert of the Institute of Slavic Studies at the University of Wrocław, underlines: – It is the first Nobel for independent Ukraine. However, it is impossible to deny that not everyone enthusiastically welcomed the Nobel Committee’s decision. Giving the award to three post-Soviet organisations at the same time: Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, very clearly evoked Putin’s narrative of a “tri-unity nation”.
Jędrzej Morawiecki clearly states that the narrative of the so-called “tri-unity nation” is a colonial narrative, which the Russians themselves deny: – The concept of a tri-unity nation is based on the assumption that Ukrainians and Belarusians are so polite, docile, local Russian who are supposed to live on their reserve. Anger of Russian propaganda as the response to Nobel Prize, which was perceived as attack on tri-unity nation, shows that it was the right decision, although the reaction of the other side seems understandable.
According to Anna Ursulenko, the anger of Russian propaganda has softened emotions in Ukraine. – It is also worth mentioning that a big part of Ukrainians saw much of a good thing in this decision. Not only because of the first Ukrainian Nobel Prize in history. It was pointed out that the prizes are not awarded to countries but to very specific people and organisations. The prize seen this way emphasises the role of people fighting against Lukashenka regimes in Belarus and Putin regimes and therefore, supporting Ukraine.
Jędrzej Morawiecki adds: – Memorial was given the prize for raising awareness of the crimes of the past. Its representatives are aware that during totalitarianism, the society lost the conciousness of their history and its crime. So, right now, when we see the darkest face of Russia, the prize for Memorial is important. It gives hope that Russians will understand that they are not only victims or descendants of the victims but they are also executioners or they just live next to ones.
Anna Ursulenko concludes: – We realize that there is no rebellion and resistance without memory. The case of the Memorial is the best testimony to this. They started by examining the testimonies of the history but it turned out that it could not be done without defending human rights. This show the inseparability of rebellion and memory.
Listen to the entire conversation here:
Translated by Martyna Sobczyk (student of English Studies at the University of Wrocław) as part of the translation practice.
