Fredrik Heffermehl

23. september 2020

Fredrik S. Heffermehl
Tlf.: +47 917 44 783, fredpax@online.no

Oslo 21. september 2020
Den norske Nobelkomite
Henrik Ibsens gate 51, 0255 Oslo

Vurdering av testators intensjon og måloppfyllelse i Nobelprisforvaltningen

Min forskning om Nobels «prisen for fredsforkjempere» har nå pågått i 13 år og resultatet er nylig gjort tilgjengelige for et bredt publikum i boken “Medaljens bakside” (Sandnes 2020). Konklusjonene er alvorlige.

Testamentet ble aldri fagmessig tolket og aldri fulgt, det har skjedd en omfattende krenkelse av rettighetene til de mottakerne Alfred Nobel ønsket å støtte. Nobelkomiteen har gitt allmenne fredspriser til mange fine mottakere, men dette hjelper lite så lenge den fortsetter å motarbeide de visjonene og den løsning det var Nobels intensjon å støtte.

Jeg har gjennom to år forsøkt å komme i dialog med Nobelstiftelsen og Nobelkomiteen om resultatene av min forskning, både for å følge Gandhis prinsipp om å ikke overraske motparten og for å få gitt tidlig informasjon til de ansvarlige for forvaltningen av Nobels siste vilje. Etter flere avslag av å møtes må jeg skrive dette brevet i stedet.

I en slik dialog ville jeg ha understreket hva som er den grunnleggende og eneste agenda for mitt arbeid, nemlig å få gjennomslag for ideen bak Nobels fredspris (s. 13 i boken). Det er begått store feil i fortiden, men det som teller for meg er vår fremtid, å få slutt på en livsfarlig sikkerhetspolitikk på autopilot.

Ved å få tilgang til Nobelkomiteens interne arkiver gjenoppdaget jeg en bortgjemt og glemt idehistorie, 120 års alternativ tenkning om fred og nedrustning. Dette alternativet kunne ha endret verdens bane og skapt fred. Dessverre har de ideene Nobel ville støtte blitt fortrengt og fortiet som følge av de militære kreftenes innflytelse i politikken, i Norge og i andre land, og også i Nobelkomiteen.

I vår tid, med rask temperaturøkning, arter som dør, skogbranner, tyfoner og ekstremvær, is-smelting, økt havnivå, flyktningestrømmer, pandemier, fare for sosialt og økonomisk sammenbrudd, er fler våpen det siste menneskene trenger. Vi har helt enkelt ikke råd.

Alle de reelle truslene mot vår overlevelse betyr at fortsatt kapprustning er den komplette galskap (s. 99-104/Klassekampen 12.09.2020). Ikke noe enkelttiltak kunne bety mer for å møte truslene enn å samarbeide om global nedrustning.

Jeg mener at det fins en latent, sterk og dyp lengsel blant de aller fleste mennesker etter å bli befridd fra en ytterst dystopisk verdensorden. Et «Ned med våpnene»-samarbeid mellom nasjonene – slik Nobel ønsket da han opprettet prisen – er ikke bare verd å forsøke, å virke for dette er komiteens selvsagte plikt, juridisk og moralsk, etter Nobels testament.

I arbeidet med «Medaljens bakside» fant jeg et omfattende nytt bevismateriale som gir vesentlig sikrere og mer presis forståelse av Nobelkomiteens oppgave og plikter (s. 39). Hovedpunkter i denne mer dyptgående tolkningen av Nobels vilje følger som vedlegg.

