Should Obama win the Nobel Peace Prize

[CatInASuit]

Apparently for his 9 month contribution for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples".

Ok, he has certainly captured the imagination of people out there in terms of his position as POTUS. But he hasn't made any breakthroughs in the Middle East, Iran is still heading towards being a nuclear power, North Korea is still beliigerant and will only wind up at the negotiation table after more concessions to it.

The Nobel committee have said that they support what he is trying to achieve. Yet, at this point in time, he has achieved very little on the international stage other than rhetoric.

So what has he done to deserve it?

[OtakuLoki]

Please tell me that you're joking and they seriously aren't considering him for the Nobel Peace prize. I'm generally satisfied with how he's been working since taking office, and certainly no birther, nor any other sort of hating nut.

But egads, let's at least wait til he has some kind of real achievement that can be easily pointed to.

[CatInASuit]

No, I;m not kidding.

Here

[OtakuLoki]

I didn't think you were. I'm still shocked to hear it. But I didn't really doubt you.

I hoped you were going to say it was a joke, but I didn't expect it.

[The Original An Gadaí]

I think it is a bit ridiculous that he won.

[Cluricaun]

I don’t know what, exactly, to make of it other than it’s an overture being made by the international community to affirm that relations with the rest of the world are beginning to improve simply by getting Bush out of office. It’s kind of a goofy gesture considering that no leader of a nation involved in a war of aggression should be eligible to win such a prize, but considering that it’s been awarded previously to Yasser Arafat it doesn’t really carry any gravitas anymore as an award.

[Clothahump]

I guess the Nobel committee thought that the Apology For America tours swayed the day.

Or something.

[OneCentStamp]

I voted for Obama and still support him strongly, especially in foreign policy, but this is weaksauce.

[Exy]

Seems like the sort of thing you should do after someone leaves office.

[Zuul]

Seems like the sort of thing you should do after someone leaves office.

My thoughts exactly. You don't start giving out Oscars while the films are still being shot, and his is a hell of a lot more delicate job.

[OtakuLoki]

Seems like the sort of thing you should do after someone leaves office.

I see what you're saying, of course - but it's only because it's such a vague citation that I think this should have been more along the lines of a retirement award.

I wouldn't feel so skeptical of this award if it were after some specific achievement, though. I can imagine many circumstances where an award of this prize could be easily justified for a sitting President. I've made snide comments about Teddy Roosevelt's Nobel Prize, but the least of the reasons for that is that he was still in office when he was awarded it.

[Sarahfeena]

Seems like the sort of thing you should do after someone leaves office.

Or at least after one major accomplishment. It's weird. I DIDN'T vote for him, but I feel like I have more respect for the guy than the Nobel committee does. I think it ought to be left open to the chance that he actually might accomplish something big.

[Orual]

I like Obama. I voted for him, and I agree with most of his general policies.

This is BULL-FUCKING-SHIT.

This is turning the Nobel Peace Prize into a "thanks for not being G.W. Bush" award. It's embarrassing.

[What Exit?]

I voted for him. Did a wee little campaigning for him and I see no way he was even a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize yet. I don't get it.

[NAF1138]

I woke up to this story on NPR, and at first thought I had imagined it. I had to double check with the wife that the story I was hearing was real.

The anylists were saying that it seems the real purpose of the award was to thank Obama for making America respectable on the world stage again, and to give Bush a hearty slap in the face. And it seems like this is the case. That they are giving him a peace prize simply because he is ceasing America's policy of unilateral action is more a reflection on the past administration than it is on anything Obama has done. They are essentially thanking him for stopping what they saw as America's policy of bullying the rest of the world into doing what we want.

The whole thing is very strange.

[parzival]

I think the real reason is clear: The Nobel Committee hates the moon.

I know there have been some pretty weak recipients in the past but this just really seems to devalue the award way down. I do hope and even expect Obama will be able to live up to it but they really should have waited.

