Obama's Nobel Prize? Not so fast.
The Nobel committee tossed off a shocker today, giving President Barack Obama the Peace Prize after less than a year in office.
The reason? Mr. Obama's "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.”
The real reason? He's not George W. Bush.
It may be that during his tenure in the Oval Office, the President will earn a Nobel Peace Prize, but he certainly hasn't yet.
His one accomplishment so far has been putting a friendlier face on American foreign policy, and bolstering the public image of the U.S. abroad.
That's not insignificant. Europeans loathed W. And by not being W., O. has gained a lot of good will.
But the Obama Effect hasn't yet produced a single significant diplomatic or human rights victory.
Perhaps Mr. Obama's most significant action has been a concession: namely, the decision to scrap a land-based missile shield in eastern Europe.
That project was deeply unpopular in Western Europe and Russia and mothballing it may have contributed to this decision.
The Nobel committee acknowledged that "it wanted to enhance Mr. Obama’s diplomatic efforts so far rather than anticipate events in the future," according to the New York Times.
But awards of this prestige should be used to recognize accomplishment, not as lobbying tools.
Is Mr. Obama in a league with Elie Wiesel, Nelson Mandela, and Mikhail Gorbachev? Maybe someday, but certainly not yet.
Your thoughts? Comment below. (And remember, please keep it civil.)
posted by Brian Mann @ 10/09/2009 07:42:00 AM
20 Comments
20 Comments:
I read, elsewhere, that Gorbachev praised the award.
I'm sure that means so much from the guy whose tanks rolled over the Baltic states to deliver his representative to Oslo, for accepting the award.
Kudos Brian, at last a critical look at politics!
While axing the missile shield may have been popular with Russia, it was decidedly unpopular with most of Europe. The Poles reportedly felt particularly betrayed.
Winning a Nobel based on less than a month in office ( the nomination has to be in by 2/1/09 IIRC) goes to prove that it means nothing anymore. No more than a kiss from your sister. Al Gore won a Nobel for a movie of a slide show based on opinion (religion?) and not science. Mandela won one despite the thousands, including children, he and his followers murdered by "ringing" (burying your victim to his shoulders and setting a gasoline soaked tire over the head and igniting it- nice , huh?) and Gorbachev won his for giving in to Regan.
A kiss from your sister.....
I'm dumbfounded.
Bret -
The missile shield was wildly unpopular in Western Europe.
So your "most of Europe" doesn't fly factually.
Your read on Gorbachev is also pretty sketchy.
He managed to maneuver a decaying empire, peacefully, away from Cold War confrontation.
Those of us who grew up under the threat of Soviet missiles understand the practical and more significance of that accomplishment.
And suggesting that Nelson Mandela was a mass murderer? Sorry, you lost me there.
The ANC was responsible for some brutal stuff -- it was a revolution, after all.
But during that time Mandela was behind bars in an Apartheid prison.
After his release, he -- like Gorbachev -- led a society through a remarkably peaceful transition.
Gore's prize is a little more sketchy in my mind.
Someone certainly deserved to win for raising awareness of global climate change -- a phenomenon which the scientific community views as settled fact.
Was Gore the right guy? I'm not so sure.
Brian, NCPR
A-freakin-men!
I don't hate Obama bnt the decision is completely unfathomable. Especially regarding someone who's almost certain to escalate us further into the morass of Afghanistan.
My only suspicion is that maybe the Nobel committee hopes Obama will be so embarrassed by the undeserved honor that he'll actually try to live up to it.
The award was designed to help aspirants further their efforts, not be a deathbed "atta boy!"
Thus, the cash part of the award; arriving when it's most needed.
And, frankly, if he did get it for NOT being George W. Bush... that's something, isn't it?
They commented upon his "efforts" for peace. It is good to remember that Woodrow Wilson's efforts to establish the League of Nations ended up failing as did Jimmy Carter's attempt to settle the dispute between the Arabs and Israelis.
I think the award is intended to encourage and reward efforts since if no one even makes the effort we will never make progress toward peace. In that sense his efforts in contrast to the recent diplomatic climate, not just "W", are conspicuous.
The surprise, and I'll confess to a bit of surprise myself, may be best attributed to a Western obsession with results rather than effort.
It's their award. They can do whatever they want with it. Didn't they give it to Henry Kissinger once? Just because O's record doesn't fit the criteria of the NCPR prize committee...
I agree with the poster who observed that there are no criteria for the award; the committee can choose whoever they wish for whatever reasons.
It's like the baseball MVP. There have been past winners who were largely unknown to the world until the Nobel committee dumped fame upon them. It's hard to make a case that a person unknown to the general public has done a great deal to advance world peace,
Obama may come to regret the award. If he were smart, he might decline the award.
By the way, I am a bit tired of all awards from Hollywood to Sweden.
The award business is little more than a back slapping society. See how great and smart we are. We're so smart we know what's best.
Where is George Scott when we need him.
I've heard several times the comment that "nominations had to be in when Obama had only been in office about a month..."
