Why Gandhi Missed the Nobel Prize?

This happens to be a very interesting question actually, and a related article appeared in the local newspaper here. Hence, I thought it would be interesting to share the clipping.

Why did Mahatma Gandhi never win the Noble Peace Prize?

It is a question people are again asking as the Norwegian committee has just announced the prize winner this year — the International Atomic Energy agency and its chief Mohammed ElBaradei. Gandhi's omission has been widely criticised to the extent that later members of the Nobel committee publicly regretted it.

When the Dalai Lama was awarded the prize in 1989, the chairman of the committee said that this was "in part a tribute to the memory of Mahatma Gandhi". Gandhi, revered as the Father of the nation in India, was nominated for the prize in 1937, 1938, 1939, 1947 and, finally, a few days before he was murdered in January 1948.

On behalf of the Friends of India Association in Norway, Ole Colbjornsen, deputy member of the Norwegian parliament, nominated Gandhi's name thrice — 1937, 1938 and 1939. In 1937, Gandhi was duly selected as one of 13 candidates on the Norwegian committee's short list.

The committee's adviser, Professor Jacob Worm-Müller, who wrote a report on Gandhi, however was very critical of the Mahatma.
"He is undoubtedly a good, noble and ascetic person — a prominent man who is deservedly honoured and loved by the masses of India...(But) sharp turns in his policies, which can hardly be satisfactorily explained by his followers. He is a freedom fighter and a dictator, an idealist and a nationalist. He is frequently a Christ, but then, suddenly, an ordinary politician."

The adviser pointed out that Gandhi was not consistently pacifist and that he should have known that some of his non-violent campaigns towards the British would degenerate into violence and terror.

Moreover, Worm-Müller expressed doubts whether Gandhi's ideals were universal or primarily Indian: "One might say that it is significant that his well-known struggle in South Africa was on behalf of the Indians only, and not of the blacks whose living conditions were even worse."

The argument that went against Gandhi in 1947 was that the Nobel Peace Prize had never been awarded for any struggle for independence.

"Labour politician Martin Tranmوl was very reluctant to award the Prize to Gandhi in the midst of the India-Pakistan conflict, and former foreign minister Birger Braadland agreed with Tranmوl. Gandhi was, they thought, too strongly committed to one of the belligerents."

The Nobel website quotes from Jahn's diary: "While it is true that he (Gandhi) is the greatest personality among the nominees — plenty of good things could be said about him — we should remember that he is not only an apostle for peace; he is first and foremost a patriot... Moreover, we have to bear in mind that Gandhi is not naive. He is an excellent jurist and a lawyer."

Committee adviser Seip commented in his very favourable report that "Gandhi can only be compared to the founders of religions."

The committee decided to make no award that year (the year of his assassination - 1948) on the grounds that "there was no suitable living candidate". The qualifying clause is the closest the committee came to honour the 'great soul'.