[GingerOfTheNorth]

My husband awoke me this morning with "look out the window Honey, that's the world gone crazy. Barack Obama has been awarded the Nobel Prize".

As I saw it posted on a friend's Facebook feed: "I also have made significant advances in not being George W. Bush. Where's my $1.4 million?"

[What Exit?]

Thank you so much Mr. Obama for not being George W. Bush. This is such a great act that we feel the need to award you the Nobel Peace Prize.

We also would like to thank Joe Biden for not being Dick Cheney he is in the running for next year's award.

[vison]

This is meant as encouragement, not reward.

[GingerOfTheNorth]

We don't give prizes as encouragement, generally.

[NAF1138]

We don't give prizes as encouragement, generally.

Apperantly the Nobel commity does though.

Not that I am on board with this selection, I think it's totally silly, but according to the nobel commity (don't make me dig up the site, it was posted on the SDMB) the frequently award the prize to people who are starting down, what they see as, the road to peace, as a way of helping to make sure they stay on that path.

That's why people like Arafat have won the prize.

I'm not saying this time it wasn't silly, but I don't think it was the travesty that many people are making it out to be. If anything I think it shows just how fucking afraid of the US the rest of the world had become.

[What Exit?]

Apperantly the Nobel commity does though.

Not that I am on board with this selection, I think it's totally silly, but according to the nobel commity (don't make me dig up the site, it was posted on the SDMB) the frequently award the prize to people who are starting down, what they see as, the road to peace, as a way of helping to make sure they stay on that path.

That's why people like Arafat have won the prize.

I'm not saying this time it wasn't silly, but I don't think it was the travesty that many people are making it out to be. If anything I think it shows just how fucking afraid of the US the rest of the world had become.

Oh yay, Bush/Cheney made people think we were the next Hitler/Stalin didn't they?

[Cluricaun]

We don't give prizes as encouragement, generally.

You're right. By this measure I should be awarded the Nobel Prize Literature because I have an idea for a cool story about a flying dog that I'm planning on writing, but I just need a nudge in the right direction.

Not to go all tinfoiled Freeper here, but honestly after giving this some thought this morning it seems like nothing more than Europeans attempting to meddle in American foreign policy by preemptively awarding Obama the prize in an effort to all but say “Well now you kind of have to, don’t you?”

[OtakuLoki]

Speaking of which - how soon before the Freepers use this for evidence that Obama is a traitor, foreigner, or just un-American?

[GingerOfTheNorth]

That would be a ridiculous leap for them to make, but I'm not familiar with them. The man himself had nothing to do with it.

[Zuul]

Ginger, are you secretly Obama?

[GingerOfTheNorth]

Ginger, are you secretly Obama?

Yes.

[Exy]

I suppose watching you guys and the Dopers continually freak out over this over the next few weeks should be reasonably entertaining.

Europeans attempting to meddle in American foreign policy

ONE WORLDISM UNITED NATIONS THEY'RE GONNA TAKE OUR GUNS

[Cluricaun]

ONE WORLDISM UNITED NATIONS THEY'RE GONNA TAKE OUR GUNS

Looking at this as an attempt to influence policy in an indirect manner isn't the same thing jumping right into some Alex Jones style frenzy of "ZOMG EURO UN BILDABEAR WORKSHOP ZIONIST HOMO ILLUMINATI 911 SATANIST CONSPIRACY DANCE TIME!!!!"

[vison]

Tit for tat, you know. Maybe it's time "the Europeans" meddled in America's internal affairs.

[Feirefiz]

That's why people like Arafat have won the prize.

Yes, but no matter what you think of Arafat at the time he had a decades-long record and his own achievements.

And America is not Myanmar where the prize could protect and support him.

I can't help thinking that it is a weird and ultimately misguided choice.

[NAF1138]

Yes, but no matter what you think of Arafat at the time he had a decades-long record and his own achievements.

And America is not Myanmar where the prize could protect and support him.

I can't help thinking that it is a weird and ultimately misguided choice.