Med hilsen

Fredrik S. Heffermehl

Vedlegg.
Cc: Nobelstiftelsen, Stockholm

EPOST fra Fredrik S. Heffermehl til Nobelkomiteen 21.09.2020

HOVEDPUNKTER I TOLKNINGEN AV NOBELS INTENSJON:

Det mest grunnleggende nødvendige i formåloppfyllelse, formidling og effektiv realisering av Nobels intensjon, er en faglig forsvarlig utredning av Nobels intensjon med testamentet. Dette oppfordret jeg i Aftenposten 14.08.2007 de norske forvalterne til å gjennomføre. Intet skjedde, selv etter et pålegg fra det svenske stiftelsestilsynet 21.03.2012. Derfor har jeg selv påtatt meg å utføre den utredning arveloven forutsetter.

Korrespondansen mellom Alfred Nobel og fredspioneren Bertha von Suttner inneholder et rikt bevismateriale om formålet med testamentets ord om prisen for fredsforkjempere. Her er noen viktige konklusjoner om Nobels mening og den norske forvaltningen av testamentet:

  1. Nobels hovedintensjon var å støtte samtidens ideer om en kursendring vekk fra militær kappestrid til å unngå krig gjennom samarbeid om folkerett, internasjonal organisering og avskaffelse av nasjonale militære rustninger.
  2. Det har i alle år sviktet i å skille mellom politikk og et lovregulert ansvar fastlagt i lovene om testament, stiftelser og om forvaltning av betrodde midler. Valget av medlemmer til Nobelkomiteen faller utenfor Stortingets oppgaver etter grunnloven. De folkevalgte er her undergitt lovene «som enhver annen som påtar seg rollen som testamentsfullbyrder». I dette har forfatteren støtte både fra juridiske professorer og en tidligere justitiarius i HR, Carsten Smith.
  3. Stortinget vedtok i 1897 å påta seg oppgaven med å utpeke en komité på fem til å dele ut prisen, men i presidentskapet ble det i stillhet besluttet å se bort fra testamentets ord om nedrustning. Den norske forvaltningen startet altså med å forkaste selve kjernen i Nobels hovedintensjon, et grovt brudd på lovens regler om forvaltning av betrodde midler.
  4. Den fremragende juristen Bernhard Getz, Norges første riksadvokat, la, som leder av den første Nobelkomiteen, stor vekt på en selvstendig komité og uavhengighet av Stortinget. Ved hans død ble Jørgen Løvland, en ledende stortingspolitiker, ny komiteleder. Han ville knytte prisen nærmest mulig til Stortinget og bruke den som redskap for norsk sjølstende- og utenrikspolitikk. Norges frigjøringskamp fra unionen med Sverige gir bidrag til å forklare hvorfor Nobels intensjon med prisen aldri ble realisert.
  5. En faglig forsvarlig tolkning av testamentet burde ha vært foretatt i starten, men ble aldri foretatt. I stedet valgte komiteen å utforme sitt eget fredsbegrep, den har fritt tolket sine egne selvvalgte ord, «fred» og «fredsarbeid». Det er bare funnet to tilfelle (uttalelser i 1905 og 1910) hvor Nobels egen intensjon har vært målbåret av de norske forvalterne av prisen.
  6. Tolkning av testamenter er å finne testators hensikt, uavhengig av hvilke ord som ble anvendt. Min seneste tolkning av Nobels intensjon har avdekket en grunnleggende svikt i oppgaveforståelsen. Hovedoppgaven var ikke var å velge en prisvinner, den beste i bunken av nominerte, men å sikre at tildelingene ble brukt aktivt til å fremme den løsning på sikkerhet som Nobel ville støtte med sin nedrustningspris.
  7. Forutsetningen i testamentet om at Stortinget ved sine valg til Nobelkomiteen skulle utse de beste til å realisere Nobels hovedintensjon er ikke blitt oppfylt; i stedet har Stortinget like til det siste latt sine egne medlemmer dominere komiteen, utforme prisens innhold, og gjøre prisen til Stortingets egen. Etter de to første tiårene har det bare sporadisk vært ytet et visst monn av rettferd til de legitime mottakere fra fredsbevegelsen.
  8. Selv om Nobels fredsvisjon har hatt begrenset støtte i norsk samfunnsliv, har Stortinget, Nobelkomiteen, Nobelinstituttet og dets konsulenter hatt en juridisk plikt til å opptre lojalt mot hva Nobel selv ønsket. Stikk i strid med dette fant jeg i Nobelkomiteens interne dokumenter både motvilje og forakt mot de ideer og personer prisen skulle tilgodese. Boka viser konkret frem de best kvalifiserte; gjennom en full presentasjon av de som egentlig skulle ha mottatt prisene får man et vidt utblikk over alternative fredsideer i de siste 125 år.
  9. Utredningen munner i Del II ut i en analyse av nedrustningsarbeidet i FN. Ut fra sikker erfaring kan man si at dette arbeidet ikke gir fremgang. I utredningen forklares hvorfor dette arbeidet er nødt til å feile og det fremmes noen ideer om nye tilnærminger, som bruk av New Diplomacy og muligheten av at verdens byer kan ta føringen. Norge tar fra nyttår sete i Sikkerhetsrådet. Ved en kombinasjon av to elementer med sammenfallende målsettinger, Nobels fredspris og FN-pakten, kan Norge gi en lenge etterlengtet håndsrekning til verdens beboere som trenger en langt bedre organisert verden – snarest mulig.

