Indians
have won
five Nobel Prizes to date.
It should have been six.
Yet the most famous Indian, Mohandas Karamchand
Gandhi (1869-1948) never received a Nobel Prize, though he
was nominated five times from 1937-1939 and 1947-1948.
Alfred Nobel, in his will dated
27 November 1895
, left the bulk of his
considerable fortune to the Nobel Foundation. The peace
prize was to go to the person "who
had worked the most or the best for the fraternity among
peoples and the abolition or reduction of permanent armies,
as well as the establishment and promotion of peace
congresses." The
Peace Prize is given by a small Norwegian Nobel Committee in
consultation with an appointed advisor.
Mahatma Gandhi was a known figure in
Europe
due to his struggles in
South Africa
, even before he returned to
India
in 1915, due to the twenty
years he spent in the apartheid struggle.
Gandhiji invented the use of non-violent struggle, a
method so successful it was exported around the world and
used time and again. The
non-violence he preached was a deeply rooted belief. Many
Nobel Prize winners have given homage to Mahatma Gandhi and
credited him for teaching them.
This august list includes Albert
Einstein, Aung San Suu Kyi, George Marshall, The current
Dalai Lama, Martin Luther King Jr. and Nelson
Mandela.
The
Christian Century, a
US
magazine suggested
nominating Gandhiji for the Nobel Peace Prize in a 1934
editorial, when he was already well known in the
United States
for the Salt March of 1930.
The editorial read: “Why not award the Nobel
peace prize to Gandhi? It would be no personal favor to him
and he probably does not want it. The honor would not
greatly impress him and he would not know what to do with so
much money except give it away. These are all high
qualifications for such a prize.”
The editorial went on to
criticize the 1933 Committee for finding no deserving
recipients. It
lamented that “of the twenty-five awards, too many went
to presidents, ministers and other high officials and too
few to working friends of peace or to really radical
proponents of peace and disarmament.”
The 1937-39 Nominations
Ole
Colbjørnsen, a well known and influential Labour Party MP,
nominated Gandhi for the first time in 1937.
The Norwegian branch of "Friends of India"
wrote the note supporting the candidacy.
The Committee's adviser, Professor Jacob Worm-Müller
praised Gandhiji, saying he was noble, ascetic, prominent,
and much loved man. However
he criticized him for not being consistently pacifist in his
political actions. He
argued that Gandhiji should have known that some of his
non-violent campaigns towards the British would degenerate
into violence and terror. He also labeled Gandhiji as an
“Indian nationalist”, criticizing him for helping
Indians and not the worse off Blacks in
South Africa
. At this time no Nobel had
been given for a nationalistic freedom struggle.
The Prizes had been awarded for international
actions, or actions taken outside ones’ own country for
the betterment of the masses. Gandhiji’s focus on the
plight of the Indians in
South Africa
and
India
did not fit well. The Prize
instead went to Lord Cecil of
Chelwood
,
UK
.
Ole
Colbjørnsen renominated Mahatma Gandhi again in 1938 and in
1939, but the arguments made by Prof Worm in 1937 ensured
that Gandhiji did not get on the shortlist in either year.
The 1947 Nomination
In 1947,
shortly after
India
’s independence, Gandhiji
was nominated again, and ended up as one of six names on the
Nobel Committee's short list.
The
Nobel Committee's adviser Jens Arup Seip was a historian.
Jens was full of praise for Gandhiji for his efforts in
three different, but mutually related conflicts: the
struggle for
Independence
against the British; the
stance taken to support
India
's participation in the
Second World War; and, finally, his efforts to resolve the
conflict between Hindu and Moslem communities. In all these
matters, Jens said, Gandhiji had consistently followed his
own principles of non-violence.
Unfortunately, Jens was not explicitly supportive of
the Nobel going to Gandhiji. Jens also hinted that the
partition of
India
and the resulting violence
had reduced the impact of Gandhiji to some extent.
At the time of the Nobel discussions, there was considerable
unrest due to the violence and war between
India
and
Pakistan
. When the deliberations
began on
October 30, 1947
, two Committee members spoke
in favor of Gandhiji’s nomination. However they were not
able to convince the three other members.
Øyvind Tønnesson speculates that Committee members
must have had to consider the political fallout and signals
that would be sent if they had awarded the Peace Prize to
India
’s leader in a time of war.
A second strong argument against Gandhiji was his
statement made in September 1947, that although he had
always opposed warfare, he would support it if it was the
only way to secure justice from
Pakistan
. The Committee took a
negative view of this stance, and decided to give the award
to the Quakers.
