Ronny Tong says it is an indictment of world politics that people who openly courted the award can turn a blind eye to the suffering in Gaza

No one has courted the Nobel Peace Prize more in recent memory than perhaps President Donald Trump of the United States. In a recent surprise move, Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado, recent winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, offered to “share” the prize with President Trump, which elicited a grateful response from the latter, who said that it was a “very nice” gesture and that he would be “honored” to meet with the former. As expected, the offer invited a polite rebuke from the Norwegian Nobel committee: Sorry, the Peace Prize is not for sharing. Notwithstanding the committee’s rebuke, Machado said on Thursday that she “presented” her Nobel Peace Prize medal to Trump at a private White House meeting that day, but did not say if Trump accepted it.

We have been brought up to believe that peace means something. That the Nobel Peace Prize is apparently being treated as a baseball celebrity card suitable for political trade is perhaps as much an insult to past winners as it is demeaning to the symbol of peace. The Peace Prize was first established in 1901, and according to The Oxford Dictionary of Contemporary History, it is “the most prestigious prize in the world”. It was reported to be normally awarded annually (with some exceptions) to people who 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 congress”. However, in recent years, the Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to those who have actively promoted human rights and democracy. You may question whether peace can be readily equated with political values no matter how noble; but the fact remains that the Norwegian Nobel Committee has absolute discretion as to whom the Nobel Peace Prize should be awarded, and past awards have not been made without controversy on this score.

Without a doubt, insofar as peace is concerned, we have been plagued with at least two major armed conflicts in the last decade: the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, respectively, to be precise. The comparison, however, stops there. According to a report by the Human Security Centre, a well-respected international, nonprofit-making, independent think tank in London, in July last year, the United Nations reported 8,898 civilian deaths and 18,818 injuries between 2022 and 2024 in the Russia-Ukraine conflict with a total of between 12,000 to 15,000 civilian deaths over the entire period of conflict. This is to be contrasted with 29,092 Palestinian fatalities and 69,028 injuries just between October 2023 and February 2024 alone with a total of 71,266 Palestinians killed and 171,222 injured in Gaza up to December 2025. This is not to mention that various estimates put the proportion of child deaths to be as much as 80 percent of global child deaths in conflict zones in 2024. These painful figures demonstrate convincingly that the Gaza conflict was by far the worst human tragedy we have seen in our time. And yet, world attention appears to be far more focused on the Ukraine than the human sufferings in Gaza; at least it is as far as President Trump is concerned.

It is never possible to attribute blame in politics, especially in world politics, but human life is human life. If peace is a well-accepted international value in reducing deaths from armed conflict, then those who are committed to promoting peace should at least make a conscious effort to stop the civilian killings in Gaza. No political ideal justifies the taking of human lives, especially not when women and children are involved.

In this regard, the helplessness of the United Nations is particularly distressing. While resolutions by the UN Security Council on the Ukraine conflict have been almost consistently vetoed by Russia, resolutions on Gaza have likewise been generally blocked by US veto. Be that as it may, whereas Russia is almost universally being condemned, the world is generally more divided as far as Gaza is concerned. This is despite the fact that whereas humanitarian access in the Ukraine war theater is difficult but possible, humanitarian aide in Gaza has been downright severely restricted.

That the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to a politician last year rather than to those who risked their lives to address the devastation in Gaza speaks volumes as to the relevance of the prize in terms of value and contribution to peace. That there are people who openly courted the prize and yet turn a blind eye to the glaring sufferings in Gaza is an indefensible indictment to human nature and world politics. Such is the world we live in today.

The author is a former chairman of the Hong Kong Bar Association, a member of the Executive Council, and convener of the Path of Democracy.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.