Presentation Speech by Gunnar Jahn*, Chairman of the Nobel Committee, on December 10, 1945
Six years have passed since we last awarded
the Peace Prize, six years during which war has dominated the
world. These war years, in which men have fought for life and
freedom on a scale unprecedented in the annals of history, have
offered few opportunities to speak and work for peace. In this
respect they are in contrast to the years of the First World War,
when the ideology of peace not only survived but even exerted an
appreciable influence on many belligerent and neutral countries.
Nevertheless, the Nobel Committee has found some who have been
able, even during this last war, to work for the cause of mankind
and for the creation of the international organization whose task
will be to bring to reality the dream of preventing war. The
Nobel Committee has awarded the Peace Prize for 1944 to the
lnternational Committee of the Red Cross and that for 1945 to
Mr. Cordell Hull of the United
States.
The International Committee of the Red Cross was awarded the
Nobel Peace Prize on a previous occasion in the year 1917. The prize was given then while the
war was still raging; this time it is given after the advent of
peace; but in both cases it was earned by work done during
wartime. Philip Noel-Baker put
it well when he proposed that the prize be awarded to the
International Committee of the Red Cross because the Committee
«by its action throughout this war has held aloft the
fundamental conceptions of the solidarity of the human race, and
the identity of the vital interests of different nations and of
the need for true understanding and reconciliation, if peace is
ever to be brought about». In doing so, it has contributed
to the promotion of the concept of that «fraternity among
nations» referred to in Nobel's
testament.
The International Committee of the Red Cross is international in
its activities, but it is national in its composition, for all
its members are Swiss citizens. It is not by mere coincidence
that it has found its home in Switzerland whose very atmosphere
must give it vitality. For this little democracy has learned by
experience that it is not impossible to forge solidarity between
peoples of different origin.
But, as is so often the case when institutions are established,
this one, too, owes its origin to the initiative of a single man.
And today, in awarding the Peace Prize to the International
Committee of the Red Cross, we cannot but think back to Henri Dunant who was given no peace by
the horrors of Solferino's battlefields until he had made others
aware of them1. His idea can be
expressed as follows: We must try to mitigate the horrors of war,
to reduce as far as possible the number of its victims, and to
prevent as far as possible the suffering it causes. This work
must be organized in advance before war breaks out, for no one
knows where or when war will come; and it must be organized on an
international scale. In this way we shall also invoke and develop
the spirit of brotherly love which will oppose war in the most
telling manner. It is on this idea that the work of the Red Cross
is founded.
Since he wrote this, many of his ideas have been realized. After
its modest beginning in 1863 under the auspices of the Societe
genevoise d'utilite publique [Geneva Society for Public Welfare],
the organized work he mentions has been solidly established
through the Red Cross, and the Geneva Convention of 1864 has made
it possible to carry on the work during war2. And so, in some respects, the work has been
made international, but here as in so many other fields it has
been difficult to awaken the spirit of brotherly love.
I shall not elaborate here on the development of the
International Committee of the Red Cross, on the more highly
organized form it took through its statutes of 1921 and in
subsequent years, on its function as a link between the National
Red Cross Societies, or on many other aspects of it. It is on its
work during the wars that I would like to concentrate. The first
really great test to face the Committee came during the First
World War. Its task could be said to be twofold: it had, first,
to ensure that the provisions of the Geneva Convention were
observed and, second, to forward information concerning prisoners
of war and so on, and to give help where help was needed. We have
to admit from the outset that the first task was not an easy one
and that the protests from Geneva in most cases produced meager
results. The second task, on the other hand, was carried out
successfully during the First World War and contributed in a
large degree to lessening the suffering of prisoners of
war.
During the Second World War, its activity has for the most part
been similar in nature, but its scope has greatly increased and
has gradually been extended to new fields.
The Committee's principal mission during the last war was to
serve as a comprehensive information center on prisoners of war.
