The Nobel Peace Prize 1973 - Presentation Speech Presentation Speech The Nobel Peace Prize 1973 Henry Kissinger, Le Duc Tho Share this: Presentation Speech by Mrs. Aase Lionaes, Chairman of the Nobel Committee of the Norwegian Storting Your Majesty, Your Royal Highnesses, Ladies and Gentlemen: On January 23 of this year a ceasefire agreement was concluded between the United States of America and the Vietnamese Democratic Republic. At its meeting on October 16 the Nobel Committee of the Norwegian Storting decided to award the Peace Prize for 1973 to Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho, the two chief negotiators who succeeded in arranging the ceasefire after negotiating for nearly four years. For many long and bitter years the civilian population of Vietnam and the fighting troops engaged on both sides had borne the sufferings and privations of war. This was a war that concerned not only Vietnam and its people; it was a war moreover that had poisoned the atmosphere in countries and between countries all over the world. Never since the conclusion of the Second World War have the people of Vietnam enjoyed unbroken peace. At the conclusion of the World War France was faced in Vietnam with a powerfully armed resistance movement under Communist leadership.

Attempts to negotiate a solution to the problem of establishing and recognising an independent Vietnamese state proved unsuccessful. Open war broke out. Although the number of French troops involved amounted to close on 400,000, France failed to crush the opposition. After the defeat of France at Dien Bien Phu in 1954 a ceasefire agreement was concluded at Geneva. A military line of demarcation was drawn at the 17th parallel. The intention was for the country subsequently to be unified after free elections had been held. This, however, was not to be: the new government in South Vietnam maintained that free elections could not be carried out under the Communist regime in the north. As a result two states emerged on the soil of Vietnam. Between 1954 and 1960 the two Vietnamese states took shape, a Communist state in the north and a non-Communist one in the south. In South Vietnam a guerilla movement, opposed to the government in power, came into being. In the course of 1960 its activities increased. At the end of that year a joint organisation and command was established in the National Liberation Movement, the FLN.

It was acclaimed in North Vietnam, and the South Vietnamese government maintained that the FLN was operating under North Vienamese control. During the years that followed the South Vietnamese government failed to hold in check the increasing activities and influence of the FLN. It was also clear that attempts to create an effective administration and government in South Vietnam had failed. In 1964 decisions were made that resulted in the United States during the next few years, committing American armed forces to acts of war on Asian soil. These troops were at that time engaged both in a civil war in South Vietnam and in a war between the two Vietnamese states. This took the form of a large-scale commitment of American forces on South Vietnamese soil, as well as air attacks on targets in North Vietnam and on supply lines, through Laos and Cambodia, for North Vietnamese troops. In March 1969 the number of American soldiers in Vietnam reached maximum figures of 541,500 men. The escalation of the American commitment was matched by a corresponding increase in North Vietnamese forces in South Vietnam. The world today is aware of the misery that the war has inflicted on the people of Vietnam.

The mechanical inhumanity of modern warfare has gone hand in hand with the horrors of civil war. There is no need here to repeat the uncertain but chilling figures of the victims of this war - the dead and wounded, the orphans, prisoners of war, deportees, and homeless multitudes, fleeing from the theatre of war. The war proved a nightmare not only to the people of Vietnam but to the entire world. In 1969 the systematic withdrawal of American forces from Vietnam commenced. By December 1972, out of a one-time total of half a million, only 27,000 were still left. But the war continued, with major offensives in South Vietnam and fresh aerial attacks on North Vietnam - the latter as late as in December of last year. Nevertheless, the negotiations for a ceasefire and peace in Vietnam, initiated in Paris in 1969, only suffered minor interruptions. Finally, on January 23 of this year the United States negotiator Henry Kissinger and the North Vietnam negotiator Le Duc Tho arrived at a ceasefire agreement, which they were able to sign on January 27.

The Nobel Committee of the Norwegian Storting was fully aware that a ceasefire and not a peace agreement was involved. They realised that peace has not yet come to Vietnam, and that the sufferings of the population of Vietnam are not at an end. They were also aware that events in Vietnam may yet endanger the détente in the world. The ceasefire agreement was only the first but a tremendously important step on the laborious road to full peace in Vietnam. It is our hope that the two chief negotiators and statesmen who have been awarded the Peace Prize this year will show the same understanding of the purpose and intention of the award as that expressed by Chancellor Willy Brandt in his speech here in this Festival Hall when he received the Peace Prize for 1971: "Nobel's Peace Prize is the highest honour, but at the same time the one that imposes the greatest obligations, that can be bestowed on any man bearing political responsibility." In his letter of November 2 to the Nobel Committee Henry Kissinger expresses his deep sense of this obligation. In the letter he writes among other things: "I am deeply moved by the award of the Nobel Peace Prize, which I regard as the highest honor one could hope to achieve in the pursuit of peace on this earth.

When I consider the list of those who have been so honored before me, I can only accept this award with humility. The people of the United States, and indeed of the whole world, share the hope expressed by the Nobel Peace Prize Committee that all parties to this conflict will feel morally responsible for turning the ceasefire in Vietnam into a lasting peace for the suffering peoples of Indochina. Certainly my Government, for its part, intends to continue to conduct its policies in such a way as to turn this hope into reality." I feel convinced that all right-minded people will share the Nobel Committee's pleasure at this statement of Dr. Kissinger. The Nobel Peace Prize is often awarded to persons who do not have direct responsibility or share in the responsibility for the policy of governments, for peace or war among nations. It has been awarded to individuals and to organisations promoting cooperation between nations in the endeavour to create a better world - a world without hunger, a world of justice for workers, a world in which human rights are respected everywhere, a world without racial discrimination and racial antagonism. And the Prize has been awarded to persons filled with the dream of a world in which war is inconceivable.

But Nobel's Peace Prize has also been awarded to persons exercising political responsibility and heavily committed to the confusing maelstrom of events. They were awarded the Peace Prize because in the course of their activities they had indicated the road that should be followed. No one could know whether this road would be followed; but they had lit a torch on the long and difficult road to peace among men. They were awarded the Peace Prize because, within the framework of the politically possible, they championed a peace which, though it might not be perfect, was nevertheless a step along this road. In the present-day situation it might be useful to go right back to 1950, when the Prize was awarded to Ralph Bunche , the United Nations representative in Palestine, for his contribution in negotiating a ceasefire between Israel and the Arab states. On three occasions since the days of Ralph Bunche - in 1956, in 1967, and now once again in 1973 - the ceasefire has been superseded by open war in the Middle East. The road he indicated by his own actions was not followed.

