War and Peace, According to Obama

Published in Le Monde
(France) on 10 December 2009
by Pierre Rousselin (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Sarah Repucci. Edited by June Polewko.
It is rare for a Nobel Peace Prize winner to receive the award while advocating for a “just war” conducted to defend world harmony. In the face of the controversy provoked by his prize — granted even before he had accomplished anything — Barack Obama could not be satisfied with conventional thanks.

A double trap was set for him. First, he had to accept the praise of the prestigious jury gracefully, but without getting hooked by giving the impression of taking advantage of a popularity that is much greater abroad than in the United States. Next, he had to distance himself from the pacifistic aspirations of the Nobel in order to not leave himself open to criticism from those who believe his consensual approach to international problems is naive.

Thus Barack Obama took advantage of the platform that was offered him to deliver one of his trademark seminal speeches. Resorting to force is “not only necessary but morally justified” because “evil does exist in the world,” he explained, responding to those who find his vision of the world too idealistic.

To meet the objective of differentiating himself from his predecessor, he responded to the doctrine of “preventive war” that was so imprudently applied in Iraq by George W. Bush. For Obama, war must be waged while following “certain rules of conduct” that distinguish us “from those whom we fight” and allow the West to defend its values, hence his decisions to prohibit torture and close Guantanamo.

His speech also contained a warning to Iran, though nothing bellicose. “Those regimes that break the rules must be held accountable. Sanctions must exact a real price,” he said, acknowledging that pressure would only be effective when the world is truly united.

The award of the Noble Peace Prize, under controversial circumstances, has allowed Barack Obama to elucidate his thinking on a subject as serious as war and peace. Once again, his comments are unfailingly destined to satisfy everyone a bit, from supporters of human rights to defenders of national security; but after the speech is finished, it is his actions for which Obama will be judged.


Guerre et paix, selon Obama
Par Pierre Rousselin le 10 décembre 2009
Il est rare qu'un Prix Nobel de la paix reçoive sa distinction en se faisant l'avocat des « guerres justes » à mener pour défendre la concorde mondiale. Face à la controverse suscitée par ce prix, octroyé avant même qu'il ait obtenu de résultat, Barack Obama ne pouvait se contenter de remerciements convenus.

Un double piège lui était tendu. Il lui fallait, d'abord, accepter de bonne grâce les éloges du prestigieux jury, mais sans se prendre au jeu et sans donner l'impression de profiter d'une popularité bien supérieure à l'étranger qu'aux États-Unis. Il lui fallait, ensuite, se démarquer
des aspirations pacifistes des Nobel, pour ne pas prêter le flanc aux critiques de ceux qui jugent naïve son approche consensuelle des questions internationales.

Barack Obama a donc profité de la tribune qui lui était offerte pour prononcer un de ces discours fondateurs qui sont sa marque. Le recours à la force peut être « nécessaire et moralement justifié » parce que « le mal existe sur la terre », a-t-il expliqué, répondant à ceux qui trouvent trop idéaliste sa vision du monde.

L'objectif restait de marquer sa différence avec son prédécesseur, en apportant sa réponse à la doctrine de « guerre préventive » si imprudemment appliquée à l'Irak par George W. Bush. Pour Obama, la guerre doit être menée en suivant « des règles de conduite » qui « nous distinguent de ceux que nous combattons » et permettent à l'Occident de défendre ses valeurs. D 'où sa décision d'interdire la torture et de fermer Guantanamo.

Il y avait aussi dans son discours une mise en garde à l'Iran, mais rien de belliqueux. «  Les nations qui brisent les règles du jeu doivent être tenues responsables de leurs actes. Elles s'exposent à des sanctions qui doivent avoir un prix réel », a-t-il dit, tout en reconnaissant que la pression ne serait efficace que lorsque le monde serait vraiment uni.

L'attribution du prix Nobel de la paix, dans des circonstances controversées, aura permis à Barack Obama de préciser sa pensée sur un sujet aussi grave que la guerre et la paix.
Une fois de plus, son propos sans faille est destiné à satisfaire un peu tout le monde, des partisans des droits de l'homme aux défenseurs de la sécurité nationale. Mais, après le temps des discours, c'est sur ses actes que sera jugé Obama.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Spain: Global Trumpism Is Running Out of Steam

South Africa: 1 Strait and 2 Gulfs: The War of Leverage

South Korea: President Trump and the Avignon Papacy

Japan: Manned Space Exploration Needs To Demonstrate Japanese Technology

Germany: The Internal War in the Pentagon*

Topics

Spain: The Danger of Political Violence

Saudi Arabia: The Bullet, the President, and the Battle for the Image

Austria: Gulf War in Limbo

Canada: As Trump’s America Steps Back, Xi’s China Moves In

Canada: Charles Shows Power with Soft Diplomacy

Venezuela: The World Turns

Related Articles

Saudi Arabia: A World without NATO… What Would It Look Like?

Israel: Faced with Diplomatic Impotence, War against Iran Is Legitimate

France: Donald Trump’s Dangerous Game with the Federal Reserve

France: Trump Yet To Make Progress on Ukraine