When I flipped on NPR this morning, within moments of rolling out of bed, I was informed by the Morning Edition team that my very own President, Barack Hussein Obama, had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Flip on, flip out.
I don’t think anyone I know was anticipating that. Lot of lost bets, I’d imagine…
Anyway, I’m shocked, and apparently many others are, too. I’ve had to stay away from FB and other media this morning, but I have no doubt they’re all buzzing, whether in celebration, rage, or bemusement. I’d like to raise the discourse a little on the subject, as I fear cable news will play the Saint or Demon? game, and there will be a lot of unwarranted fist-pumping or -shaking.
So, today’s FFT might be less “fun,” but I am genuinely interested in hearing from our readers about their reactions–not so much yay-or-nay referendums on the honoree or the committee, but rather, what exactly it is that the committee has bestowed the award for. Certainly, in the 100+ year history of the Nobels, people have won for different reasons, which vary in legitimacy, depending on who you ask.
The Nobel Committee’s statement is as follows:
The Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.
Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama’s initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.
Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population.
For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world’s leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama’s appeal that “Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges.”
That’s officialese. What’s really going on here? Is Obama seen as a national leader of promise who thus should be honored (and his power strengthened)? Do they see him as the guy under whom the financial crisis that’s wreaking havoc all over the Global North (and elsewhere, of course, we’re all connected) will be remedied by his “socialist” interventions? (ONE OF US! ONE OF US! (GABBA GABBA WE ACCEPT YOU!) Are they awarding his (in)famous “working across the aisle” ethos? Might it be a way to increase the global pressure on Obama to deliver on his various campaign promises? Or are they just so so glad he’s not GWB?
Weigh in, oh Brainy Ones!
I think he owes GW Bush half his prize money.
I, for one, am supporting the “so glad he’s not GWB” theory.
@Spark: The “thanks for lowering the bar, dude” payoff?
Also, HRC could use some recognition for grinding away in the trenches. It’s his vision for world peace, but she’s spent a lot of time on the road kicking ass and taking names in order to make it happen.
Being better than Bush on foreign policy is not exactly the achievement one dreams of receiving the Nobel Peace Prize for, I’d imagine. Poor Barry.
In that the rest of the world seems to hate us a lot less, and are perhaps less likely to incite violence on our behalf, he has certainly brought some peace.
But if one can get a peace prize for simply envisioning a world without nuclear weapons, a global response to global warming, and well, world peace, then myself, and a number of former Miss America contestants should count ourselves nominated for next year’s prize.
In seriousness, I do hope we look back on the award on perhaps premature, but ultimately, not without merit. I am ever the optimist. Maybe the Swedes are too.
Norwegians, I mean. Norwegians.
Kenya must be so proud!
/snark
I don’t feel strongly either way. I’m sure there were other worthy candidates. Whatever; it’s mostly spectacle. I’m just sick of the wailing and gnashing of right-wing teeth.
Okay, this is where I put the “I Am Not American” hat on, scroll by if that infuriates you.
In response to Carly: from my discussions with Canadian friends and with other friends from the UK/Australia/France/Germany/the Netherlands, I kind of feel like sure, the world likes Obama a lot. Liking America a lot is going to take a bit more time. I think weirdly a lot of foreigners think of Obama as a fluke, rather than as proof that “America” has changed.
At the level of foreign policy, of course, the man is important. But I feel like he’s going to lose some of that if the shutting down of Guantanamo doesn’t happen a lot faster, or they don’t come to some kind of accord on Kyoto and a number of other issues that the US has been slow (since before GWB!) to come to the table on.
Could this have been a move to put Obama’s feet to the fire?
SarahMC, after thinking about it I kind of think it was. Sort of like, “we like you dude. Now put your money where your mouth is and shape your country’s attitude up.”
@SarahMC: Could be. Certainly it raises expectations even higher.