Today, finally, after the fourth war in the Middle East, there are prospects that the new ceasefire, as Bunche had hoped, could form the basis of a peace which would provide lasting security to all the people living in this part of the world. In 1971 the Prize was awarded to a responsible statesman, Chancellor Willy Brandt, for his personal contribution to a détente, and to a policy of cooperation in Europe. He had succeeded in convincing the majority of the German people that the basis for a policy of peace and negotiation in Europe must be a recognition of the actual power relationship in Europe, and in this way of the fact that two German states are now in existence on German soil. This was not a perfect solution. But as a responsible statesman and the leader of a nation in the heart of Europe Willy Brandt opted for the peace policy which was the only possible one. In awarding the Prize in 1973 as well to two responsible politicians at the centre of events, the Nobel Committee of the Norwegian Storting emphasises its belief that the approach to a solution of the many controversies that have led to or may lead to war must be via negotiations, not through total war aiming at total victory.

The two negotiators who were awarded the Prize represent widely differing systems - one an essentially western system, such as the one in which our own Storting functions, the other a Communist system. We are under no illusion that the differences between systems and ideologies can be ignored; but the Nobel Committee has been anxious to emphasise that in a world yearning for peace, no one can assume the right to force his particular system on others by armed might. Nations with different systems of government must be able to live together in peace and solve their controversies by negotiation. Le Duc Tho has informed the Committee that at present he is not in a position to be able to accept the Prize, giving as his reason the present situation in Vietnam. In accordance with current regulations the Committee has been able to withhold the Prize until October 1, 1974. It hopes that conditions in Vietnam will develop in accordance with the aims of the ceasefire concluded on January 23, and this will make it possible for him to accept the Prize. This year Henry Kissinger was appointed Secretary-of-State in the United States.

In his letter to the Committee he writes as follows: "I greatly regret that because of the press of business in a world beset by recurrent crisis I shall be unable to come to Oslo on December 10 for the award ceremony. I have accordingly designated Ambassador Byrne to represent me on that occasion. However, I would hope and consider it a privilege, should you so wish, to visit Oslo at a future appropriate date to deliver the lecture which I understand is customarily given by Laureates of the Nobel Peace Prize." The Committee is, of course, aware of Dr. Kissinger's burden of work this autumn. Nevertheless they profoundly regret that he was unable to come here today to receive the Prize in person. We are looking forward to hearing his lecture at a later date. Henry A. Kissinger was born in Germany in 1923 of Jewish parents. In 1938 his family escaped to the United States. His father, who had been a teacher, worked in an office in New York. Henry Kissinger was called up for military service in 1943, and became an American citizen.

He took part in the concluding military operations in Europe, and was responsible for the administration of a small South German town administered by the occupying allied powers. In 1946 he won a scholarship for study at Harvard University. In 1954 he received his doctor's degree for a thesis on the European peace settlement after the Napoleonic Wars. In the 1950s he conducted a study group at the Council of Foreign Relations in New York. This group analysed the relations of the USA to the Soviet Union, in particular problems of military security in the nuclear age. In 1957 he returned to Harvard, where he was appointed professor in 1962. In the 1950s and likewise in the 1960s he wrote a great deal on various political subjects. He also carried out research projects for President Eisenhower and President Kennedy. Without associating himself with any party he also helped to draw up Nelson A. Rockefeller's programme during the presidential election of 1968. After 1968 he worked in an advisory capacity for President Nixon. From January 1969 he was to play a central role as advisor to the President on questions of national security.

In 1973 he was appointed Secretary-of-State. In all Dr. Kissinger's writing we catch sight of a basic attitude which made him particularly suited to the role he was destined to play in 1969. This attitude emerges already in local German accounts of his conduct as an American administrative officer in 1945-46. People still remember the way in which this young German-Jewish emigré, who returned to the land of his birth seven years later, wearing an American uniform, and seventeen of whose relations had been murdered under the Nazis, made it clear at once: "We have not come to take our revenge." This attitude reveals an early developed concept of the relations between people and nations, an attitude which tolerated no fanaticism - not even in a young man of German-Jewish blood, not even in his dealings with a people that had allowed fanatics to plunge them into a moral abyss. In his doctoral thesis Kissinger deals with the protracted period of peace that reigned in Europe after 1814, a period that lasted with infrequent warlike interruptions for a hundred years, right up to 1914.

In dealing with this period many historians emphasise exclusively the military balance of power: no single great power was militarily strong enough to endeavour to dominate the whole of Europe - as Napoleon had done before 1814 and Germany was to do after 1914. Kissinger, on the other hand, places a great deal of emphasis on the fact that peace was bound up with an international order, based on universally accepted principles for the behaviour of states in their relations to one another. In those days, too, political systems differed widely, and the great powers had a great many conflicting interests. But by and large they respected these principles and rules, and on this basis they tried to prevent differences of systems and interests leading to war. It was therefore quite natural that Kissinger should place very great emphasis on diplomacy as a factor for the promotion of peace as well, diplomacy both as a profession and as an art. The overriding idea in Kissinger's views on foreign policy is that peace must be based on rules to which all states, at any rate the great powers, adhere in their conduct. It is not sufficient for one single state, or a number of states, to do so.

On the contrary, a dangerous situation may arise if some states desire peace at any price and fail to ensure that other states, too, adhere to the rules. In his doctoral thesis he expressed this as follows: "Whenever peace - conceived as the avoidance of war - has been the primary objective of a power or a group of powers, the international system has been at the mercy of the most ruthless member of the international community." A policy of this kind could lead to war, and the most frightening example was the Munich agreement of 1938, in which the western powers sacrificed Czechoslovakia to Hitler. There were people who believed that as the result of this deal peace would be secured "for our lifetime". At the time there was a failure to understand that Hitler entirely ignored all the rules of the game in international relations. It goes without saying that in the case of a man with Kissinger's background the experiences of the 1930s were bound to set their mark on his thinking. Whenever political extremists acquired power in a state, they were dangerous, in his opinion, because they were unwilling to accept any permanent rules in relationships between states.

