A Prize for Hope, Dialogue and the Future

President Barack Obama is a worthy winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. The award is also one of the boldest in the history of the prize. Obama has had the most powerful elected office only since January 20th. In less than nine months in The White House, he has formulated a series of ambitious goals, but has not had the time to achieve results in the good causes he is working on. The declaration was only a few minutes old when this objection was delivered. Even if we understand the argument, it is a narrow point of view.

This year’s peace prize is first and foremost a push for a political philosophy where the United States is again declaring that it is an equal member of the international society. It means that the most powerful nation in the world not only has rights, but also duties, as part of the community. Such a duty is absolutely necessary, if peace is to be secured and the global challenges in climate, the environment and fighting poverty are to be solved. Here Obama has already delivered a fundamental contribution by breaking with the entrenched belief in American unilateralism that dominated American foreign policy under President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

The significance of this change in course from the unilateral to the multilateral can hardly be overstated. America was heading into isolation that not only made the world more dangerous, but also weakened the country’s reputation and influence. The background to Obama’s current position is that more and more Americans are realizing that this policy was leading in the wrong direction.

Even if the contrast to Obama’s predecessor is important to understand this award, the Nobel committee has in its justification for this award met the argument from the American right that the award is nothing but another attack on Bush. The committee is especially pointing to Obama’s radical new thinking of a world free from nuclear weapons, which could push for a new round of widespread disarmament talks. This initiative is also deeply founded in the last will and testament of Alfred Nobel.

This year’s peace prize is the first since Thorbjørn Jagland took over as leader of the Norwegian Nobel Committee. The choice of Obama separates itself from many recent awards, where the honor has been bestowed on relatively unknown individuals. We can only think as far as the Kenyan environmentalist Wangari Maathai in 2004; and Mohammad Yunus, the micro-financing pioneer from 2006. The prize is also different from last year’s award that went to former Finnish Prime Minister Martti Ahtisaari and the former American President Jimmy Carter in 2002. In these cases the award came as a lifetime achievement award.

There is absolutely nothing new in the committee attempting to influence political processes under development. The famous award for the German critic Carl von Ossietzky in 1935 had a clear intention of putting the spotlight on the Nazi regime’s ever more hard-handed oppression. The peace price has also focused on resistance to apartheid in South Africa, the fight for human rights in the former Soviet Union and the work for peace in the Middle East in recent years. In the last case there are still challenges awaiting this year’s winner.

Obama inherited two wars from his predecessor. The military engagement in Iraq is now under termination, while the president and his advisor are standing in the middle of a major study of what will happen in Afghanistan. In addition, the worst economic setback since the 1930s might derail all of Obama’s plans for the future. The potential for failure is great, not least because the president has turned hope and optimism into his central message. If the results are not coming, it could all end in bitter disappointment.

The Nobel Committee is taking a significant risk with this award, and will be criticized for it. But we do appreciate that the committee under Jagland’s leadership has the courage to choose something other than the safe and bland. Obama has the potential to change international politics for an entire generation.