Snowden nominated for Nobel Peace Prize

Snowden nominated for Nobel Peace Prize

Summary: A former Norwegian minister has nominated fugitive US intelligence leaker Edward Snowden for the Nobel Peace Prize in a letter to the Norwegian Nobel Committee.


Former Norwegian Socialist Left Party minister Baard Vegar Solhjell and his party colleague Snorre Valen, have written to the Norwegian Nobel Committee and nominated Edward Snowden for the Nobel Peace Prize

"He has contributed to revealing the extreme level of surveillance by nations against other nations and of citizens," Solhjell said on Wednesday, explaining his move.

"Snowden contributed to people knowing about what has happened and spurring public debate" on trust in government, which he said was "a fundamental requirement for peace".

In a letter to the Norwegian Nobel Committee obtained by Agence France-Presse (AFP), Solhjell and Valen said they do not necessarily condone or support all of Snowden's disclosures, but praised him for revealing the "nature and technological prowess of modern surveillance".

"The level of sophistication and depth of surveillance that citizens all over the world are subject to have stunned us, and stirred debate," they wrote in the nomination letter.

They added that Snowden's actions have "led to the reintroduction of trust and transparency as a leading principle in global security policies".

US National Security Agency documents leaked by Snowden in 2013 revealed widespread surveillance of individuals and institutions in the US and around the world.

According to the whistleblowing website Wikileaks, Snowden, now living in Russia, had applied for asylum in several countries, including Norway.

Solhjell, who was environment minister until Norway's left-wing government lost power last year, told AFP he was aware of Snowden's reported request for asylum and that it should be handled according to normal procedures.

"This matter has not affected our decision to nominate Snowden for the peace prize," Solhjell said.

The deadline for submitting nominations for the 2014 peace prize is February 1.

Among those eligible to forward nominations are politicians and barristers around the world, as well as university professors from certain disciplines.

United States President Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009, with the internet making the short list of nominees in 2010.

Topics: Security, Government, Privacy

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Premature

    The committee should see how much the Snowden revelations actually contribute to world peace (if at all) before awarding him the Peace Prize. My prediction is that the consequences will be very mixed.

    There's often a gap of many years between the actual work and the Nobel Prize that recognizes it. There's definitely time to see how things play out (Snowden is only 30).
    John L. Ries
    • Also...

      ...given that the gentlemen who made the proposal are (I assume) senior members of the Norwegian Storting, they may want to review their own country's secrecy laws and propose whatever changes they think are appropriate; as it's highly likely that Snowden's revelations would have violated Norwegian law as well.
      John L. Ries
  • New Three Stooges

    Should Snowden get the Prize, the world will have a new bunch of Stooges who won a Nobel: Al Gore, Barack Obama, and Edward Snowden. I put no credibility with the Nobel Prize Committee for their selections of unqualified people getting the "honor." It's a sham.
    • Name some qualified people...

      ...who didn't get the prize, and why you think they're qualified. What do you think the qualifications should be?
      John L. Ries
  • Snowden

    LOL....don't hold yer breth!
  • I'd second that motion ...

    ... though I suspect Snowden would recoil in horror at joining a list with the likes of Obama and Kissinger.
  • Some comments on questionable awards

    As long as the names have been mentioned...

    1. The award to Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho was premature, as the cease fire didn't hold and Le was probably negotiating in bad faith. Interestingly enough, Kissinger's boss, Richard Nixon, probably should have gotten the prize for his opening to China (which has withstood the test of time), but the Watergate scandal insured that would never happen.

    2. The award to Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin should have gone to Jimmy Carter, as the Camp David Accords would never have happened without his efforts. Mr. Carter properly received the prize later for his work since leaving the US Presidency. In hindsight, Camp David should have accomplished more than it has, leaving us with the lesson that peace is hard to achieve unless people are truly willing to live together.

    3. As inspiring as Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign was, it didn't warrant the Nobel Peace Prize. Indeed, it has become increasingly clear that he lacks the political skill to settle the hyperpartisanship plaguing his own country, much less that required to contribute substantially to the peace of the world.

    4. Albert Gore's work on global warning has raised a necessary debate, but I don't think it has contributed substantially to world peace.

    As I have made mention of a number of US politicians, I'll note that I voted for Carter and Gore, but against Obama (twice). I was way too young to have voted for or against Nixon, but I would have voted against him both times. He would have been one of our greatest Secretaries of State, but the country would have been much better off if he had never been President.
    John L. Ries
    • Agreed

      I certainly agree with your comments on Item 2. IMHO, most of the people who have won the Nobel Peace Prize haven't deserved it and have actually contributed more to world instability than many others who never got the nod.

      Succeeding George Bush as President is hardly a good enough reason to give someone a Nobel Peace Prize.
      sissy sue
  • Not him

    Sure the guy may have snitched on his country and is a traitor [where one day the CIA will take him out permanently], but what some don't realize is that his actions may have cost lives. Think about it: one country could do a bit of revenge work on the other. Or maybe he has exposed agents or spies in other countries. He has definitely caused friction between various countries [that would be the opposite of peace, right?].
    • Maybe

      "Sure the guy may have snitched on his country and is a traitor"

      I would feel that way too -- if I were loyal to the American Empire rather than to the American Republic.
      sissy sue