For this reason he looked with profound misgiving at the Communist governments, and this was to affect his thinking with regard to the situation in the West and its security in the 1950s. At the same time, however, he was aware, at an earlier stage than most people, of the dangers to mankind that the new atomic arms involved. He was concerned with the problem of how the United States and Western Europe would be able to defend themselves without having recourse to supremely absurd means - strategic atomic arms. He pinned his hopes on the thought that in the age of atomic arms all great powers must realise that their most important task is to prevent the outbreak of nuclear warfare. It was of vital importance to them to realise this, no matter what political systems and ideologies they represented. But recognition of this fact would also of necessity compel them to develop a new relationship to one another, a new system based on universally accepted rules, as had been the case in Europe prior to 1914. This was Kissinger's working hypothesis, the basis of his great experiment in foreign policy. In a world of this kind the United States should not, in his opinion, try to play the role of "world policeman".

The other powers, first and foremost the Soviet Union and China, should be invited to join in as equal partners, enjoying the same rights in this policy and with the same responsibility for peace in the world. Kissinger is no technocrat: when he set out on his journeys to Moscow and Peking after 1969 he had no cut-and-dried solutions to the problems, devised at his desk in Washington. He approached these problems with his working hypothesis, his message, his queries. This great experiment indicates a way out of the world situation created by the Second World War and the Cold War. The policy Kissinger has attempted to put into effect since 1969 is closely bound up with the ideas he had arrived at long before 1969. No one is in any doubt as to his personal contribution to the policy of détente. In a recent interview he made it quite clear that it is precisely because they have conflicting interests and different systems and ideologies that it has become imperative to seek a détente in the relationship between the great powers. This is why it is so important to reduce the danger of nuclear warfare.

The détente provides governments with opportunities to negotiate, and to act swiftly when required, as well as the opportunity to show moderation. This was emphasised in connection with the crisis in the Middle East. This year's Nobel Prize winner has been called a realist. He cautions against the markedly ideological and emotionally conditioned approach in foreign policy, in his own country as well. This realism of his is deeply rooted in a considered conviction, a fundamental ethical attitude which has remained unshaken through changing times and situations. His preoccupation has been the responsibility of the statesman in an imperfect and multifarious world, full of danger. Now he himself bears the burden of such responsibility. In the years that lie ahead we shall know how far his experiment will take us on the road to a safer world. But this depends not only on Henry Kissinger, nor only on the United States. One of the touchstones in the conflict is the Middle East; another touchstone is the conflict in Vietnam. Here the result depends on all parties involved in the conflict, both the states in the actual area of conflict and the superpowers who are involved.

In our part of the world, too, in Europe, negotiations are at present going on for a détente, security and cooperation within the global framework which this great experiment has provided. Today a handful of great statesmen are sitting down at the conference table, deciding the question of war and peace in the world. But the millions of people whose fate is at stake cannot allow the politicians to carry the burdens and responsibility alone. By means of an active and positive world opinion we must make our contribution to the fulfilment of our hopes for peace. Irrespective of national boundaries the peoples of this world, and not least the peace organisations, must speak with one voice, the voice of peace, so loudly that the politicians are forced to listen. There are people today who cynically shrug their shoulders at negotiated agreements. This is an amoral, nay, a dangerous attitude. Ceasefire agreements between states must not be called in question, they must not be interpreted merely as paper resolutions, but as a moral and inviable obligation between the states that have signed them. Only with an honest approach of this kind to the intentions and obligations of international agreements can they help us along the road to peace.

The peace at which we must aim must not be limited merely to the avoidance of military conflict. Real peace in the world can only mean that all of us, in every country, should make it possible for people, irrespective of race, religion, ideology, or nationality, to live a life free from fear, free from violence, free from terrorism - a life in which the fundamental human rights are the secure and imperishable possession of every single human being. From Nobel Lectures , Peace 1971-1980, Editor-in-Charge Tore Frängsmyr, Editor Irwin Abrams, World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore, 1997 American Nobel Peace Prize winners FacebookEmail Twitter Google+ LinkedIn Pinterest American Nobel Peace Prize winners 2009-President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." Post to Facebook American Nobel Peace Prize winners 2009-President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." Check out this story on USATODAY.com: CancelSend A link has been sent to your friend's email address. Posted! A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

16 To find out more about Facebook commenting please read the Conversation Guidelines and FAQs American Nobel Peace Prize winners None 2009-President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." Jewel Samad, AFP/Getty Images None 2007-Former vice president Al Gore and the United Nations' top climate panel received the Nobel Peace Prize "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change." Bjorn Sigurdson, AFP/Getty Images None 2002-Former president Jimmy Carter received the Nobel Peace Prize "for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development." Bjorn Sigurdson, AP None 1997-Jody Williams and the International Committee of the Red Cross won the Nobel Peace Prize "for their work for the banning and clearing of anti-personnel mines." Roar Vestad, AP None 1986-Elie Wiesel won the Nobel Peace Prize for his role as chairman of The President's Commission on the Holocaust.

Todd Plitt, USA TODAY None 1985-Members of the Boston and London staff of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War won the Nobel Peace Prize for, "authoritative information and by creating an awareness of the catastrophic consequences of atomic warfare." International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War None 1973-Henry Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize for his role in the 1973 Paris agreement when he was U.S. secretary of State. He also served as assistant to the president (Nixon) for National Security Affairs. Michel Lipchitz, AP None 1970-Norman Borlaug won the Nobel Peace Prize for his contributions to food production in Asia and Latin America. Jym Wilson, Gannett None 1964-Martin Luther King Jr. won the Nobel Peace Prize as the "first person in the Western world to have shown us that a struggle can be waged without violence." AP 1962-Linus Pauling won the Nobel Peace Prize for campaigning against nuclear weapons testing. Paul Sakuma, AP 1953-George C. Marshall won the Nobel Peace Prize for originating the Marshall Plan.