While that's true, the voting, if I understand the process, didn't happen until very recently, so the vote was based on the direction in which the President is trying to steer the country and the world.
That being said, I agree that this prize is mostly due to the huge change in direction our leadership has taken - he probably wouldn't have gotten it had we not had the Bush Administration as a comparison.
No doubt Cheney's spinning in his casket (where he goes during the day) and crying out "We could've had world peace if only everybody had just done what we told them to do!"
ps - I must've missed the news that Mandela personally burned anybody alive. That must've been from a FoxNews pundit.
Gee, maybe it's for the beer summit.
All joking aside, it's probably his diplomatic, conciliatory approach to international matters that appealed to the judges. And it conveys that global respect which Obama has at present. Why not be happy that the President won and be proud of him as an American. (Please no birther remarks....)
After all, he has accomplished a great deal just by winning the presidency. Perhaps the judges thought that in itself was noteworthy, that it signaled that racial peace has been achieved in America.
Whatever the reason, an honor for Obama is an honor for America!
Brian- read the headlines from the European papers around the time it happened. IIRC it was the Telegram that headlined-"Obama surrenders Europe to Russia!" Maybe you have to look at more than the NY Times to get the complete story. If you want I can try and find the ones I looked at and was referred to at the time?
Gorby lost the war and the country to Regan and Bush 1. I never understood the glorification of him. I considered it a slap at the US more than anything.
BTW- I was in the Marine Corps from '79-'83 Brian. Trust me, I grew up under the shadow of the Cold War and the USSR.
Mandela was hardly an innocent. I've read reports of his early days and the carnage he lead and took part in. The man isn't and wasn't a saint. There is blood on his hands. Did he ever denounce the violence his followers committed? After it was said and done maybe, but not at the time. Martin Luther King or Ghandi he wasn't But since he was the politically correct man of the day....
Gore? Please, be serious. There's this big ball of burning gases about 93 million miles from Earth that's far more responsible for natural climate change than man. And since I know you'll disagree I'll give you the opportunity to change my mind- just give me a rational explanation of why the temps on Mars and several other planets were rising at the same time our temps were rising? I've asked this question to every global warming devotee I've met and none has been able to answer me.
Please don't start in on the "you just want to pollute the Earth" stuff. Nothing could be further from the truth. I just fail to see the logic in "carbon credits", Cap and Trade and basically bankrupting the 1st world countries while letting the 2nd and 3rd world countries continue to pollute AND sending them our tax dollars. IOW- if I have 2 choices and one involves sending all my money to the UN and AL Gore and the other doesn't- I take option 2.
dear bret,
i for one would be interested to hear more about where you're getting your information, but from what i understand, you're simply wrong on the facts.
per matt yglesias, our missile defense systems were decidedly unpopular in the czech republic and in poland -- the very countries in which they were to be built.
as for broader european opinion, i again think brian's got it right, not you. so far all you've cited is this article in the uk's daily telegraph. but that proves nothing! it's just an opinion piece by a right-wing pundit in a right-wing paper. surely you know that newspaper headlines are no proxy for genuine public sentiment.
i'm extremely skeptical of your other claims too, but i confess i lack the patience to check them out myself -- at least until you can show us some credibility. i'd be happy to have you change my mind.
Have it your way. I will admit my perception of the "anger" was heavily influenced by the reports from the Poles. Sorry, I have no training in this.
"Lech Wałesa Blasts Obama BMD Surrender
The Nobel Prize winner unloads on Obama:
“Americans have always cared only about their interests, and all other [countries] have been used for their purposes. This is another example,” Mr Wałęsa told TVN24. “[Poles] need to review our view of America, we must first of all take care of our business,” he added.
“I could tell from what I saw, what kind of policies President Obama cultivates,” the former president added. “I simply don't like this policy, not because this shield was required [in Poland], but [because of] the way we were treated,” he concluded."
"Anger in Europe as Barack Obama scraps missile defence shield,'"
The former Czech prime minister, Mirek Topolanek, said: "This is not good news for the Czech state, for Czech freedom and independence. It puts us in a position wherein we are not firmly anchored in terms of partnership, security and alliance, and that's a certain threat."
The Polish deputy foreign minister, Andrzej Kremer, saidthat Warsaw had heard from different sources there were "serious chances" the anti-missile system would not be deployed."
Even Newsweek notes it.
"...But the timing of the announcement is regarded as disastrous by the Poles. Eugeniusz Smolar, a former chief of Warsaw's Centre for International Relations, said: "We are disappointed." But he added that the Polish government had been assured by the Americans that promises of training with Patriot missile batteries and help in modernising the Polish military remained valid.
A few weeks ago, in a cri de coeur to Washington, several senior eastern European officials and public figures wrote a public letter to Obama complaining that their security interests were being ignored by the west to improve relations with Moscow."
I can go back to to other sites and get more if you wish.
