News that President Barack Obama had been awarded the 2009 Nobel Prize for Peace stunned the world today. He has been in office less than nine months, leads a country involved in two ongoing wars and has yet to bring about the end of any of the world's many extant conflicts. His conservative political opponents in the United States derided the choice, ascribing it to his "star power," in the words of Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele. Michael Binyon of the London Times called the decision "absurd" and a "mockery." See the NY Times account here.
Obama himself, in a brief Rose Garden statement, said, "To be honest, I do not feel I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who have been honored by this prize..." He said he was "surprised and humbled" by the award and would accept it as "a call to action" and an "affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations." So how are we to make sense of this?
We do that by taking a look at things from the perspective of the rest of the world. This choice was a sigh of relief on behalf of many in the world community. The world's most powerful nation had literally been frightening people of good will around the globe for several years. In a large sense the Committee's award was a repudiation of Obama's predecessor and the direction he was leading the United States and the world. What was the world community to make of the planet's erstwhile champion of rights and human values engaging in torture, "disappearing" suspects, scoffing at climate change, treating other nations with ill-disguised contempt, militarizing one problem after another, showing a smug and superior attitude in dealings even with its allies, refusing to even talk to those with whom it had disagreements, starting a war and justifying it by obvious lies and having a second in command who openly spoke of working "the dark side" in pursuit of his aims?
The Nobel Committee, in its statement, praised Obama for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen diplomacy and cooperation between peoples," and said he had "created a new international climate." Committee Chairman Thorbjorn Jagland said, "The question we have to ask is who has done the most in the previous year to enhance peace in the world. And who has done more than Barack Obama?" He likened the selection to that of German Chancellor Willy Brandt in 1971 for his "Ostpolitik" diplomatic outreach to Communist-ruled Eastern Europe. The fall of Communism there was not to come for another eighteen years but the thaw may well have begun with Brandt's initiative.
Obama has ordered an end to torture, passed fuel efficiency and cap and trade legislation, offered an open hand to the Muslim world in June in Cairo, started talks with Iran and North Korea, begun winding down American involvement in Iraq, has taken steps with Russia on nuclear proliferation, speaking recently in Prague of "a world without nuclear weapons," brought China into the Korea talks, has begun an initiative in the Middle East and is reassessing U.S. policy on Afghanistan and Pakistan. As his recent election rival John McCain observed today, "I think part of their decision-making was expectations. And I'm sure the President understands that he now has even more to live up to."
The Nobel Committee is the latest to evidence what most of the world has felt about Obama from the start of his campaign, that his election would signal something very different and healthy in the psyche of the American populace and a commensurate positive change in the way his country was ready to relate to the world. He has not disappointed so far. Just think of where American diplomacy and the international climate were one year ago. And indeed, who has done more in the past year to foster world peace than Barack Obama? Obama has barely begun to scratch the surface in terms of bringing about international accord in his less than nine months in office. But he has restored the one indispensable element to getting it off the ground--hope. From where things stood a year ago, that in itself is an achievement to be celebrated.
3 comments:
Perhaps the Nobel Committee believes in the power of positive thinking? Now Democrats can pride themselves on the fact that we have elected two presidents in a row who have won a Nobel! Maybe to make Rush Limbaugh feel better they can award GWB an honorary "Nobel Prize for Most Books Read by Leader During Moment of Foreign Attack."
Mr, Natoli,
Thanks for writing such a positive piece on President Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize. It's really refreshing hearing something positive on this. I agree Pres. Obama is also deserving of this award, but it's way too odd to hear on the news that this is a bad thing for him or it could possibly be a bad thing for him. People should brighten up and look in retrospect of where we were this time last year.
I agree, guys. Just today comes word the Republican National Committee, in a letter signed by their Chairman Michael Steele, is trying to fundraise based on Obama's winning the Nobel Prize. The letter, asking for $25 to $1,000 checks for the RNC, raises fears of, "the Democrats and their international leftist allies" and continued, "truly patriotic Americans like you and our Republican Party are the only thing standing in their way."
Exactly. Standing in the way of an America the world actually likes, and a president the world actually admires and looks up to, for a change. Rather different than when their guy was in the White House, isn't it? Those sour grapes can really make your mouth pucker.
Post a Comment