Library of Congress 1950-Ralph Bunche won the Nobel Peace Prize for his role as a mediator in Palestine. AP None 1947-The American Friends Service Committee won the Nobel Peace Prize for "compassion for others and the desire to help them." American Friends Service Committee None 1946-Emily Greene Balch won the Nobel Peace Prize for her work with the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom. AP None 1946-John Raleigh Mott won the Nobel Peace Prize for his role as chairman of International Missionary Council and president of World Alliance of Young Men's Christian Associations. Library of Congress None 1945-Cordell Hull won the Nobel Peace Prize for "his fight against isolationism at home, his efforts to create a peace bloc of states on the American continents, and his work for the United Nations Organization." Library of Congress None 1931-Jane Addams won the Nobel Peace Prize for leading the Women's International League of Peace and Freedom.

University of Illinois-Chicago Library None 1931-Nicholas Murray Butler won the Nobel Peace Prize for promoting the Briand-Kellogg pact and for his work as the "leader of the more establishment-oriented part of the American peace movement." Library of Congress None 1929 - Frank B. Kellogg won the Nobel Peace Prize for the Kellogg-Briand pact, an international agreement which signatory states promised not to use war to resolve "disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may be, which may arise among them." Library of Congress None 1925-Vice President Charles G. Dawes won the Nobel Peace Prize for the Dawes Plan, which arranged for German reparations after World War I. Library of Congress None 1919- President Woodrow Wilson won the Nobel Peace Prize for his role in establishing the League of Nations.

Library of Congress None 1912 - Elihu Root won the Nobel Peace Prize for "his strong interest in international arbitration and for his plan for a world court." Library of Congress None 1906 - President Theodore Roosevelt won the Nobel Peace Prize for "his successful mediation to end the Russo-Japanese war." AP 10 Americans who’ve won the Nobel Peace Prize 10 Americans who’ve won the Nobel Peace Prize NCC Staff Pin it Share On this day in 1901, the first Nobel prizes were awarded in ceremonies in Sweden and Norway. Since then, the Nobel Peace Prize has earned special significance, with 21 Americans gaining the honor, along with several U.S.-based organizations. More The first Nobel ceremonies were secretive and suspenseful. In 1975, one witness to the event in Sweden recounted the drama in 1901, when four of the five winners were announced live at an event. “The Nobel Laureates’ names had been kept secret – they were not, as now, revealed months in advance.

When three distinguished German – speaking gentlemen arrived by train from the south and were taken to the Grand Hotel, it was clear that they must be the Nobel Laureates,” said Folke Henschen. In Oslo, Norway, the Peace Prize was awarded jointly to Jean Henry Dunant and Frédéric Passy for their international peace efforts. Since then, Americans have played a visible role as recipients. The first American to win a Noble prize of any kind was President Theodore Roosevelt, who won the 1905 Peace Prize for arbitrating the end of hostilities between Japan and Russia. Here are 10 other American Noble Peace Prize winners from the past century , including a few names you may recognize: 1. President Woodrow Wilson (1919). Wilson was honored for his role in peace talks after World War I concluded. He actually received his award in 1920 after the committee waited for year to find a candidate that met the conditions of Alfred Nobel’s will. 2. Frank B. Kellogg (1929). Along with French politician Aristide Briand, he co-authored the Kellogg-Briand treaty that intended to allow for “the renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy.” 3.

Jane Addams (1931). She shared the award with Nicholas Murray Butler. Addams was a leading figure in pacifist movements internationally. 4. Emily Greene Balch (1946). Balch had worked with Addams on peace efforts during World War I. After she won the Nobel Peace Prize right after World War II ended, the U.S. government didn’t congratulate her – she was seen as a radical in the early Cold War era. 5. Linus Pauling (1962). He has already won a Nobel prize as a chemist in 1954, but Pauling was honored again in1962 for his efforts to end above-ground nuclear weapons testing. Pauling is the only person to win two unshared Nobel Prizes. 6. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (1964). Dr. King received his Nobel Prize for his non-violent efforts to promote civil justice. Ironically, one of his role models, Mahatma Gandhi, was never given a Nobel Prize during his lifetime. 7. Henry Kissinger (1973). Kissinger was born in Germany, but he became a naturalized citizen while serving in the U.S.

Army during World War II. He was awarded his Peace Prize for efforts to end the Vietnam War. 8. Jody Williams (1997). She was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1997 for her efforts to ban and clear anti-personnel mines. 9. Al Gore (2007). Gore was a co-winner of the Peace Prize for efforts “to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.” 10. President Barack Obama (2009). President Obama was awarded the prize just eight months into his first term in office, for “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” The controversy over the award continues today. Recent Stories on Constitution Daily Nobel Peace Prize Winner History: Why it Was Once Rejected In 1973, one of the honorees refused to accept a Nobel Peace Prize + READ ARTICLE With the announcement Friday morning that the Tunisian National Dialogue Quartet will be the latest recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize , the number of Peace Prize laureates will tick up to 129 .

That figure doesn’t match up with the number of years the prize has been given, as some years have multiple honorees and others–historically times of war–have none. But it also wouldn’t match up with the number of prizes announced. That’s because in 1973 Le Duc Tho became the first and only person ever to voluntarily refuse a Nobel Peace Prize. The prize had been awarded jointly to Tho, a North Vietnamese politician and diplomat, and U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger for their work negotiating a ceasefire in the Vietnam War. As TIME reported , the Nobel committee’s decision “aroused an unprecedented storm of criticism”: Only at the White House was the announcement greeted with unguarded praise. Kissinger was unabashedly delighted; President Nixon, who might have hoped to win it himself, said that the award gave “deserved recognition to the art of negotiation itself in the process of ending a war and laying the groundwork for peace.” Hanoi, however, was resoundingly silent, lending substance to rumors that Tho would not accept the prize.

