The Nobel Peace Prize and the Evolution of Nonviolence

"Peace is not merely the absence of conflict, but the ability to handle conflict by peaceful means." – Ronald Reagan 

Since its inception in 1901, the Nobel Peace Prize has stood as one of the most prestigious international recognitions for efforts in conflict resolution, diplomacy, and humanitarian advocacy. Over time, it has not only reflected prevailing global ideals about peace but also helped shape the discourse on the legitimacy and power of nonviolent action. From early laureates such as Frédéric Passy, a steadfast advocate of arbitration over war, to more recent recipients like Martin Luther King Jr., Malala Yousafzai, and the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), the Nobel Peace Prize has increasingly emphasised the moral and strategic potency of nonviolence. 

The Prize remains a vital cultural and political barometer of how the international community defines, and redefines, nonviolence in the pursuit of lasting peace. 

The Conception of the Prize 

In his final will, dated 27 November 1895, Swedish chemist and industrialist Alfred Nobel laid the foundation for one of the world’s most distinguished honours: the Nobel Prizes. Among them, the Peace Prize was the most idealistic. Nobel stipulated that one-fifth of his fortune be used to recognise “the person who shall 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.” 

At the time, Nobel’s vision was both radical and rooted in the spirit of nineteenth-century liberal internationalism – a belief that peace could be achieved through diplomacy, arbitration, and transnational cooperation rather than through imperial conquest or militarism. His emphasis on reducing standing armies and encouraging dialogue between nations reflected a growing scepticism of militarised nationalism, which was beginning to dominate European geopolitics. 

The Nobel Peace Prize is therefore more than an award; it reflects global values and shifting concepts of peace throughout the twentieth century, particularly those envisioned by its founder. 

Early Conceptions of Peace 

The earliest recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize were primarily diplomats, legal scholars, and pacifists who worked within formal institutions to promote peace. Figures such as Frédéric Passy (co-recipient in 1901) and Élie Ducommun (1902) championed arbitration as a peaceful alternative to war. During this period, peace was often understood as the absence of conflict between nation-states, achieved through legal frameworks and state diplomacy. The Prize thus rewarded individuals who contributed to treaties, international courts, and intergovernmental peace initiatives. 

A Shift Towards Moral and Ethical Nonviolence 

By the mid-twentieth century, the Nobel Peace Prize began to acknowledge the power of nonviolent resistance as a legitimate, and often superior, method of political change. This shift reflected broader patterns in public opinion, with many laureates inspiring widespread popular support. 

A seminal example of this change was the awarding of the Prize to Martin Luther King Jr. in 1964. His leadership of the Civil Rights Movement demonstrated the ethical force of nonviolence in confronting systemic injustice. King’s adherence to Mahatma Gandhi’s principles and his success in mobilising mass movements without resorting to violence redefined peace – not merely as the absence of war but as the presence of justice. 

Mother Teresa (1979) and Desmond Tutu (1984) were recognised for their humanitarian work and moral leadership against poverty and apartheid, respectively. These awards signified a growing understanding that peace is intrinsically linked to the fight against structural violence and racial oppression. The Nobel Committee broadened the definition of nonviolence to include compassionate action and moral witness. 

Nonviolence and Global Activism 

In the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, the Nobel Peace Prize has increasingly symbolised grassroots activism – nonviolent movements and organisations that apply pressure on institutions to uphold peace and human rights. The 1991 award to Aung San Suu Kyi for her nonviolent struggle against military rule in Myanmar, and the 2006 award to Muhammad Yunus and the Grameen Bank for pioneering microfinance, are examples of the Committee’s endorsement of bottom-up approaches to peace and development. 

The 2014 Prize awarded to Malala Yousafzai, a teenage advocate for girls’ education and outspoken critic of Taliban violence, underscored support for youth-led, gender-focused, nonviolent resistance to extremism. Similarly, organisations like the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), winners in 2017, represent a transnational, nonviolent advocacy model employing legal, civil, and moral tools to confront existential threats. 

Rising Criticism of the Nobel Peace Prize 

However, this evolution has not been without controversy. At times, the Prize has been awarded to individuals or organisations whose contributions to peace were symbolic or aspirational rather than transformative. 

Political scientist Ronald R. Krebs praises the Prize’s ability to attract “international attention to repression,” yet he warns of its limitations. He argues that, rather than fostering peace, the Prize has sometimes hindered reform efforts, especially in authoritarian regimes where laureates have faced increased surveillance, suppression, or political backlash. Those lauded for their humanitarianism and advocacy often endure significant repercussions. 

Criticism has also targeted the nomination system’s broad eligibility criteria, which permit university professors, members of national parliaments, previous laureates, and other groups to submit candidates. While intended to ensure a democratic process, this openness has occasionally led to controversial or inappropriate nominations. For example, in 1939, a Swedish legislator nominated Adolf Hitler as a satirical gesture. Although the nomination was promptly withdrawn and never seriously considered, it sparked public outrage due to Hitler’s role in undermining peace and promoting militarism. Similarly, Joseph Stalin received nominations in 1945 and 1948, raising questions about candidate suitability. Such episodes reveal vulnerabilities within the nomination process that risk undermining the Prize’s purpose. 

Looking Ahead 

With the Nobel Peace Prize laureates for 2025 due to be announced on Friday 10 October, it is timely to reflect on the legacy this award leaves behind. While recipients are often celebrated for their remarkable impact on the pursuit of lasting peace, many face daunting challenges thereafter. 

As the discourse surrounding peace evolves, so too will the profile of those honoured. The evolution of nonviolence depends on international narratives and on individuals and organisations willing to stand firm. This prestigious award remains a unique means of recognising such commitment and plays a vital role in shaping the culture surrounding peace. 

Bibliography 

Primary Sources 

Alfred Bernhard Nobel, ‘Full Text of Alfred Nobel's Will’, trans. by Jeffery Ganellen (Paris, 27 November 1895) <https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred-nobel/full-text-of-alfred-nobels-will-2/> [accessed 23 July 2025]. 

Secondary Sources 

Källstrand, Gustav, ‘More Than a Nobel Prize: The Creation of the Nobel System’, Attributing Excellence in Medicine: The History of the Novel Prize (2019), pp.39-58. 

Krebs, Ronald R., ‘The False Promise of the Nobel Peace Prize’, Political Science Quarterly, Vol.124, No.4 (2009-10), pp.593-625. 

Nobel Peace Prize, ‘Laurates’, <https://www.nobelpeaceprize.org/laureates/> [accessed 26 July 2025]. 

Tikkanen, Amy, ‘7 Nobel Prize Scandals’, Britannica, 13 June 2025 <https://www.britannica.com/list/7-nobel-prize-scandals> [accessed 24 July 2025].