A Bold Peace Prize
Published in Dagsavisen
(Norway) on 9 October 2009
by Ivar A. Iversen (link to original)
Obama's peace prize could be difficult to defend in the coming months.
A gasp went through both the Nobel Institute hall and the offices of Dagsavisen when Torbjørn Jagland said the words “Barack Obama.” The name was mentioned in speculation, but few had believed that the Nobel committee would award the prize to the still-fresh president of the United States.
There are certainly arguments for this award. He is undoubtedly the person who has, on a rhetorical level, done the most to create hope for peace and cooperation around the world this last year. Jagland mentioned in particular the vision of a world without nuclear weapons. Obama recently gathered the leaders of all the veto powers in the Security Council to adopt a resolution of a nuclear weapon-free world.
An important symbolic resolution. But just that — a symbol, not real policy. Ronald Reagan had the same vision, but did not receive a peace prize. Obama probably has bigger opportunities to cut the world’s nuclear arsenal than Reagan had. But still not one missile has been removed. Obama has decided not to build missile shields in the Czech Republic and Poland, but a shield will be deployed from ships, and later on the ground in Europe.
One possibility is that this award will remain standing as being forward-looking, like Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg said. But it will be interesting to see how the award will look when Obama makes decisions that may not look so good in relation to the will of Nobel. And there could be many:
- Like sending tens of thousands of troops to Afghanistan, which might happen within a few weeks.
- Like arriving at the climate summit in Copenhagen in December without American legislation to support him, and therefore getting a lot of the blame for the failure of the historic climate treaty the world needs. That is a very likely scenario.
- Like admitting that the prison camp at Guantanamo will not be closed January 1st like he promised on his second day as president. Obama’s advisers have already sounded the alarms about that one.
- Or like taking an even more reclusive role in the faltering work for peace between Israel and the Palestinians. That could happen quickly, too. Two weeks ago, Obama tried to pressure Israel into committing itself to stop building settlements. He failed completely. Netanyahu said no. And the prospects for a credible peace process in the Middle East are worse than they have been in a long time.
The Nobel Peace Prize can give Obama’s work more momentum. But one cannot deny that it will be more of a problem when facing domestic opposition and opinion.
This is without a doubt a very bold award. It could prove to be forward-looking. But it could also be difficult to defend in the months ahead.
A gasp went through both the Nobel Institute hall and the offices of Dagsavisen when Torbjørn Jagland said the words “Barack Obama.” The name was mentioned in speculation, but few had believed that the Nobel committee would award the prize to the still-fresh president of the United States.
There are certainly arguments for this award. He is undoubtedly the person who has, on a rhetorical level, done the most to create hope for peace and cooperation around the world this last year. Jagland mentioned in particular the vision of a world without nuclear weapons. Obama recently gathered the leaders of all the veto powers in the Security Council to adopt a resolution of a nuclear weapon-free world.
An important symbolic resolution. But just that — a symbol, not real policy. Ronald Reagan had the same vision, but did not receive a peace prize. Obama probably has bigger opportunities to cut the world’s nuclear arsenal than Reagan had. But still not one missile has been removed. Obama has decided not to build missile shields in the Czech Republic and Poland, but a shield will be deployed from ships, and later on the ground in Europe.
One possibility is that this award will remain standing as being forward-looking, like Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg said. But it will be interesting to see how the award will look when Obama makes decisions that may not look so good in relation to the will of Nobel. And there could be many:
- Like sending tens of thousands of troops to Afghanistan, which might happen within a few weeks.
- Like arriving at the climate summit in Copenhagen in December without American legislation to support him, and therefore getting a lot of the blame for the failure of the historic climate treaty the world needs. That is a very likely scenario.
- Like admitting that the prison camp at Guantanamo will not be closed January 1st like he promised on his second day as president. Obama’s advisers have already sounded the alarms about that one.
- Or like taking an even more reclusive role in the faltering work for peace between Israel and the Palestinians. That could happen quickly, too. Two weeks ago, Obama tried to pressure Israel into committing itself to stop building settlements. He failed completely. Netanyahu said no. And the prospects for a credible peace process in the Middle East are worse than they have been in a long time.
The Nobel Peace Prize can give Obama’s work more momentum. But one cannot deny that it will be more of a problem when facing domestic opposition and opinion.
This is without a doubt a very bold award. It could prove to be forward-looking. But it could also be difficult to defend in the months ahead.
Next article![]( "Not Being George W. Bush Won Obama the Nobel Prize")