The biggest reason for the controversy was the obvious one: despite Tho and Kissinger’s work, the war in Vietnam continued (as it would for more than a year after the Nobel announcement). And many argued that Tho and Kissinger had been just as responsible for creating war, not stopping it. One TIME reader wrote in to say that “The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho is like granting Xaviera Hollander (the Happy Hooker) an award for extreme virtue.” Though Tho would probably not have agreed with the second half of that argument, he did agree that Vietnam was not at peace—and, further, as the Nobel Committee puts it, “his opposite number had violated the truce.” He declined to accept the prize. He said that he might reconsider if peace were restored to his country eventually, but his decision stood. But, as TIME noted in 1978 when Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin controversially received the prize, lasting peace was obviously not a prerequisite.

Past winners included “Aristide Briand and Gustav Stresemann, the French and German statesmen who won the 1926 prize for the ill-fated Locarno peace treaties, in which Belgium, France and Germany agreed never to fight again” and “American Diplomat Frank Kellogg, who was the originator of the utopian Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928, in which 15 powers, including Germany and Japan, agreed to renounce war as an instrument of national policy.” 10 Most Controversial Nobel Peace Prize Winners 10 Most Controversial Nobel Peace Prize Winners Reddit The Peace Prize is to be awarded to individuals and institutions that “have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses,” according to Alfred Nobel’s will. The Nobel Peace Prize has been awarding scientists, writers, peace and political activists since the late 1800s, but not everyone always agrees on who is and isn’t worthy of the $1.2 million prize.

While meant to recognize those whose work has greatly benefited or contributed to the advancement and unity of mankind, the Nobel Peace Prize has sometimes been given to those with violent pasts, those whose award-winning work contains factual errors, or those whose accomplishments do not quiet bear up under close examination. It may be a rare occasion that the committee’s choices were short-sighted, or even worse, naive, but a number of poor decisions have been made. Here are the ten most controversial Nobel Peace Prize winners of all time. Rigoberta Menchú Rigoberta Menchú won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1992 for I, Rigoberta Menchú, her autobiographical account of her life as a Mayan and, more specifically, the genocide of the indigenous Guatemalan people in the late ’70s and early ’80s. Menchú’s book was first published in 1982 and would eventually be translated into 12 different languages, making it one of the first cohesive accounts of the atrocities against the Mayans and garnering international interest that would lead to her Nobel Peace Prize win. But did everything in Menchú’s book really happen the way she described ?

Thanks to the work of American anthropologist David Stoll, Menchú’s book — and her Nobel Peace Prize — became the topic of great debate after he discovered that she had stretched the truth to make her story more emotionally persuasive. Menchú was not, as she had written, entirely uneducated, and she did not witness the torture and murder of her brother (although her mother did.) While Stoll supported Menchú’s win regardless of these discrepancies, he also pointed out that Menchú’s account was not a realistic portrayal of what actually caused the genocide to take place. Henry Kissinger Easily one of the most controversial Nobel Peace Prize winners of all time (if not the most) is Henry Kissinger. The U.S. Secretary of State during both the Nixon and Ford administrations was a joint winner in 1973 with North Vietnamese leader Le Duc Tho. Le Duc Tho rejected the award, given for the pair’s peace work in South Vietnam, because he felt that peace had not yet been achieved in the area — and doubly, didn’t want to share the award with Kissinger . Kissinger accepted the award “with humility,” but many felt that it should never have been offered to him in the first place.

There were two reasons for this controversy. Kissinger was accused of war crimes for his alleged role in America’s secret bombing of Cambodia between 1969 and 1975. His win was also called premature since North Vietnam invaded South Vietnam two years after the prize was awarded, voiding his work. Two Norwegian Nobel Committee members resigned to protest Kissinger’s win. Cordell Hull Nominated several times throughout the 1930s, Cordell finally won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1945 for his prominent role in the creation of the United Nations, his peace efforts, and his trade agreements. But many felt he was undeserving of the award because his callous anti-immigration stance only years earlier meant almost 1,000 Jewish refugees were denied asylum. In 1939, the SS St. Louis attempted to carry 950 Jewish refugees from Hamburg to America in order to avoid the impending Holocaust. Although President Franklin D.

Roosevelt seemed in favor of this action, it was largely due to Secretary of State Cordell Hull’s advice, and the opposition of Southern Democrats, that the ship was turned away and forced to return to Germany, where many of the refugees suffered torture and death at the hands of Hitler’s Nazis. Yasser Arafat “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter,” wrote TIME of the heated debate surrounding Yasser Arafat’s controversial Nobel Peace Prize win. Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994, sharing the award with Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres for the trio’s work on the Oslo Peace Accords, a document meant to create “opportunities for a new development toward fraternity in the Middle East.” Yet the document is seen now as only one of many stop-gate measures that failed to resolve the longest-running conflict in the world. Criticism has been heaped on the committee for this award not only because of the failure of the Oslo accords but because of Arafat himself.

Although Arafat publicly spoke out against terrorism, he’s been called “ The worst man to ever win the Nobel Peace Prize ” by his critics. As Jay Nordlinger — author of Peace, They Say: A History of the Nobel Peace Prize, the Most Famous and Controversial Prize in the World — wrote in an opinion piece for The Times of Israel, Arafat was an “unrepentant terrorist with a long legacy of promoting violence” for terrorist campaigns against Israel. His life has been majorly scrutinized, including his role in overseeing military groups responsible for bombings, hijackings, assassinations, and his aversion to compromise, a quality that hurt the future of the Oslo accords all the more. The long list of Arafat’s numerous crimes has spurned many to call the Palestinian leader “ the father of modern terrorism .” Norwegian Nobel Committee member Kaare Kristiansen resigned to protest Arafat’s Nobel Peace Prize win. By comparison, his supporters have likened Arafat to South Africa’s Nelson Mandela.

Paul Thomas Chamberlin — an assistant professor of history at the University of Kentucky and author of The Global Offensive: The United States, the Palestine Liberation Organization, and the Making of the Post-Cold War Order — noted in a 2012 opinion piece for The New York Times that “yesterday’s ‘terrorists'” — including Arafat, Mandela, and Menachem Begin — “have a tendency to turn into tomorrow’s peacemakers.” Barack Obama In a move called “a stunning surprise” by the New York Times, Barack Obama was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize only 12 days after he took office in 2009. When he actually won the prize only months into his first term in office, many accused the Nobel Peace Prize Committee of being politically motivated since the president was chosen to receive the award for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples,” rather than any concrete achievements. “Very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future,” the Norwegian Nobel Committee said, pointing to his calls to reduce the world’s stockpile of nuclear weapons and work to reignite the stalling Middle East Peace process.