PSoul: I think those of us in America who voted for him fear the election was a fluke, actually. It wasn’t the die-hards like ourselves who put him over the edge in terms of the election – we’re pretty much always going to vote Dem since it will, at the very least, be the lesser of two evils. It was the elusive “middle America” who voted him in – folks like my aunt, who doesn’t think much about politics, certainly has never heard of the concept of “privilege,” is a devout (read: judgmental) church-going Ohioan who very rarely votes Democrat but felt Obama offered hope for positive change. She voted for the “feeling,” but she sure hasn’t changed, nor have the other members of that branch of my family. They’re still running their mouths in emails about how people without healthcare have a moral imperative to “take care of themselves,” not smoke, not be immorally fat, etc, because THEY don’t want to pay for someone else’s poor health decisions (as though it can be boiled down to such a binary and, as lamented frequently in these parts of the internet, as though people without healthcare don’t have it because they’re bad, and therefore don’t deserve it anyway).
I guess I’m kind of rambling here, but I definitely agree it’s too early to say whether a sea change is coming to the US. I think the Nobel was awarded to Obama in the hopes of encouraging that change, giving it the momentum it seems to be losing here in the US. And if it works, then by God I will consider it to have been a wise move, a move beneficial to the world as a whole. The Nobel as an aspirational award is bizarre, but again, if it works, I applaud the foresight of the committee.
Totes am with the “feet to the fire” contingent. As well as something we may be overlooking: it was a reward for the person who seemingly started to change American culture, for the better. His win gives many more people HOPE – not just us ‘mericuns.
I think it was probably part “thank god you’re not GWB” and part “get your shit together and do it, dude.”
But I think it is at least partly a recognition of the way his election kind of made everyone breathe a little. Like, when GWB was around, I feel like he put everyone–American, especially, but also everybody else–on edge. Like the world was a rubber band stretched really tight and about to snap, and it was that’s man’s decision of whether to flick it, pull it tighter, or let it go. Releasing that pressure that everybody felt helped relieve the actually dangers posed. Americans were no longer getting notices about the threat level turned up to neon orange-green, and the rest of the world didn’t have to worry so much about whether the US was going to bomb somebody or, to quote Ani DiFranco stick it’s dick in the sand of someone else’s desert. Less posturing, less feeling under attack, means that we can now go a little more slowly and, hopefully, not keep blowing shit up. It’s like, you took the weight of this pressure off so we wouldn’t all be so prone to jump at the slightest hint of danger. Now actually reduce the danger altogether, mmkay?
I think it’s probably two things: an effort to encourage him to pursue his chosen course, and to strengthen him in the face of strong opposition.
Unfortunately, I’m afraid that it will backfire, especially as the second point is concerned: I can see it being made out by the Right to be just another example of how Obama is Un-American (read: too europhile) and Socialist and a Celebrity who is Famous for Nothing.
On the other hand, a friend from Germany sent me an email saying how glad she was about it, because he really does send a signal of hope for the whole world, and I suppose that really is true, too.
Still, I have an uneasy feeling about the whole thing. I’m worried it will increase the pressure on him.
I was really excited and genuinely pleased to hear the news this morning, once the initial “FOR REALZ?!” response wore off.
I do think, by merit of being elected, he has changed the global perspective of America, and that is really, really important, imo.
I see it as a move, on the Nobel Committee’s part, to influence international peace, relations, and policy in a new way. Rather than reward and encourage someone when they have already accomplished amazing things, why not throw their weight behind someone who is in the early changes of trying to accomplish shit.
And, as you have all said, it puts pressure on him to follow through on his promises.
Overall, the whole thing gives me warm fuzzies.
early stages* of trying to accomplish shit
i think the American people deserve the Nobel Peace Prize
Esther, I think I heard one of the commentators say that exact thing on NPR this morning – we’re the ones who voted for him, we’re the ones who gave the order, so it should go to us, not our figurehead. Not sure I totally agree with that but I definitely see the point.
@Esther: unfortunately, I know enough un-peaceful Americans that I have to say I totally disagree.
@Becky – when discussing the award with friends last night, the role that HRC plays in bringing a different diplomacy has been somewhat overlooked.
That said (and maybe I should put the “I’m not an American” tag in this post as well) I think the Nobel prize is in part about hope for the future, that seems to transcend one country.
With that said, I think the Nobel committee sees this hope for the future exhibited by the peoples of the world, and is now providing extra recognition for him to deliver on election promises, especially in the arena of international relations.
@Mackey: Well put, my Aussie sister! It seems childish and simplistic to say “ooh, he gave us HOPE.” But shit, if you don’t have it, absolutely nothing ever gets accomplished.