Oh totally, I don't disagree with that. I am just saying it isn't as weird or misguided as it seems at first blush.

Still a strange and wrong choice though.

[Inner Stickler]

Look, it's really simple. Obama could have launched a tactical nuclear strike against every other continent and overrun Canada by breakfast of his first day as Prez. But he didn't. Why? Because the man is committed to peace!

[CatInASuit]

You can tell Obama is committed to peace.

He is sending troops to Afghanistan to stop the war by winning it.

[Glazer]

You can tell Obama is committed to peace.

He is sending troops to Afghanistan to stop the war by winning it.

That's better than ending the war by losing it. To bad Afghanistan can't be won without rebuilding it from the infrastructure up.

For ten or more years the Nobel Peace Prize has been used as a tool to promote policy. Not as a reward for accomplishment.

The Peace Prize banks on the influence and respect or the Science (Real) Nobel Prizes.

[Sarahfeena]

I suppose watching you guys and the Dopers continually freak out over this over the next few weeks should be reasonably entertaining.



ONE WORLDISM UNITED NATIONS THEY'RE GONNA TAKE OUR GUNS

Looking at this as an attempt to influence policy in an indirect manner isn't the same thing jumping right into some Alex Jones style frenzy of "ZOMG EURO UN BILDABEAR WORKSHOP ZIONIST HOMO ILLUMINATI 911 SATANIST CONSPIRACY DANCE TIME!!!!"

Moderator note: No, it isn't, and Exy, you knew that. In this forum, if you don't have something constructive to say, please leave it alone.

[Hatshepsut]

It's very hard to add anything to this thread that hasn't been said already - if I may roughly characterize the majority viewpoint as "Obama is a great guy and I voted for him, but this is premature and was pretty much given to him because he's not Bush" then I agree with it.

originally posted by WhatExit?
Oh yay, Bush/Cheney made people think we were the next Hitler/Stalin didn't they?

I'm not certain whether that comment is serious or sarcastic, but I assume the latter. However - yes, as a matter of fact, that is hardly an exaggeration at all. Take it from someone who has lived in Moslem countries the whole time we were subjected to Bush/Cheney. A common topic of conversation among expatriate Americans - even those who supported his policies - was whether we should lie about our nationality and pretend to be Canadian when asked by the locals where we were from, as a matter of personal comfort and security. I do not think that the fact that Bush's policies were largely hated on the world stage is, by itself, reason to reject them, although it certainly is suggestive. But, regardless of what you think of Bush the man or the steps he took as president, it is a fact, plain and simple, that many, many people around the world came to fear and hate America because of him.

To get a little closer to the subject of the OP, it seems that a lot of these awards are given for political reasons rather than merit. My book club generally has a criterion that books we choose must have been at a minimum short-listed for a major award like the Booker Prize. I think this is a stupid rule, and we sure have read some crap books as a result.

[Exy]

A common topic of conversation among expatriate Americans - even those who supported his policies - was whether we should lie about our nationality and pretend to be Canadian when asked by the locals where we were from, as a matter of personal comfort and security.

Wow.

[Shodan]

Seems like the sort of thing you should do after someone leaves office.

Maybe the Prize committee knows something we don't.

Regards,
Shodan

[ivan astikov]

Nobody but a Republican can deny that Obama, by winning his way into the White House, has the potential to start a dialogue with America's enemies, and make allies the previous Prez could never have envisaged even speaking to.

So if awarding him the NPP encourages him even further towards those targets, then the award committee have made a good choice.

[Walker in Eternity]

Not to go all tinfoiled Freeper here, but honestly after giving this some thought this morning it seems like nothing more than Europeans attempting to meddle in American foreign policy by preemptively awarding Obama the prize in an effort to all but say “Well now you kind of have to, don’t you?”

And of course, Americans never meddle in the foreign policy of other countries at all do they?

But you have a point, this is just a reward to Obama for not being Bush.

I'm not against Obama, but he's not really been in office long enough to achive anything significant yet.

