“China’s response is the most dramatic evidence of the Prize’s effectiveness.” Director Geir Lundestad of Norway’s Nobel Institute is convinced of the value of awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to a Chinese dissident. Human rights activist Liu Xiaobo will not be in Oslo today to receive his award. China is furious and other countries with their own dissident issues are also giving the ceremony a wide berth.

The Nobel Institute - which assists the Nobel Committee in its quest for laureates – believes in the power of the Peace Prize. “This view is not only confirmed by the winners themselves, but sometimes by the course of history as well,” says Professor Lundestad, citing Polish union leader Lech Walesa as an example. The Peace Prize has been an enormous help to previous winners in fighting their battles. However, Professor Lundestad goes on to admit that the level of resistance now being shown by China is without precedent.

Irritation
The indignation of the Chinese government is also being echoed among the country’s population. The majority of people in China have no idea what Liu Xiaobo has done to deserve the prize. Either they have never heard of him or they are irritated by all the attention he is receiving, since Liu’s ideas have nothing to do with the practical concerns of their daily lives.

According to Huang Jing, a researcher at the University of Singapore, “the prize has held back important reforms in the area of civil liberties.” These were on the agenda for October’s party meeting “but have now been blocked by conservative pressure.”

The West knows best
Tom Zwart, Professor of Human Rights at Utrecht University, can well understand China’s reaction. In his view, the Nobel Committee wanted to make a political statement by giving the Nobel Prize to a controversial figure in China:
“They wanted to emphasise a Western view of human rights in China. In itself that is perfectly legitimate. But you shouldn’t expect it to bring human rights any closer.”

Professor Zwart believes that when the West tries to impose its view of individual human rights on China, the Chinese dig their heels in. He reckons it is more effective to seek dialogue with a broader vision of human rights, such as the right to food or education, with which the Chinese culture can more readily identify.
“If you take that approach, you will find a great deal of common ground. I’d say we’d find 80 percent of the human rights we value so much in the West reflected in China, no question.”

But this year’s Nobel Prize comes across as “we in the West know best”. It gives the impression that we want to teach superpower China a lesson.

Recognition helps
Does this mean that the Nobel Committee has completely missed its target? “It would have been better to choose someone with broader support,” argues Professor Zwart. Cuba expert Edwin Koopman doesn’t agree. He has seen that human rights awards conferred on Cuban activists have had a favourable effect.

This year, dissident Guillermo Farinas received the Sacharov Prize from the European Parliament. Critical blogger Yoani Sánchez was given a Prince Claus Award for her groundbreaking work. The Cuban regime is not at all happy with this recognition but, for the award winners, it is an enormous boost.

“Awarding a prize and generating publicity for these types of people, often leads to them being jailed less often or for shorter periods. The repression is relaxed because the Cubans know that the whole world is watching if anything happens to them.”

Interfering and offensive
Like China, Cuba has expressed its displeasure by denying Guillermo Farinas and Yoani Sánchez a visa to leave the country. “Cuba sees the awards as interfering and offensive and they will have no effect on the human rights situation in the short term. But it'll end there, since Cuba is no China,” says Edwin Koopmans. Because when it comes to expressing its aversion to any kind of interference in its internal affairs and hitting back at its accusers, an economic superpower like China has many more resources at its disposal.