I am shocked that the Nobel prize for Economics has gone to American economist Professor Thomas C Schelling for his work in applying mathematical theory with regards to international relations especially in the balance of power between nuclear weapon states.

While micro-economics is an absolute science, macro-economics is not, and any attempt by economists to apply scientific theory to a human behavioural model is a form of fascism which must be rejected.

The implications in attempting to explain human behaviour in terms of pseudo-science is an attempt to destroy the uniqueness of the human race. There are no hard and fast rules for human interaction.

While the theory presented by the Nobel laureate for Economics may have some truths in Western ideals and mentality, the world is a much more varied place. The Nobel Prize Committee should choose its winners from amongst scientists whose research benefits mankind - not Machiavellian-type theorists who attempt to laud the benefits of brinkmanship and imperialism.

Professor Schelling has dedicated his life to explaining the science of conflict and peace. His conclusions such as crediting the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as the reason for peace in the world is offensive.

Not to mention his insinuation that the spread of nuclear technology as being detrimental to the US' competitive edge in international dealings and trade. This indicates an ulterior motive and an ill-intention designed to pave the groundwork for sanctions against Iran for pursuing nuclear technology.

Furthermore, the winner of the Nobel Prize for Peace this year - the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and its director M El-Baradei - are also related to halting the spread of nuclear weapons.

The choice of Nobel prize winners for Peace and for Economics clearly highlight the trend towards non-disarmament by the existing nuclear states and the requirement of non-proliferation for nations with oil wealth so that they can be forced into subjugation.