Written by Ann
In a decision that surprised many, the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded President Barack Obama the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on October 9th. Obama was honored for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” Reuters described it as “a stunning decision that honored the first-year U.S. president more for promise than achievement.”
I have to agree. My reaction when I heard the announcement was, “For what?” Had I missed the accomplishment that earned the President this honor? Just over a year ago, many people were still not sure Barack Obama had enough experience to be President of the United States. He did not run on a long list of accomplishments. He ran on change. I have no doubt he is working hard, but he’s only been in office 9 months. I would not have expected him to have done much to earn a Nobel Peace Prize this soon, so I am surprised that the Nobel Committee would have awarded the honor to him. As an American, I am always proud when our President is honored. I really do wish I knew why he earned this award, though.
What are your thoughts?
Loading ...
Comments
13 Responses to Promise or Achievement?
The Nobel Committe picks the recipient months before it is given. President Obama would not have been in office very long. I think this was purely symbolic, which(imo) diminishes the award. It is kind of like giving the Heisman trophy to the college football player that might have the best year next year.
I’m going to stay out of this one. I don’t think he did much to earn it but the award was also given to Jimmy Carter and Al Gore. So, my respect for the reward as a whole is not exactly overflowing.
It is for what Barack Obama may do, not what he has done. President Obama, of course, is not at fault here and if anything it puts him at a disadvantage. How can he make decisions for our future with this award hanging over his head? Who nominated him for this?
Yeah, not to sound all conspiracy theory-like but this seems to be a message from the world to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan. The problem with just leaving Afghanistan is that no country has been successful there yet. Leaving would be tantamount to defeat and would embolden the Taliban.
President Obama, of course, is not at fault here and if anything it puts him at a disadvantage. – Pam
I agree. I wonder if he wishes it weren’t given to him. I heard a snippet of his speech after the award was announced and he was very humble. I think he understands that many or most people will think he doesn’t deserve it (yet).
That said, the award is what it is. The Nobel committee has a more liberal political ideology than many Americans. I don’t think we need to feel pressured to change our military strategy (such as pulling out of Afghanistan), but I also think the award signifies, in a small way, that the international community sees positive developments in our approach to other nations. I think there is a fine line to be walked between putting the interests of our own nation first and being a peaceful and cooperative member of the international community. I personally think Obama has made some positive steps in the right direction, but realize not everyone here sees it like that.
Lastly, I have to disagree w/Erin on this one – I think Jimmy Carter did definitely deserve the prize.
I agree with Anya (surprise, surprise!) – the award may seem premature, and in a way I agree that it is, but there is precedent for the award being given as an impetus for people the committee feels are on the right track to continue on that path.
It is a bit distressing to me to see so many people who had previously espoused the “my country, right or wrong/the President must be respected” POV so angry about the honor. Over the weekend I heard a conservative radio show host insist that Obama was a “laughingstock” for having received the award. Which, first of all, I don’t believe – people who love him are thrilled that he got it, people who hate him are furious that he got it, and those of us in the middle are somewhere in the middle – some combination of bemused, confused, proud and nonplussed. Second, as Pam pointed out, it’s not Obama’s “fault” that he received this honor. I think he’s been appropriately humble about it and has pointed out that there is much work to be done. I wish him the best of luck on it.
The way I understand it, nominations for the award were closed two weeks after he took office. . . . two whole weeks.
Carter was not one of our better presidents but he won for his Habitat for Humanity efforts (I think). Gore for his environmental efforts, maybe. I think the award is starting to be a little celebrity-driven. Didn’t Bono get one too? Not that these people don’t deserve to be recognized but in the past it seemed to go to brilliant minds and people who gave their lives for causes (Ghandi, Mother Teresa). I do know, however, that if I ever won a Nobel award, I would never wish I had not won!! I would cherish it until I died, and I certainly would not care what anybody who never had a chance to win one thought about it. I would never apologize.
The way I understand it, nominations for the award were closed two weeks after he took office. . . . two whole weeks.
Okay, but to be fair, that was just nominations – I’m not sure when the actual decision was made, but presumably more recently. So, fair or not, he wasn’t being judged on two weeks worth of work. It’s my understanding that anyone can nominate someone for the Nobel Peace Prize (please correct me if I’m wrong).
I swear my buddy, my pal Jennie- I’m not trying to argue. But I’m confused. If he was nominated for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples”- two weeks after he took office……. how was it not for those 2 weeks? Did he do something I’m unaware of before that?
I just read Thomas Friedman’s take on this published in the New York Times on October 10th. I think if Obama took his advice he’d score with everyone. Here’s what Friedman suggested Obama say (expanded text in NYTimes here):
Let me begin by thanking the Nobel committee for awarding me this prize, the highest award to which any statesman can aspire. As I said on the day it was announced, ‘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.’ Therefore, upon reflection, I cannot accept this award on my behalf at all.
But I will accept it on behalf of the most important peacekeepers in the world for the last century — the men and women of the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps.
Ann, Obama can’t do that now – they’ll say he cribbed from Friedman!
Sam, I may be understanding the process wrong. I had assumed that Obama was nominated by whoever two weeks after he took office, but that those who voted to give Obama the prize were allowed to consider events after the nomination, up until the fairly recent past. I don’t know, but that’s the only thing that makes sense to me. Otherwise, I’d have to say that the award is more to the American people, for voting Obama into office, more than anything else.
Obama has started a lot of things and has announced many things he would like to accomplish while he is our President but he hasn’t completed anything. I do not think he should have received the award yet.