An Ignoble Prize & Liu Chan’s Calligraphic Comment

Contra Trump

貪天之功，以為己力

The Norwegian novelist Knut Hamsun was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1920. Later, when he became a staunch supporter of the German Nazis and a collaborator with the traitorous Vidkun Quisling in Norway, Hamsun sent his Nobel Prize medal to Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi minister of ‘public enlightenment’, as a gift.

Nobel controversies go back to Alfred Bernhard Nobel, the prizes’ founder who was known to have become ‘rich by finding ways to kill more people faster than ever before.’ It is believed that he created the eponymous prize in part to burnish his legacy.

The Nobel Peace Prize, awarded yearly since 1901, has included a number of dubious laureates, as well as controversial nominees:

  • Benito Mussolini, the Italian Fascist dictator was nominated in 1935, the same year he invaded Ethiopia.
  • Adolf Hitler, Reichskanzler of the Third Reich, was nominated by E.G.C. Brandt, a member of the Swedish parliament, in 1939 as a protest against the nomination of British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain that year.
  • Joseph Stalin, leader of the Soviet Union, was nominated first in 1945 and again in 1948.

After German pacifist Carl von Ossietzky was awarded the 1935 Nobel Peace Prize, Adolf Hitler banned all Germans from accepting Nobel Prizes.

In 1974, Le Duc Tho and Henry Kissinger, were jointly awarded the peace prize for their work to end the Vietnam War. Tho, however, had the decency to refuse the honour saying that ‘peace has not yet been established.’ The US mass murderer Kissinger had no such scruples. Nor, indeed, does the budding latter-day Nazi Donald J. Trump today.

China established the Confucius Peace Prize 孔子和平獎 as an alternative to the Nobel Peace Prize after Liu Xiaobo was awarded a Nobel Prize in 2010. Despite an attempt by China’s Ministry of Culture to ban the prize in September 2011, the original organisers re-established the award under the aegis of the China International Peace Research Centre. Recipients of the award were: Vladimir Putin in November 2011; Kofi Annan and Yuan Longping in 2012; Fidel Castro in 2014; Robert Mugabe in 2015; and, Hun Sen in 2017. Beijing denied any connection to the ongoing fiasco and the prize committee was subsequently disbanded.

***

The chapter of Contra Trump features a calligraphic comment by Liu Chan 劉蟾 on the fiasco surrounding the award of the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize. The Chinese rubric of the chapter comes from a line in Zuo Zhuan 左傳: 竊人之財猶謂之盜，況貪天之功以為己力乎 — ‘To purloin another’s wealth is theft, isn’t taking credit for someone else’s achievement of the same order?’ In his calligraphic couplet and the explanatory note, Liu also comments on the murderous developments in Iran.

Things did not end with Machado’s cringe-worthy supplication to the American president, nor did his possession of a Nobel Peace Prize assuage his boundless sense of grievance. We conclude with an essay by Anne Applebaum titled Trump’s Letter to Norway Should Be the Last Straw.

— Geremie R. Barmé
Editor, China Heritage
18 January 2026

***

Liu Chan in The Other China:

Liu Chan’s work also features in:

Selling Out without Trading Up

María Corina Machado presented Donald Trump with her Nobel peace prize medal on 15 January 2025. Photograph: Daniel Torok/The White House/Reuters

***

Dasheng Liu Chan’s calligraphic comment on the fiasco at the Oval Office on 15 January 2026 and the recent slaughter of protesters in Iran

Source:

***

***

‘Regardless of what may happen to the medal, the diploma, or the prize money, it is and remains the original laureate ‍who is recorded in history as the recipient of the prize.’

— Nobel Institute, January 2026

***

***

***

Trump’s Letter to Norway Should Be the Last Straw

Anne Applebaum

 

Let me begin by quoting, in full, a letter that the president of the United States of America sent yesterday to the prime minister of Norway, Jonas Gahr Støre. The text was forwarded by the White House National Security Council to ambassadors in Washington, and was clearly intended to be widely shared. Here it is:

Dear Jonas:

Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America. Denmark cannot protect that land from Russia or China, and why do they have a “right of ownership” anyway? There are no written documents, it’s only a boat that landed there hundreds of years ago, but we had boats landing there, also. I have done more for NATO than any person since its founding, and now, NATO should do something for the United States. The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland. Thank you! President DJT

One could observe many things about this document. One is the childish grammar, including the strange capitalizations (“Complete and Total Control”). Another is the loose grasp of history. Donald Trump did not end eight wars. Greenland has been Danish territory for centuries. Its residents are Danish citizens who vote in Danish elections. There are many “written documents” establishing Danish sovereignty in Greenland, including some signed by the United States. In his second term, Trump has done nothing for NATO—an organization that the U.S. created and theoretically leads, and that has only ever been used in defense of American interests. If the European members of NATO have begun spending more on their own defense (budgets to which the U.S. never contributed), that’s because of the threat they feel from Russia.

Yet what matters isn’t the specific phrases, but the overall message: Donald Trump now genuinely lives in a different reality, one in which neither grammar nor history nor the normal rules of human interaction now affect him. Also, he really is maniacally, unhealthily obsessive about the Nobel Prize. The Norwegian Nobel Committee, not the Norwegian government and certainly not the Danish government, determines the winner of that prize. Yet Trump now not only blames Norway for failing to give it to him, but is using it as a justification for an invasion of Greenland.

Think about where this is leading. One possibility, anticipated this morning by financial markets, is a damaging trade war. Another is an American military occupation of Greenland. Try to imagine it: The U.S. Marines arrive in Nuuk, the island’s capital. Perhaps they kill some Danes; perhaps some American soldiers die too. And then what? If the invaders were Russians, they would arrest all of the politicians, put gangsters in charge, shoot people on the street for speaking Danish, change school curricula, and carry out a fake referendum to rubber-stamp the conquest. Is that the American plan too? If not, then what is it? This would not be the occupation of Iraq, which was difficult enough. U.S. troops would need to force Greenlanders, citizens of a treaty ally, to become American against their will.

For the past year, American allies around the world have tried very hard to find a theory that explains Trump’s behavior. Isolationism, neo-imperialism, and patrimonialism are all words that have been thrown around. But in the end, the president himself defeats all attempts to describe a “Trump doctrine.” He is locked into a world of his own, determined to “win” every encounter, whether in an imaginary competition for the Nobel Peace Prize or a protest from the mother of small children objecting to his masked, armed paramilitary in Minneapolis. These contests matter more to him than any long-term strategy. And of course, the need to appear victorious matters much more than Americans’ prosperity and well-being.

The people around Trump could find ways to stop him, as some did in his first term, but they seem too corrupt or too power-hungry to try. That leaves Republicans in Congress as the last barrier. They owe it to the American people, and to the world, to stop Trump from acting out his fantasy in Greenland and doing permanent damage to American interests. He is at risk of alienating friends in not only Europe but also India, whose leader he also snubbed for failing to nominate him for a Nobel Prize, as well as South Korea, Japan, Australia. Years of careful diplomacy, billions of dollars in trade, are now at risk because senators and representatives who know better have refused to use the powers they have to block him. Now is the time.

***

Source:

貪 tān, ‘greed, corrupt, venal, avarice’, in the hand of Lou Ji (婁機, 1133-1211)