This has been not only an arduous but also a very extensive
undertaking. With the war still fresh in our minds, we can
appreciate more than ever before what it means to be able to
obtain news of the fate of a father, a brother, or a friend. And
even more important, what it means to have an organization that
can transmit correspondence between prisoners of war and their
relatives. It was first and foremost the Committee which
undertook this work. Another service which was of much greater
importance during this war than during the first, was the
distribution of parcels to prisoners of war, both those from
relatives and also the collective parcels which were paid for
partly by the belligerent powers and partly by contributions
collected in various other countries. I should mention here that
the Committee arranged for the distribution of, in all, several
hundred thousand tons of goods. Its work in this field on behalf
of prisoners of war was truly immense.
But prisoners of war were not the only ones to receive aid nor
were they the ones who needed it most. In greater need were the
other prisoners, the civilian prisoners or the «political
prisoners», as the Germans liked to call them. Their
treatment and fate are so well known that I shall mention them
only briefly. They were without legal rights, and there was no
international agreement giving the International Committee of the
Red Cross the right to intervene on their behalf. It was,
moreover, difficult to achieve anything in the face of the Nazi
regime in Germany. Not until the winter of 1942-1943 did Germany
authorize the Committee to send parcels to political prisoners;
and shipping could not be started until the fall of 1943, and
then only after many difficulties. Eventually, however, it did
reach proportions which made it possible to save many
lives.
While this work was being successfully pursued, the Committee
encountered such great difficulties in the other parts of its
activities that the results fell short of its expectations. I
refer particularly of course to the pro raised against
infringements of international law relating to the treatment of
prisoners of war. During this war, just as in the previous one,
such protests rarely had any effect. In contrast, the inspection
of prisoner-of-war camps, carried out by the Committee's
delegations, proved to be effective although no inspection was
possible of camps in Russia or Japan, or of Russian
prisoner-of-war camps in Germany and the occupied countries,
because neither Russia nor Japan had ratified the Prisoners of
War Convention of 1929. This shows that full benefit can never be
derived from a convention unless it achieves universal
acceptance. Needless to say, the Committee was unable to inspect
the concentration camps in Germany or in the countries under its
occupation since Germany considered them an internal political
matter.
Another great service accomplished during the last war concerned
the exchange of prisoners. Although such exchanges were
admittedly initiated by the belligerents, the value of the
contribution of the International Committee of the Red Cross
cannot be overstated.
Mere listing of the activities of the International Committee of
the Red Cross cannot give a true picture of its significance;
this lies fundamentally in the fact that human lives have been
saved and in the feeling of solidarity engendered by help that
has penetrated the iron walls erected by war.
On behalf of the Nobel Committee of the Norwegian Parliament, I
have the honor to present the Peace Prize for 1944 to the
International Committee of the Red Cross for the great work it
has performed during the war in behalf of humanity.
* Mr. Jahn,
also at this time director of Norway's Central Statistical
Bureau, delivered this speech at the Nobel Institute in Oslo on
December 10, 1945. The translation is based on the Norwegian text
in Les Prix Nobel en 1945. At the end of his address Mr.
Jahn presented the prize for 1944 (reserved in that year) to Mr.
Max Huber, who had recently retired from the active presidency of
the International Committee of the Red Cross and who was present
as one of the two official representatives of the Committee the
other being Col. Chapuisat, who, the next day, delivered the
Nobel lecture.
1. Jean Henri Dunant (1828-1910),
co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize for 1901. For his Solferino
experience and the plan that grew out of it, see biography, Vol.
1, p. 6.
2. See biography of Dunant; for
details and the text of the Convention, see James Avery Joyce,
Red Cross International and the Strategy of Peace (London:
Hodder & Stoughton, 1959), pp. 247-249.
From Nobel Lectures, Peace 1926-1950, Editor Frederick W. Haberman, Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1972
Copyright © The Nobel Foundation 1944