I saw in a British paper that the nominations had to be in by early February and, therefore, he had only been in office about two weeks. At that point it hadn’t been long enough to accomplish much – except to not be Bush/Cheney.
I think it should have been shared by him and his Secretary of State, HRC.
i think that one of the problems with a lot of the analysis i’ve heard/seen is that it still presumes that the international community was thinking of the united states, rather than the international community, when they made their choice.
if our economy can bring the global economy to its knees, it’s a measure of what our military means to global stability.
for all the bush-cheney years meant to those of who live in the us, the damage to those who live abroad is much greater. obama’s campaign was the beginning of a national shift, and his election literally means lives. i like the old british saying that there is only an inch of difference between Labour and the Tories, but in that inch, we survive. for many third world people Obama is a gap that is the difference between life and death. he not the only one, but he is one.
For those who don’t subscribe to the barrage of Obama emails, here’s a snippet from the one concerning the award:
“To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who’ve been honored by this prize — men and women who’ve inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.
But I also know that throughout history the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it’s also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes.”
I can see how the committee might have thought that awarding him the prize would reinvigorate some of the “yes we can” global optimism that seems to have waned since the election. Personally, I feel almost more cynical now than I did when Bush was in office. I really like Obama. He’s always struck me (perhaps naively) as a good, decent man who honestly believes in working together to make our country and the world a better place. Yet much of what Ive seen since his election signals to me that very few people in power are truly interested in following suit, especially many in our Congress who continue to preen and bicker just like nothing’s changed. I know politics is slimy. But now I am starting to believe that to get anything done you have to be an unabashed bastard asshole. And whether any given constituent sees this as an evil or a virtue just depends on what side of the political spectrum he/she is on. Maybe we are too big and too divided to do anything but waffle every few years between one party or the other, getting little done as we go.
-Debbie Downer
I was on the road all day and this was quite a surprise. Since when does the Nobel Committee give prospective peace prizes? We’re all happy to be rid of King George and his evil minions, but let’s be real. We’re still in Iraq. We’re now contemplating a significant increase of troops (read: the sons and daughters of Americans) in a country no one has ever defeated. We’re still violating human rights by keeping Guantanamo open. We are choosing not to pressure Netanyahu to cut it out already with the settlements by refusing to use the most effective weapon we have-cutting off the money. And on and on.
I worked for Obama and voted for him. But he has got to understand that happy thoughts and good intentions go nowhere in this evil world. If he can’t shove his own party into line, how is he going to manage the Iranians, North Koreans, Pakistanis, Chinese, Russians and the rest of the world’s troublemakers?
Tallgirl, I’m with you. I hope someday Obama lives up to this prize, but right now it’s just posturing by the Nobel committee. If you want to snub American writers, that’s one thing, but really, we’e got enough political grief here already.
i wasn’t saying that he doesn’t deserve it or that he shouldn’t be considered for one.
I can’t quite put my finger on why this conversation bothers me. HRC is really doing all the heavy lifting? His voters should get some of the credit? Really? Really?!?!?
“His voters should get some of the credit?”
I can’t really wrap my brain around that either. Does that apply to all elected officials who win a Nobel or just Obama & Americans? In other words, hell no.
@Ceejee: Since Obama hired HRC, her work is part of his, so I would have to agree with that critique of the comments. However, it’s hard to argue with the reality that Obama just hasn’t done very much as yet compared to what previous winners have accomplished. That’s why I understand the comment about the voters who put him in office.
If you agree that this prize is really for bringing a change of direction to a country whose actions influence the world, then the comment is saying that it’s the people who saw the problems with the Republican world view and caused it to be voted out of power who are the real cause of the change.
I think he won it for his June speech addressing the Arab nations in Egypt, ‘A New Beginning’(I know the noms were in February, but the decision wasn’t made until later.) Here in America, we probably cannot grasp what an amazing, world-changing effect this had – after centuries of abuse by the West, I believe the Arab world was genuinely stunned by what this American President said. Since the Middle East is arguably the biggest threat to World Peace right now, I think the award makes perfect sense.
@Diziet_Sma – that address was pretty amazing. I read the transcript after the address, and was amazed at the sentiments expressed by Obama.
Enjoyed all your comments. It is great to get so many intelligent viewpoints in a single forum. Kudos.