The 1948 Nomination
Two days
before he was assassinated, six nominations were received by
the Nobel Committee. The
Quakers who pipped Mahatma Gandhi in the previous year,
nominated him, and he was included in the final short list
of three names. Alas,
when Gandhiji died, so did his chances for a Nobel.
The award only went to the living.
Till 1948, no one had ever been awarded the Nobel Peace
Prize posthumously. But the Nobel Foundation could make this
award under certain exceptional circumstances.
Unfortunately, the organization chose to focus on some
rather irrelevant details regarding the practical
consequences of the money distribution if the Prize were
awarded posthumously. Although
Gandhiji had no will or succession plan, this was a weak
excuse; his sons were living, and Navjivan Publishing House
publishing Gandhiji’s writings could have inherited the
award. The Swedish Committees that award all other Nobels
were consulted. They
did not support a posthumous award, stating that it could
only have been made if the laureate died after the
Committee's decision had been made.
After much deliberation, the Committee opposed 4-1 to make a
posthumous award to Mahatma Gandhi.
The announcement was made on
November 18, 1948
, that "there was no
suitable living candidate" and therefore the prize
would remain unawarded that year. This gesture certainly was
intended as a show of respect for Mahatma Gandhi.
It is unfortunate that the Committee lacked the courage to
create a precedent. What
we do know is that this is a decision that the Nobel
Foundation regrets to this day, as evidenced quite openly in
their actions.
Nobel Organization
regrets
The
Nobel Foundation website talks about the Mahatma’s
life and work at great length in an aptly titled
write-up, “The Missing Nobel”.
When the Dalai Lama received the Peace Prize in
1989, the chairman of the Nobel Committee said “It
would be natural to compare him with Mahatma Gandhi, one
of this century's greatest protagonists of peace, and
the Dalai Lama likes to consider himself one of Gandhi's
successors. People have occasionally wondered why Gandhi
himself was never awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, and the
present Nobel Committee can with impunity share this
surprise, while regarding this year's award of the prize
as in part a tribute to the memory of Mahatma Gandhi.”
The Secretary of the Norwegian Nobel Committee,
Geir Lundestad said that no prize could establish a
perfect record, indicating their omission of Mahatma
Gandhi.
At
Chicagopex 2001, the Chicago Philately Association
recognized this omission as well. The organization
celebrated the 100th anniversary of the Nobel
Prize by releasing a number of first day covers.
All covers bore the title “One Nobel prize
was not awarded – Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi”,
and had stamps honoring Mahatma Gandhi, Albert Einstein,
Desmond Tutu, Martin Luther King Jr., Aung San Suu Kyi,
Desmond Tutu, George Marshall and Nelson Mandela,
figures who always supported and honored this man.
Why ?
Were
the Nobel Committees in the 1930s and 1940s too short
sighted? Politically motivated? Did it fly in the face
of the imperial designs of
Europe
, and send wrong signals
to the struggling non-Europeans who were trying to
overcome European tyranny around the world.
Or was it due to
Norway
’s connections to
Britain
.
Little is recorded of those Committee’s
debates, and no evidence suggests that
Britain
tried to block the
awards.
We
can only speculate that Mahatma Gandhi did not fit the
stereotype of an international political and
humanitarian figure.
Neither was he European or American, in a time
when the Nobel typically went to Westerners with such
backgrounds. He
was a “nationalist” seeking to free Indians from the
British in
India
and
South Africa
, thus unable to fit into
the narrow definitions that made the Nobel Committees
comfortable assessing for such awards.
Thankfully
in today’s times, such nationalistic struggles would
surely be rewarded by the Nobel, as is evidenced in
their awards to Martin
Luther King Jr., the Dalai Lama and Aung San Suu Kyui.
In fact, some argue that the principles of Alfred
Nobel of “the
abolition or reduction of permanent armies, as well as
the establishment and promotion of peace congresses"
have not
been considered in some awards to controversial
supporters of war and violence, including Menachem
Begin, Henry Kissinger, Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak
Rabin.
No
wonder the Nobel Organization has tried to make amends
for its omission of Mahatma Gandhi.
They’ve done less to honor Leo Tolstoy, another
historical figure that was never awarded the Nobel, but
that’s another story.
It
is believed that Gandhiji would have been invited to
Oslo
to receive the Nobel Peace Prize in 1948, had he not
died tragically that year.
He would certainly have been the brightest light
in six instead of our five winners.
■
(c) Copyright 2004 BITSAA International Inc. |
Website
by jPeople, YonEarth
and BITSAA Technology |
|