 "Then US National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho, member of Hanoi's Politburo, speak outside a suburban house at Gif-sur-Yvette in Paris after negotiations on June 13, 1973. File Image/AP")
The Nobel Peace Prize, traditionally a symbol of global peace efforts, is not immune to controversy. The 1973 award remains one of the most disputed in the prize’s history, leaving a lasting shadow over its prestige.
That year, the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded the Peace Prize to then US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and North Vietnamese negotiator Le Duc Tho for their efforts in brokering a ceasefire in the Vietnam War through the Paris Peace Accords.
This decision ignited protests and widespread condemnation, with some even branding it “the worst Nobel Peace Prize” ever awarded.
Why were Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho awarded the Nobel Peace Prize?
By the early 1970s, the Vietnam War had ravaged the region for nearly two decades, drawing global outrage and intensifying anti-war sentiment within the United States.
Henry Kissinger, serving as US President Richard Nixon’s chief diplomat, spearheaded negotiations with Le Duc Tho, a senior North Vietnamese leader, to seek an end to the conflict.
These talks culminated in the Paris Peace Accords, signed on January 27, 1973, which stipulated the withdrawal of US forces from Vietnam and called for a ceasefire.
However, the accords were a fragile arrangement. The ceasefire rapidly disintegrated as both North and South Vietnam resumed fighting. Critics argued that the agreement served more as a face-saving exit for the United States rather than a true peace deal.
Historian Asle Sveen later remarked, “It wasn’t a peace agreement but a truce that rapidly started to crack.” The fall of Saigon just two years later, in April 1975, marked the definitive end of the Vietnam War with North Vietnam’s victory.
“It’s the worst prize in the entire history of the Nobel Peace Prize,” he told AFP.
Why was it the ‘worst’ prize in the history of the Nobel Peace Prize?
The decision to award the 1973 Nobel Peace Prize to Kissinger and Le Duc Tho sent shockwaves through political and diplomatic circles worldwide. When the Nobel Committee announced the award on October 16, 1973, public outcry was immediate and intense.
The New York Times scathingly referred to it as the “Nobel War Prize,” while outraged Harvard professors addressed the Norwegian Parliament, arguing that the choice was “more than a person with a normal sense of justice can take.”
Perhaps the most significant reaction came from Le Duc Tho himself, who refused to accept the award, making him the only Nobel laureate in history to decline the Peace Prize.
In the telegram to the Nobel Committee, Tho stated: “When the Paris agreement on Vietnam is respected, guns are silenced, and peace is really restored in South Vietnam, I will consider the acceptance of this prize.”
Kissinger accepted the award, but did not attend the ceremony in Oslo, citing a scheduling conflict with a NATO meeting. His decision not to attend was reportedly influenced by fears of widespread protests.
Two years later, when Saigon fell and the Vietnam War officially ended, Kissinger attempted to return his Nobel Prize, declaring that “the peace we sought through negotiations has been overturned by force.” However, the Nobel Committee refused to take it back.
What about the Nobel Committee who selected the winners?
The fallout from the decision reached even into the Nobel Committee itself. In an unprecedented move, two of the five members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee resigned in protest over the award.
Their resignations were not only a statement against the selection of Kissinger and Tho but also against the committee chairman’s public claim that the decision had been unanimous, a breach of an unwritten rule that internal deliberations should remain confidential.
Sveen called it “a total fiasco.” Many echoed these sentiments, with critics lambasting Kissinger’s role in expanding the war into Cambodia and Laos through intensive bombing campaigns and his alleged involvement in supporting authoritarian regimes like Augusto Pinochet’s military coup in Chile in 1973.
Did the Nobel Committee know that peace would not last?
The Nobel Committee, in its deliberations, hoped that awarding the Peace Prize to Kissinger and Le Duc Tho would contribute to a lasting peace, not only in Vietnam but also to easing tensions in the Cold War.
According to Olav Njolstad, the current head of the Nobel Institute, the committee believed that the accords were a key step toward reducing East-West tensions.
However, many experts, including Peace Research Institute Oslo’s Stein Toennesson, have argued that the prize was awarded prematurely and was “a bad decision.” Toennesson, who reviewed the committee’s deliberations after they were declassified 50 years later, noted that the documents clearly showed the committee understood that the ceasefire would likely collapse.
“The prize was given to Kissinger for having gotten the US out of Vietnam … without any peaceful solution in South Vietnam,” Toennesson stated. He also revealed that Le Duc Tho was included because the committee felt it could not give the award to Kissinger alone.
John Sanness, a Norwegian academic and member of the committee who nominated Kissinger and Tho just two days after the signing of the Paris Accords, acknowledged that the future impact of the agreement was uncertain.
In his recommendation letter, Sanness stated that the award would highlight “the positive” that negotiations had at least ended the direct conflict between the US and North Vietnam. However, he admitted, “I am aware that it is only in the time ahead that it will become clear (what kind of) significance the accords will have in practice.”
Why is Kissinger’s legacy so polarising?
While some view Henry Kissinger as one of the most skilled diplomats in American history, his legacy remains deeply divisive. His realpolitik approach, characterised by pragmatism and often ruthless tactics, left him vulnerable to severe criticism.
As National Security Advisor and later US Secretary of State under Presidents Nixon and Ford, Kissinger was a central architect of US foreign policy during one of its most turbulent periods.
His critics argue that Kissinger’s policies exacerbated violence, particularly in Southeast Asia. Under his watch, the US launched devastating bombing campaigns in North Vietnam, including a massive bombing of Hanoi in December 1972 — just weeks before the peace talks were concluded.
American satirist Tom Lehrer famously remarked that the award “made political satire obsolete,” highlighting the disbelief felt by many at the time.
The decision also sparked accusations that the prize was being used to sanitise Kissinger’s record, with professors writing that his responsibility for the bombing of Cambodia, Laos, and North Vietnam disqualified him from receiving an award for peace.
In their view, Kissinger’s involvement in expanding the conflict left a trail of destruction and human suffering.
Beyond Southeast Asia, Kissinger was blamed for supporting authoritarian regimes around the world. His role in the 1973 military coup in Chile that ousted democratically elected President Salvador Allende and his tacit approval of Indonesia’s invasion of East Timor in 1975 further blackened his reputation.
Having passed away at the age of 100 in November 2023, Henry Kissinger continues to cast long shadows over global politics as the debate over whether he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize endures.
With inputs from agencies