But critics of the choice were quick to highlight that Obama’s short presidency had already seen the escalation of the war in Afghanistan as well as the beginning of a drone campaign that caused hundreds of civilian casualties. After what journalist Kirsten Powers called Obama’s “determination to attack” Syria and his handling of the “ pointless and failing ” war in Afghanistan, many people agree with what Obama said in his acceptance speech: that he doesn’t deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. António Caetano de Abreu Freire Egas Moniz The words “prefrontal lobotomy” typically inspire daunting, Hollywood-esque before-and-after images: before, a mentally troubled individual being forced to undergo this life-changing procedure (often against their will), and after, the same person robbed of identity, vapid and open-mouthed, devoid of personality and the ability to function independently (which, we must point out, is not always the result.) António Caetano de Abreu Freire Egas Moniz was the inventor of the prefrontal lobotomy, and surprisingly, won a share of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1949 for his work developing the surgery .

Many have since argued that the invention of the prefrontal lobotomy has caused more harm than good . The Soviet Union prohibited lobotomies entirely, and the practice was outlawed in America after some patients consequently died due to complications from prefrontal lobotomies. The Nobel Peace Prize Committee defended Moniz’s win despite heated debate, claiming that there were “no effective alternative therapies” for certain mental illnesses during the time of its invention . Fritz Haber The 1918 Nobel Peace Prize winner was Fritz Haber, awarded for his significant discoveries in chemistry, specifically his discovery of a method to synthesize ammonia from its elements , something that was sought after for over 100 years prior to Haber’s solution. The process of synthesizing ammonia is largely used to aid food grown with the help of synthetic chemical fertilizer, which feeds most people in the world today. It’s said that 30 to 40 percent of the world’s population would not be alive without this ability. The controversy surrounding Haber’s win lies in his past . Haber was the director of the Institute for Physical Chemistry when it was making poisonous chlorine gas.

Besides assisting in the development of the poison, which would go on to kill over 1.3 million people in World War I, Haber vehemently lobbied for its usage. Despite the lives claimed by the utilization of chlorine gas in chemical warfare and the fact that Haber’s own wife, also a scientist, killed herself a mere ten days after the first instance of chemical warfare, Haber was awarded the Iron Cross in praise of his deadly invention. Al Gore Al Gore’s Nobel Peace Prize win in 2007 was, according to the Nobel Peace Prize Committee, awarded because “he is probably the single individual who has done most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures that need to be adopted” regarding climate change and global warming. The problem was many feel Gore was undeserving of the award since he hardly practiced what he preached. In 2006, shocking electric and gas bills from the Gore household showed that his 20-room home and “pool house” were eating up over 20 times the national average electricity usage. Additionally, Gore’s eye-opening film about the effects of global warming and measures that could be taken against it was exposed as having nine gross errors , as ruled by a High Court in England.

The errors, crafted to support Gore’s argument, included “alarmist” fudging of facts regarding the rising of sea levels, unfounded claims of the effects of global warming, and the manipulation of statistics. Although his work is undeniably important, his presentation of speculation as fact, coupled with his refusal to address concerns regarding said inaccuracies , makes Al Gore one of the most controversial Nobel Peace Prize winners of all time. European Union In 2012, the European Union was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for “six decades of contributions to the advancement of peace and reconciliation, democracy, and human rights in Europe,” despite the protests and riots engulfing Greece, Portugal, and Spain at the time. The Associated Press stated that the win came during the union’s most severe internal crisis ever . Arguments over the European Union’s possible democratic deficit and its economic crisis made this Nobel Peace Prize particularly controversial, but there’s no denying the positive effects the European Union has had uniting participating nations after World War I and II and by participating in international aid efforts .

Harald Zur Hausen Possibly lesser known than the other candidates on this list is Nobel Peace Prize winner Harald Zur Hausen, who won the award in 2008 for discovering that HPV causes cervical cancer. Less controversial than Hausen himself was the scandal surrounding the award . As a consequence of Hausen’s win, the Swedish anti-corruption police unit launched an investigation into AstraZeneca, a pharmaceutical company that had a large monetary stake in two lucrative HPV vaccines and was suspected of influencing two Committee members. The company directly benefited from Hausen’s win . Though the company denies any wrongdoing and the investigations turned up nothing , AstraZeneca is still suspected of “buying” this Nobel Peace Prize win. As a side note, the Nobel Committee has also been accused for picking no winner in 1948, when Mahatma Gandhi would have been the ideal choice. Gandhi — leader of India’s peaceful independence struggle — had died that year. But since the award was not allowed to be distributed posthumously at that time, no award was made. More From Wall St.

Cheat Sheet: The Nobel Peace Prize 1973 The Nobel Peace Prize 1973 Henry Kissinger, Le Duc Tho Share this: The Nobel Peace Prize 1973 Henry A. Kissinger Le Duc Tho Prize share: 1/2 The Nobel Peace Prize 1973 was awarded jointly to Henry A. Kissinger and Le Duc Tho Le Duc Tho declined the Nobel Peace Prize. Photos: Copyright © The Nobel Foundation Share this: To cite this page MLA style: "The Nobel Peace Prize 1973". Nobelprize.org. Nobel Media AB 2014. Web. 17 Jan 2017. < Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho awarded Nobel Peace Prize - Oct 16, 1973 - HISTORY.com Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho awarded Nobel Peace Prize Share this: Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho awarded Nobel Peace Prize Author Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho awarded Nobel Peace Prize URL Publisher A+E Networks Henry Kissinger and North Vietnamese diplomat Le Duc Tho are awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for negotiating the Paris peace accords.

