Guaranteeing peace and security to all the people of the world is one of the greatest dreams of the modern civilization. The Noble Prize for Peace was instituted for appreciating and encouraging the efforts of an individual or organization to promote the idea of peace on an international level. The committee awarding the prize will have to consider various factors before identifying the most deserving person or organization for the coveted honor.

Last month the Nobel Peace Prize Committee awarded the prize for the year 2005 to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and its Director General Dr. Mohamed Mustafa El-Baradei.

Baradei is the second Egyptian to win the Nobel Prize for Peace after President Anwar Sadat who won the honor in 1978 in recognition of his contribution to the Middle East peace by signing a peace agreement with Israel. The other Egyptians to win the Nobel prizes were Naguib Mahfouz for literature in 1988 and Dr. Ahmad Zawel for chemistry in 1999.

Briefing the media, the Norwegian Nobel committee said that the prize has been awarded to IAEA and its director general in recognition of their tireless efforts to guarantee that atomic energy was used only for peaceful purposes in a risk-free manner and it is not diverted to military fields. They were selected from 199 individuals and organizations. The committee noted that the atomic watchdog and its director general have been working without fear or favor.

Everyone need not agree with the decision of the Nobel committee or appreciate its action. However the choice has been welcomed by most countries and organizations in the world. This is not to forget that some doubts over El-Baradei’s worthiness for the prestigious honor has been raised by some quarters.

The opposition is largely motivated by political considerations. One of the first critics was the Japanese nominee for the prize, Shanji Ya Majoshi, one of the few survivors of Nagasaki that along with Hiroshima was the target of the devastating American atom bomb attacks on Japan at the end of World War II. He blamed the Nobel committee for sidestepping him for fear of inviting the wrath of America which considers itself the sole power responsible for the control and distribution of nuclear warheads.

At about this time the British newspaper Independent published an article on the past winners of the peace prize with the comment that El-Baradei is the man who challenged Bush and won. Washington was very much against extending the term of El-Baradei as IAEA director general. Renewal of his term is considered a slap on the face of the US president.

The newspaper further said that El-Baradei had dared to declare that the US justification to invade Iraq was false. The British newspaper added that the recognition of International Atomic Energy Agency and its director general by the Nobel authorities amounts to a warning to George Bush and Tony Blair against launching another war on flimsy grounds, this time against Iran.

Israel objected to the Nobel committee’s selection because Al-Baradei is an Egyptian who called for monitoring the nuclear capabilities of Israel.

He also wanted Israel to disclose its nuclear arsenal. Israel’s Deputy Premier Shimon Peres, father of the Jewish state’s nuclear bomb, launched an attack on El-Baradei and the Nobel committee saying: “Of course El-Baradei is an admirable personality but the choice is not at all ideal. There are several flaws in the functioning style of the IAEA including the treatment of the Iranian nuclear issue.”

There are of course shortcomings in the functioning of the atomic agency such as letting Israel go ahead with its nuclear programs without any monitoring or inspection by the UN agency.

Israel is now a member of the nuclear club in all but name. It has a stockpile of more than 200 nuclear warheads of varying strike power — all because it could continue its clandestine nuclear programs without UN monitoring.

In spite of its shortcomings the IAEA and its Director General El-Baradei deserve the prize. Weapons of mass destruction are a threat to the survival of all of us and everything needs to be done to prevent its proliferation. There is an urgent need for reformulating the rules for the control and monitoring of the nuclear technology. It should be fair and just to win global approval.