Mandela is easy, lots on him. I'll spare you the grisly pics-
"Here are two photos showing the Church Street bombing. As mentioned before, in his so-called book, "Long Walk to Freedom", Mandela says that he "signed off" with this act of terrorism. People should take a look at what Mandela "signed off" with while he was in prison � convicted for other acts of terrorism! President P.W. Botha told Mandela way back in 1985, that he could be a free man as long as he did one thing: Publicly renounce violence. Mandela refused. That is why Mandela remained in prison until the F.W. de Klerk freed him unconditionally. The bottom line is that Nelson Mandela never publicly renounced violence - and we should never forget that."
"...during Nelson Mandela's trial, they found a document wherein he had said that some hideous punishment must be found for "traitors" (i.e. Blacks who actually support, work with and are friendly to Whites). In this document, Nelson Mandela suggested - cutting off their noses.
Years later, his wife, Winnie Mandela, publicised the idea of "necklacing" the traitors - which is to burn them alive. They put a tyre around their necks, pour petrol in and set them on fire."
Apparently "Ringing" is a takeoff term for "necklacing", Winnie Mandelas version of entertainment. Real nice people.
Whoops, have to do this in two parts
Part 2, aren't you lucky?
Gorby? Isn't that perception? You can call him a hero, I call him a victim of Regans plan.
Do you really want to go into Global warming?
"From National Geographic:
“Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the St. Petersburg’s Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says the Mars data is evidence that the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun.“
From MIT on Pluto
“the average surface temperature of the nitrogen ice on Pluto has increased slightly less than 2 degrees Celsius over the past 14 years.”
Since Pluto is moving further away from the Sun and continuing to warm despite that fact, it indicates that something doesn’t fit into “Solar Constant” dismissal theories.
From Space.com on Jupiter:
“The latest images could provide evidence that Jupiter is in the midst of a global change that can modify temperatures by as much as 10 degrees Fahrenheit on different parts of the globe.”
From MIT on Triton:
“At least since 1989, Triton has been undergoing a period of global warming. Percentage-wise, it’s a very large increase,” said Elliot, professor of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences and director of the Wallace Astrophysical Observatory. The 5 percent increase on the absolute temperature scale from about minus-392 degrees Fahrenheit to about minus-389 degrees Fahrenheit would be like the Earth experiencing a jump of about 22 degrees Fahrenheit.”
So there is Global Warming on at least 4 other bodies in our Solar System that co-insides with the recent warming on Earth. Doesn’t this point strongly towards the Sun or some other Cosmic force as the cause?"
I'm not asking for anyone to abandon their beliefs and switch, just to keep an open mind about what we see and hear and most importantly what we are told to believe and what may really be going on.
I would like to clarify that I harbor no racial hatred regarding Mandela. In retrospect I can see where some will rush to assume that in this day of "playing the race card". Had I been Mandela in those days I might well have fought back too. He stuck to his guns, that I can admire. But I find it hypocrisy of the highest order to portray the man as a Saint of some sort.
In the end the proof of his efforts are visible in what South Africa has become today. His quest for a Marxist paradise haven't worked out so well under his followers, eh? It's sad that no one seems to learn form the past.
dear bret,
thanks for sharing some of your sources -- though it would be even better if you could provide links, so that we could see them in full for ourselves.
regarding missile defense: of course obama's policy change upset some people in poland, the czech republic, and europe generally, especially political/public figures who had gotten behind the old policy. but their views shouldn't be conflated with the views held in the rest of europe, or with overall popular sentiment -- which, as brian said, were broadly opposed to the missile shield.
regarding climate change: earlier in this thread you wrote
just give me a rational explanation of why the temps on Mars and several other planets were rising at the same time our temps were rising? I've asked this question to every global warming devotee I've met and none has been able to answer me.
i googled "warming on other planets" and found lots of rational explanations. the climates of other planets are poorly understood compared to the earth's, so i don't think anyone is making any hard-and-fast claims. but based on what is understood, in each case, there's a more likely explanation for what's been observed than some general phenomenon that's affecting everything, including the earth, simultaneously.
Bret,
The greatest president in history's name is spelled "Reagan." You served under him. Show a little respect. Unless you meant Donald Regan.
Second, since sainthood appears to be your criterion for a Nobel, what do you think of Kissinger getting the Nobel Peace Prize? Who's responsible for more death, Henry K or Mandela?
Third, Mandela's failure in governance in South Africa had nothing to do with communism, and a lot to do with the black helicopter operations of the GATT and IMF, if you read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine."
The Nobel prize has gone from a prestigious honor to a political award. In certain fields they still seem to award the true ground breakers, in others it appears the politically correct choice is made regardless of any real accomplishment.
My apologies for dropping the "a". A trained typist and proofreader I'm not!
Kissinger? The guy always gave me the creeps, just like Mitt Romney and Larry Flynt. But at the time he was considered brilliant. Sexy too. That I never did get, but then I'm not Jill St John.
I have no clue why south Africa is in the condition it's in now. All I know is the country is in a shambles and they had all the "right people" backing their success.
HT- I fond it hard to believe there's an individual reason for each of those planets warming at the same time Earth was. It's a lot simpler for me to think the sun had something to do with it. But, I'm just a simple guy.
Post a Comment
<< Home