Kissinger accepted, but Tho declined the award until such time as “peace is truly established.” Related Videos Lyndon B. Johnson ‹ › Fact Check We strive for accuracy and fairness. But if you see something that doesn't look right, contact us ! Get This Day In History every morning in your inbox! By submitting your information you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. More details: The Long March The embattled Chinese Communists break through Nationalist enemy lines and begin an epic flight from their encircled headquarters in southwest China. Known as Ch’ang Cheng—the “Long March”—the retreat lasted 368 days and covered 6,000 miles, nearly twice the distance from New York to San Francisco. Civil war in China between the... Philadelphia Resolutions criticize Tea Act The first public statement against the British Parliament’s Tea Act was a document printed in the Pennsylvania Gazette on this day in 1773. The document became known as the “Philadelphia Resolutions.” The Tea Act of 1773 was a bill designed to save the faltering British East India Company by greatly lowering...

Chevrolet introduces the El Camino On October 16, 1958, Chevrolet begins to sell a car-truck hybrid that it calls the El Camino. Inspired by the Ford Ranchero, which had already been on the market for two years, the El Camino was a combination sedan-pickup truck built on the Impala body, with the same “cat’s eye”... John Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry Abolitionist John Brown leads a small group on a raid against a federal armory in Harpers Ferry, Virginia (now West Virginia), in an attempt to start an armed slave revolt and destroy the institution of slavery. Born in Connecticut in 1800 and raised in Ohio, Brown came from a staunchly... China joins A-bomb club The People’s Republic of China joins the rank of nations with atomic bomb capability, after a successful nuclear test on this day in 1964. China is the fifth member of this exclusive club, joining the United States, the Soviet Union, Great Britain, and France. U.S. officials were not terribly surprised...

Twenty-three diners massacred at Texas restaurant George Jo Hennard drives his truck through a window in Luby’s Cafeteria in Kileen, Texas, and then opens fire on a lunch crowd of over 100 people, killing 23 and injuring 20 more. Hennard then turned the gun on himself and committed suicide. The incident was one of the deadliest... Stampede kills 84 at World Cup match A stampede of soccer fans before a World Cup qualifying match in Guatemala City kills 84 people and seriously injures more than 100 on this day in 1996. The Guatemala national team was set to face off against Costa Rica on a Wednesday night in Guatemala City. Approximately 60,000 fans, most... Marie-Antoinette is beheaded Nine months after the execution of her husband, the former King Louis XVI of France, Marie-Antoinette follows him to the guillotine.The daughter of the Holy Roman Emperor Francis I, she married Louis in 1770 to strengthen the French-Austrian alliance. At a time of economic turmoil in France, she lived extravagantly...

Nazi war criminals executed At Nuremberg, Germany, 10 high-ranking Nazi officials are executed by hanging for their crimes against humanity, crimes against peace, and war crimes during World War II.Two weeks earlier, the 10 were found guilty by the International War Crimes Tribunal and sentenced to death along with two other Nazi officials. Among... Baby Jessica rescued from a well as the world watches On this day in 1987, in an event that had viewers around the world glued to their televisions, 18-month-old Jessica McClure is rescued after being trapped for 58 hours in an abandoned water well in Midland, Texas. The drama unfolded on the morning of October 14, 1987, when McClure fell through...

Full list of Nobel Peace Prize winners Full list of Nobel Peace Prize winners The Nobel Peace Prize medal (AFP Photo/Gunnar Lier) More Oslo (AFP) - Here is the full list of Nobel Peace Prize laureates from 1901, when the prize was first awarded: 2015: The National Dialogue Quartet (Tunisia) 2014: Kailash Satyarthi (India) and Malala Yousafzai (Pakistan) 2013: The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) 2012: The European Union (EU) 2011: Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and Leymah Gbowee (Liberia), Tawakkul Karman (Yemen) 2010: Liu Xiaobo (China) 2007: Al Gore (US) and the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2006: Muhammad Yunus (Bangladesh) and the Grameen Bank 2005: International Atomic Energy Agency and Mohamed ElBaradei (Egypt) 2004: Wangari Maathai (Kenya) 2001

: Kofi Annan (Ghana) and the United Nations 2000: Kim Dae Jung (South Korea) 1999: Medecins Sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders) 1998: John Hume and David Trimble (Northern Ireland) 1997: Jody Williams (US) and the International Campaign to Ban Landmines 1996: Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo and Jose Ramos-Horta (East Timor) 1995: Joseph Rotblat (Britain) and the Pugwash movement 1994: Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres (Israel) and Yasser Arafat (PLO) 1993: Nelson Mandela and Frederik de Klerk (South Africa) 1992: Rigoberta Menchu (Guatemala) 1991: Aung San Suu Kyi (Burma) 1990: Mikhail Gorbachev (Soviet Union) 1989: Dalai Lama (Tibet) 1988: United Nations Peacekeeping Forces 1987: Oscar Ari

as Sanchez (Costa Rica) 1986: Elie Wiesel (US) 1985: International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War 1984: Desmond Tutu (South Africa) 1983: Lech Walesa (Poland) 1982: Alva Myrdal (Sweden) and Alfonso Garcia Robles (Mexico) 1981: Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees 1980: Adolfo Perez Esquivel (Argentina) 1979: Mother Teresa (Albania) 1978: Anwar Sadat (Egypt) and Menachem Begin (Israel) 1977: Amnesty International 1976: Betty Williams (Britain) and Mairead Corrigan (Northern Ireland) 1975: Andrei Sakharov (Soviet Union) 1974: Sean MacBride (Ireland) and Eisaku Sato (Japan) 1973: Henry Kissinger (US) and Le Duc Tho (Vietnam, declined) 1972: prize not handed out 19

71: Willy Brandt (Germany) 1949: Lord (John) Boyd Orr of Brechin (Britain) 1948: prize not handed out 1947: Friends Service Council (The Quakers), American Friends Service Committee (The Quakers) 1946: Emily Greene Balch (US), John Raleigh Mott (US) 1945: Cordell Hull (US) 1944: International Committee of the Red Cross 1943: prize not handed out 1942: prize not handed out 1941: prize not handed out 1940: prize not handed out 1939: prize not handed out 1938: Nansen International Office for Refugees 1937: Viscount Cecil of Chelwood (Britain) 1936: Carlos Saavedra Lamas (Argentina) 1935: Carl von Ossietzky (Germany) 1934: Arthur Henderson (Britain) 1933: Sir Norman Angell (Ralph Lane) (Britain) 1932: prize not handed out 1

