Nobel: The Merchant of Death


By Saleem Ayoub Quna


One must really feel sad to discover that, he or she, has been used or manipulated for a long time by others who pretend otherwise! It will be much worse if one does not do something about it, afterwards.
This is I discovered when I accidentally learned more about the most prestigious international prize called the “Nobel Prize” in its five major categories: Physical science, chemistry, medical science, literature and peace.


This prize is well known worldwide for two main reasons. But we tend to focus on one and disregard the other. The first reason is the prize founder’s name, “Alfred Nobel”, became associated with the most important award man can aspire in modern times, in terms of money and prestige. It is the most prestigious and sought after award in the world!


The other less known reason, but nevertheless no less important, is that its holder’s name is the only one which is, exclusively, linked to the invention of “dynamite” in the late 19th century! That invention was a turning point not only in this man’s life or his country, but in the course of world history. Dynamite was first used to dig out tunnels, build dams, railways, open canals between oceans and so forth. Automatically, that helped, already advanced industrial nations in Europe, to develop and strengthen their economies and improve scientific achievements at home and abroad.


The invention of dynamite which is a kind of ammunition, gradually proved to be most profitable and rewarding enterprise for those involved in it. The appetite to use them became phenomenal to the extent that the number of humans killed, just after the historical invention, drastically surpassed all those who were killed, anteriorly, by other more conventional weapons or natural disasters. The whole issue later became an integral part of manufacturing military hardware which kept developing and expanding until the world reached the era of “weapons of mass destruction” that is causing all the pain and trouble facing people everywhere on this planet since then.


While this multi-faceted tragedy and drama is going on, many people around the world, especially among the cream of the cream strata of scientists, intellectuals, inventors and leaders, and they are in the thousands, working independently or for famed institutions, are counting the days and hours, to see their names, at least, nominated for one the five categories prize, without the slightest effort on their part to know the original story behind all of this big historical farce.


A second turning point in the life of Alfred Nobel took place in 1888. That year a brother of his with the name of Ludwig who was visiting the city of Cannes, south of France, passed away. Alfred had five brothers. A local French newspaper, taking Ludwig for Alfred, picked the news and ran a report on its front page with a dramatic title: “The merchant of death died”!

When Alfred read the paper he was upset. He started contemplating ways to redress this personal dilemma and re-polish his tarnished reputation. It was not until 1895, i.e. seven years after he was described as merchant of death, and just one year before he died, that he decided to include in his will a paragraph that detailed the criteria and conditions of specified financial rewards under a special fund called the “Nobel Prize”, to be granted to all candidates, regardless of their nationality, religion, color or ethnical background. In that year, Alfred’s business empire included 90 operating factories of dynamite and ammunition scattered around the world!

However, the first award distributing ceremony did not take place until 1901 in Stockholm on the 5th anniversary of his death.

Among the hundreds of nominees for the different categories of the award and since its inauguration in 1901, the Nobel Prize was declined by two candidates only: A Vietnamese politician and negotiator named LE DUC THO who was nominated along with no other than Henry Kissinger, to share the Nobel Peace Prize, saying that he did not deserve it because peace was not achieved in Vietnam yet at that time in the year 1973.


The second candidate who declined the prize for literature was the French philosopher and writer Jean-Paul Sartre, saying that he always declined official honors.


Conclusion: Trying to be nominated for the Nobel Prize especially for “Peace”, let alone accepting it is not so different from believing in fake prophets or opportunist politicians whose actions and deeds categorically contradict their preaching and teaching. I have no illusion that any of those who genuinely work for peace on this earth, but “circumstantially” get nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, will one day, refuse to be trapped in this silk web!

This opinion was especially written for Crossfire Arabia by Saleem Ayoub Quna who is a Jordanian author writing on local, regional and international affairs and has two books published. He has a BA in English Literature from Jordan University, a diploma from Paris and an MA from Johns Hopkins University in Washington. He also has working knowledge of French and German.

Continue reading
Jordan: United Kingdom Plan and Dashing The Chance for Peace 

By Khairi Janbek

In order to reinforce the concept of the unity of the two banks, which was reaffirmed at the Cairo Arab Summit in 1970, and in order to placate the rising Palestinian sentiments, King Hussein unveiled on 15 March, 1972, his United Arab Kingdom Plan (UAK). 

In an address to the nation on that day, the late King elaborated on the proposed plan, as the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan would, after the withdrawal of Israel from the West Bank, become the United Arab Kingdom comprising of two regions: First: Region of Palestine ie. West Bank and any future territories to be liberated and whose inhabitants opt to join in, with Jerusalem as its capital. Second: Region of Jordan, is East Bank and its capital Amman.

Furthermore, Amman would be the administrative capital of both regions. The King would be the head of state. There would be a local parliament and local government for each region, as well as a federal government and a parliament. There would be one federal supreme court and one army. 

The late King added, this arrangement is his preference, though he intended to give the Palestinians, after liberation, the opportunity to determine their own future, and pledged to respect their choice.

Despite the fact that this plan was only a proposal, it drew violent reactions from the PLO as well as the Arab states who all in the 1970 Arab League Summit reaffirmed the unity of the two banks. 

The late Mr. Yasser Arafat considered the plan a mere ressurection of Jordan’s long standing policy of insisting that the West Bank was an integral part of Jordan, and the Palestinians residents were Jordanian citizens. He considered that, a real threat to his own claim of representing the Palestinian people.

The late president Sadat of Egypt wanted to identify his own regime with the Palestinan cause, and announced before a cheering crowd at the Palestine National Council (PNC) meeting in Cairo on 10 April 1972, the break of diplomatic relations with Jordan. Syria, in order not to be upstaged by Egypt, cut diplomatic relations with Jordan and closed its borders.

Significantly the Plan remained under consideration until the Rabat Arab Summit of 1974, when the Arab states decided the sole representative of the Palestinian people should by the PLO. 

The Rabat Summit forced Jordan to withdraw from direct involvement in the peace process at the time when the eyes of the whole world and the attention of the USA, were focused on the settlement of the Arab-israeli conflict.

The Rabat decision confused the issue. Instead of concentrating on the basic problem of Israel’s occupation of Arab lands, the questions of Palestinian national rights and independent Palestinian state were introduced. The nature of the problem changed overnight. 

Jordan tried to seperate the issue of withdrawal from the issue of national rights of the Palestinian people. Jordan stood for the ending of the Israeli occupation of all Arab lands; occupied after 1967 war, establish peace and then address the question of Palestinian national rights within the context of inter-Arab relations.

But the Arabs states supported the claims of the PLO as the sole representative of the Palestinian people, and the PLO leadership was not prepared to accept Israel’s withdrawal from the West Bank in favor of Jordan, fearing that would prevent it from attaining its goal; Creation of an independent Palestinian state. 

The various Arab states supported the PLO for their own reasons, and were totally content to dump the Palestinian problem on the shoulders of the PLO.

The Late President Sadat and ex-US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, exploited the PLO’s position and the Arab support to it, and manipulated events in order to enable Egypt to sign a separate peace with israel. 

The Rabat decision which neutralized Jordan’s role, and paved the way for Egypt’s separate peace with Israel, enabled Tel Aviv to tighten its grip on the West Bank and the Golan Heights. 

Developments since Rabat have shown that, Jordan’s position for a comprehensive peace settlement with Israel, would have been the best chance for a lasting peace. A chance dashed in Rabat.

Dr Khairi Janbek is a Jordanian writer based in Paris and the above opinion is that of the author and doesn’t reflect crossfirearabia.com. 

Continue reading