The Nobel Prize Committee has made a gross miscalculation in awarding the Nobel Prize to President Obama. Speaking to reporters, Thorbjorn Jagland, the chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee said "We would hope [the Nobel Prize] will enhance what he is trying to do." However, in awarding the Prize to the president, the Committee has risked undermining much of the president's momentum on a number of fronts by focusing supporters and detractors alike not on what he has done, but on what he hasn't. President Obama has only been in office since January, and has been tackling, for better or for worse, the economy, health care, Iran's increasingly aggressive stance, tough decisions about troop levels in Afghanistan, and the worsening situation in Pakistan. While it is true that he has reached out to the Muslim world in unprecedented ways, reengaged our allies, helped the U.S. reach a tremendous milestone in race relations, and spoken out on nuclear disarmament, he has yet had the chance to solidify gains on any major policy issue or really have the opportunity to turn his attention to issues of peace. In fact, as Afghanistan becomes increasingly discussed in many quarters as a war of choice, Obama has had to focus his attention not on peace and diplomacy, but on calculations of conflict.
Because of the selection of the Nobel Prize Committee, today many around the world are questioning whether Obama's accomplishments during his short time are deserving of this great honor. And, at a time when some are feeling disappointed that Obama's promises of change are not being fulfilled fast enough, this award may not actually be helpful to the president in the way that the Nobel Committee hopes. Rather, it may shine a spotlight on a lack of accomplishment, even for those who support the president. For those who wish to undermine him, this award will prove a fertile talking point for raising questions about whether the President will prove to be more about optics or substance. (Fox News will certainly be having an early Christmas because of this announcement.) So, in addition to having to live up to the hopes that his campaign and election raised at home and around the world, President Obama will have to earn, in the minds of many, this prematurely bestowed award.
So far, the White House has had little response to the announcement. However, if President Obama wants to assure the world that he is focused and grounded, it might benefit him to recognize that his accomplishments in fostering peace do not match up to those of prior recipients, and take the opportunity to talk about the work being done by others, and the long distance we still have to go in achieving the goal of peace. Otherwise, Obama may face a growing number of skeptics who worry that he will accept words over actions in this important arena. The Nobel Prize Committee ultimately may have given fodder to Obama's detractors, but the president can still seize this moment to demonstrate that he recognizes the difference between rhetoric and actual change.
Huffington Post: Obama's Nobel Peace Prize: HuffPost Bloggers Weigh In
Michael Moore: Congratulations President Obama on the Nobel Peace Prize -- Now Please Earn it!
In addition to 'giving fodder for detractors', The Noble Committee's own identity would seem ulteriorly motivated. Of course, angling or strategizing for world peace is not always bad, but the Noble Committee should've waited on this. Whiffs of the prize being 'rigged', are now all over the place, and maybe that’s just hearsay and may not amount to something, but still,... later - 'wins' ...and in this case,.... sooner - is just at a 'loss' .....of authenticity. (Our own President was surprised and at a loss of words when he was first told)
There is nothing wrong with winning such a highly esteemed accolade, but the timing of this, definitely is 'peculiar'. I'm sure Obama, must have thought', ".....I start trying to take basic civil responsibility for cleaning up the last administrations' garbage, and I win a Nobel?...................Uh oh, what are they really thinking?"
What Obama did, from the morning he entered the White House, was change the environment for the whole world regarding the prospects for peace, regarding peaceful diplomatic resolutions, regarding respecting world treaties and agreements, regarding respecting the peoples of the world, regarding what had til then been the hooligan use of weapons.
Obama did EXACTLY what is the mission of a Nobel Peace Prize laureate: he made straight the path toward peace.
Ms. Gans, I disagree with your assertions and simply will say that Mr. Obama is well deserving of this prize and just because YOU and others believe he doesn't deserve it, doesn't make you and them right.
This is for America, this is for us (yes, despite my screen name I'm an American citizen).
BTW, to the MSM and all pundits who insist on calling Afghanistan Obama's war. No it friggin well ain't! It's America's war and we are all invested in the President getting this right and bringing this madness that President Bush started to a close.
I'm a military spouse and I long for the troops to get the hell out of there and come home.
President Obama organized and ran for office and in the process changed an intractable worldview, allowed even the most lowly to see themselves differently and believe it or not, changed the world.
The Nobel Peace Prize is not about fixing the American Economy or stopping the war in Afghanistan. It's about much more than that!
And you know what the people in the street know it! The pundits? Their six and seven figure incomes depend on being willfully ignorant. [See Joe Scarborough and Mika "whatever"].
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/33249779#33249779
I would counter your argument that winning this award makes Obama's job harder with the thought that what it really does is challenge the American people and the diverse peoples of the world to redouble their efforts to follow where he leads towards a nuclear free world. Where nations treat each other with respect and all strive for peace.
The Nobel committee did not make a mistake with this award. But many are proving themselves unworthy of the honor this award bestows on the American people and all those that pray for peace.
Let's see, who else has been nominated [but thankfully, not chosen] by this wise and enlightened group? Hitler [ 1939], Stalin 1945 AND 1948], Mussolini [1935].
Who has NOT received the Peace Prize by this wise and enlightened group? Mahatma Gandhi [a 5-time nominee] and Popes John XXIII and John Paul.
Do we laugh or cry at these debased hypocrites? . . . I think I’ll just shake my head and do both.
Gidel nominated both the Academy of International Law AND Benito Mussolini, the former being his primary choice, again, never really in consideration, besides, in Feb '35, Italy had not attacked, invaded or in any way aggressed it's neighbors yet.
Stalin was nominated for his efforts to end World War II.
I desperately want Obama to succeed and be a 2-term president, but the timing of this Nobel only waters down the prestige usually associated with winning a Nobel Peace Prize.