Fredrik S. Heffermehl
21.09.2020

Related Posts

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...

Recent Articles

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...

TFF on Substack

Discover and subscribe to more peace materials on TFF Substack

Most Popular

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Read More
Living-Peace-Sign-Budapest-copy
Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
b54a1f10-8c65-4f0b-9dd5-4abc0a7d04cc_2659x2659
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
010
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Screenshot 2026-10-02 011738
Jan ObergPhD, director, The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, TFFLund, Sweden October 2, 2026 This is my full original manuscript. The Chinese Academy of Social Science, CASS, makes two publications out if it. 1. China’s Five-year plan emphasized the capabilities of basic research and original innovation. It is regarded as the goal of the future social development, which, as required, should be significantly enhanced. Can you comment on the importance of original innovation in research and academic study? I believe it is easier to define “original innovation” in the natural sciences than in social sciences. The breaking points of what constitutes something new, or innovative, are not quite as sharp in the latter. But in both fields it is about opening up something that was closed, unseen, unexplored before – making manifest what was earlier latent. Innovations come in many forms and shapes – naming something that was not...
arctic-circle-map
The agreement is catastrophic both because of what it says and what it doesn’t mention. It reduces further the major asset of security policies: Freedom of action. Jan Oberg TFF director September 25, 2026 A couple of hours before the agreement was signed on September 22, 2026, I published the following 13 hypotheses about what it would most likely contain on TFF Substack (in English). I was wrong on only the first point. Contrary to what Trump had written on his Truth Social platform, it does not appear to come into force immediately. In fact, it turned out to be worse than even I had anticipated. After these hypotheses now come a number of reflections in light of what the agreement actually contains, and does not contain, as well as the way in which it has generally been presented by major media outlets and by the public-service broadcaster DR. My...
girl-5894831_1280
Below are TFF-related media mentions, comments, videos and social media posts published elsewhere but not on this homepage. We happen to catch and list only a fraction. Regarding video comments and debates, we recommend that you go to the TFF Video Channel on Substack where many of them are reproduced. Jan Oberg is a contributor to China Daily – 52 million daily clicks – and Global Times, CGTN and CCTV (the national television), China Investment, Xinhua News Agency and several others. Articles and videos on these media very often multiply into countless Chinese (and Western media) that re-post them from these main media. Thanks to The China Academy, his analyses, interviews and comments are frequently posted on YouTube channels such as Thinkers Forum and Wave Media. These videos are often re-posted on Bilibili (China’s YouTube), the China Content Center on TikTok, and on the Chinese edition of TikTok, Douyin.com. This means reaching hundreds of millions of viewers worldwide over a year. While there are too many to catch on all these...