Yousafzai doesn’t need the peace prize

Malala Yousafzai, now 16 years old, has become an international icon for advocating girls’ right to attend schools without fear of persecution. She has delivered speeches at the United Nations headquarters, published a biography, I am Malala, and most recently, charmed Jon Stewart with an articulate interview on The Daily Show. Her fight is a global struggle: According to United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, currently 66 million girls are out of school.

Danny Razzano | Daily Trojan

Because of her achievements, many favored her to become the youngest person to win the Nobel Peace Prize, which she was nominated for this year. But on Oct. 11, the second annual International Day of the Girl, Yousafzai was not chosen as the winner. Instead, the award was given to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons for its “extensive efforts to eliminate chemical weapons.”

Many were disappointed when Yousafzai was not chosen, but they should save their frustration: Yousafzai is probably better off without the award in the first place. The Nobel Peace Prize is not worth the attention and hype that society gives it.

First and foremost, the prize itself has questionable standards. There is simply no consistent method to determining who deserves this well-known award. Alfred Nobel, the founder of the prize, stated that the peace prize would be awarded to a group or an individual that “have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies for the holding of peace congresses.”

Arguably, no committee is worthy of determining what constitutes as the “most or best work” for promoting peace. After all, it can be asserted that all individuals actively fighting for a righteous cause deserve recognition. How does one measure peace and its lasting effects? These are all issues that emphasize the subjectivity of the prize. Evidently, this would create lasting controversy when certain individuals are chosen.

Take President Barack Obama, for example. The president was awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize for “creating a new climate in international politics” and his work toward “a world without nuclear weapons.” Keeping in mind that Obama was only nine months into his first presidency, when he was selected for the award. Many noted that Obama did not make any significant steps toward improving international political climate, as all he did was travel through various states abroad and promote goodwill to different governments and their people. Some also noted that his selection was based on “popularity” seeing as he was well-received not only in United States during the 2008 election, but also among the rest of the world, which saw him as a breath of fresh air for the United States.

The Nobel Peace Prize is mediocre at best — the hype and attention surrounding the prize nomination and award simply feeds into a false sense of importance that these prizes mean something. Yousafzai does not need such an ambiguous award to further her cause. Her activism and eloquence alone have already allowed her to grab the attention of the world to regarding the issue of girls’ education.

The Pakistani teenager has a lifetime of achievement waiting for her in the future. As she develops her advocacy for girls’ rights to education, she will become a true leader, and will continue to inspire the world with her activism. Awarding her a title will simply limit her accomplishments to the achievements she has made up to this point.

Put simply, Yousafzai is too good for the Nobel Peace Prize — as a young woman who triumphed over the brutality of the Taliban, she is a champion in her own right, whose potential knows no bounds.

Shoko Oda is a junior majoring in international relations and East Asian area studies. 

Follow us on Twitter @dailytrojan