931: Jane Addams (US) and Nicholas Murray Butler (US) 1930: Nathan Soederblom (Sweden) 1929: Frank Billings Kellogg (US) 1928: prize not handed out 1927: Ferdinand Buisson (France) and Ludwig Quidde (Germany) 1926: Aristide Briand (France) and Gustav Stresemann (Germany) 1925: Sir Austen Chamberlain (Britain) and Charles Gates Dawes (US) 1924: prize not handed out 1923: prize not handed out 1922: Fridtjof Nansen (Norway) 1921: Karl Hjalmar Branting (Sweden) and Christian Lous Lange (Norway) 1920: Leon Victor Auguste Bourgeois (France) 1919: Thomas Woodrow Wilson (US) 1918: prize not handed out 1917: International Committee of the Red Cross 1916: prize not handed out 1915: prize not handed out 1914

: prize not handed out 1913: Henri La Fontaine (Belgium) 1912: Elihu Root (US) Past Nobel Peace Prize winners | Reuters.com Past Nobel Peace Prize winners 1 / 41 Henry Kissinger won in 1973 "for the 1973 Paris agreement intended to bring about a cease-fire in the Vietnam war and a withdrawal of the American forces".

Then North Vietnamese General Le Duc Tho was also awarded the Peace Prize but declined to accept. REUTERS/Shaun Best 2 / 41 Sean Macbride won in 1974 for "his strong interest in human rights and helping found and then lead Amnesty International. Amnesty International separately won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1977 for "protecting the human rights of prisoners of conscience." REUTERS/Tomas Bravo 3 / 41 Andrei Sakharov won in 1975 for "his struggle for human rights, for disarmament, and for cooperation between all nations." REUTERS/Jean-Claude Delmas 4 / 41 Betty Williams won in 1976 for being founder of the organization Northern Ireland Peace Movement (later renamed Community of Peace People. Co-founder Mairead Corrigan (not pictured) also won. REUTERS/Andrew Winning 5 / 41 Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin won in 1978 "for the Camp David Agreement, which brought about a negotiated peace between Egypt and Israel". REUTERS/File 6 / 41 Mother Teresa won in 1979 as a "leader of missionaries of charity".

REUTERS/Andrew Wong 7 / 41 Adolfo Perez Esquivel won in 1980 for founding "non-violent human rights organizations to fight the military junta that was ruling his country (Argentina)." REUTERS/Gustau Nacarino 8 / 41 The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees won in 1981 for its work as "an international relief organization founded by the U.N. in 1951." REUTERS/Adrees Latif 9 / 41 Alva Myrdal and Alfonso Garcia Robles (not pictured) won in 1982 for "their magnificent work in the disarmament negotiations of the United Nations." REUTERS/Stringer 10 / 41 Lech Walesa won in 1983 as a "founder of Solidarnosc; and campaigner for human rights".

REUTERS/File 11 / 41 Desmond Tutu won in 1984 for his work as "a unifying leader figure in the campaign to resolve the problem of apartheid in South Africa." REUTERS/Mike Hutchings 12 / 41 The International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War won in 1985 for "creating an awareness of the catastrophic consequences of atomic warfare." REUTERS/Handout 13 / 41 Elie Wiesel won in 1986 for his message "of peace, atonement and human dignity". REUTERS/David W Cerny 14 / 41 Oscar Arias Sanchez won in 1987 for "his work for peace in Central America, efforts which led to the accord signed in Guatemala.

REUTERS/Mike Segar 15 / 41 The United Nations Peace-Keeping Forces won in 1988 for "their efforts that have made important contributions towards the realization of one of the fundamental tenets of the United Nations." REUTERS/Evens Felix 16 / 41 The 14th Dalai Lama won in 1989 for "his struggle for the liberation of Tibet" as well as his consistent opposition to the use of violence. REUTERS/Yuan Jia-hung 17 / 41 Mikhail Gorbachev won in 1990 for "his leading role in the peace process." REUTERS/Stringer 18 / 41 Aung San Suu Kyi won in 1991 for "her non-violent struggle for democracy and human rights." REUTERS/Reuters TV/MRTV/Files 19 / 41 Rigoberta Menchu won in 1992 for "her work for social justice and ethno-cultural reconciliation based on respect for the rights of indigenous peoples." REUTERS/Gregg Newton 20 / 41 F.W.

de Klerk (L) and Nelson Mandela won in 1993 for "their work for the peaceful termination of the apartheid regime and for laying the foundations for a new democratic South Africa." REUTERS/Juda Ngwenya 21 / 41 From left, Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin won in 1994 "to honor a political act which called for great courage on both sides, and which has opened up opportunities for a new development towards fraternity in the Middle East." REUTERS/Jerry Lampen 22 / 41 Joseph Rotblat and the Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs won in 1995 for "their efforts to diminish the part played by nuclear arms in international politics and, in the longer run, to eliminate such arms." REUTERS/Andrew Shaw 23 / 41 Jose Ramos Horta (L) and Ximenes won in 1996 for "their work towards a just and peaceful solution to the conflict in East Timor." REUTERS/Pascal Volery 24 / 41 Jody Williams and the International Campaign to Ban Landmines won in 1997 for "their

 work for the banning and clearing of anti-personnel mines." REUTERS/File 25 / 41 John Hume (L) and David Trimble won in 1998 for "their efforts to find a peaceful solution to the conflict in Northern Ireland." REUTERS/Dylan Martinez 26 / 41 Medecins Sans Frontieres won in 1999 "in recognition of the organization's pioneering humanitarian work on several continents." REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz 27 / 41 Kim Dae Jung won in 2000 for "his work for democracy and human rights in South Korea and in East Asia in general, and for peace and reconciliation with North Korea in particular.

REUTERS/Hyungwon Kang 28 / 41 Kofi Annan and the United Nations won in 2001 for "their work for a better organized and peaceful world." REUTERS/Alain Issock 29 / 41 Jimmy Carter won in 2002 for "his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development." REUTERS/Brian Snyder 30 / 41 Shirin Ebadi won in 2003 for "her efforts for democracy and human rights, especially on the struggle for the rights of women and children." REUTERS/John Schults 31 / 41

Question: Which American was awarded a share of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973?
Answer: Henry Kissinger