[ivan astikov]

If he was having secret negotiations with Al Quaeda, would you want to know the in's and outs of a cats arse regarding what was said, or would you just be grateful to receive the benefits?

[Cluricaun]

If he was having secret negotiations with Al Quaeda, would you want to know the in's and outs of a cats arse regarding what was said, or would you just be grateful to receive the benefits?

I’d most certainly like to know what concessions we’d be giving them, since that’s what it would have to be and by giving any quarter to Al Qaeda one would be then necessarily by definition be giving aid and comfort to terrorists, making the entire overture traitorous. Yes, I’m certain I’d like to know every single nuance of a conversation like that.

[CatInASuit]

Something interesting that was pointed out to me by a friend.

The closing date for nominations for this set of Nobel Prizes was 1st February 2009. Obama won the election on 4th November 2008 and became president on January 20th 2009.

Does this mean he was nominated on the basis of his rhetoric?

[ivan astikov]

Let's look at it another way - if you'd been awarded a NPP for whatever reason, would you want to then risk having it taken back off you? This is one way of ensuring that Obama is not allowed to wriggle out of the promises he has made to try and make this world a better place for ALL, not just the chosen few.

Remember, the NPP shouldn't be just a prize for peaceable actions, but is meant to encourage them.

ps. Has anyone ever had their NPP taken back off them?

[NAF1138]

Let's look at it another way - if you'd been awarded a NPP for whatever reason, would you want to then risk having it taken back off you? This is one way of ensuring that Obama is not allowed to wriggle out of the promises he has made to try and make this world a better place for ALL, not just the chosen few.

Remember, the NPP shouldn't be just a prize for peaceable actions, but is meant to encourage them.

That's a theory I have heard a lot in the past few days. That the Nobel comity gave Obama the prize in order to ensure that he really would open up Guantanamo,end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and stop the American policy of rendition. It's an interesting idea and would sort of explain why he was nominated less than two weeks into his term.

@CIAS re: nomination.

I have been told that it is almost trivially easy to be nominated for a peace prize and that we shouldn't read too much into when he was nominated. The process of making it to the prize comity short list and then actually winning is supposed to be more rigorous, but seemingly anyone can be nominated.

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

Something interesting that was pointed out to me by a friend.

The closing date for nominations for this set of Nobel Prizes was 1st February 2009. Obama won the election on 4th November 2008 and became president on January 20th 2009.

Does this mean he was nominated on the basis of his rhetoric?

Not necessarily. While the nominations closed on that date, the committee's deliberations took place afterwards, winnowing down the initial several hundred nominated to a small set of finalists, then weighing their suitability, a process which continued until very close to the date the decision was announced. Thus, the committee was able to observe President Obama's actions and influence over the first nine months of his presidency and take into account, for example, the dramatic shift in the world's opinion of the United States, the President's preference for and effective use of diplomacy over saber-rattling, and so forth. Even some Republicans approve of the President's approach to such thorny quagmires as the Middle East:

Senator Richard Lugar termed President Barack Obama’s address to the Muslim world a “signal achievement” and dismissed criticism by fellow Republicans that the U.S. leader was too apologetic. The speech Obama delivered June 4 in Cairo was important and necessary, said Lugar, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, noting a “lack of sympathy for our country” in many Muslim nations.
“We probably as Americans need to give a lot of speeches in the Arab world,” the Indiana senator said in an interview on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” airing this weekend.
Lugar, 77, also said Obama’s language on Iran was tough enough and was meant to reassure Arab countries, which share U.S. concerns about Iran’s quest to acquire nuclear weapons.

People seem to be forgetting that then-Senator Obama worked on the nuclear nonproliferation issue with Senator Lugar and took part in writing:

a Senate bill that authorized the president to carry out a program to provide assistance to foreign countries to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The bill does not specifically list different types of weapons of mass destruction, but we'll take as a given that it includes nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. The larger part of the legislation was a separate measure to stop the spread of conventional weapons, notably shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles that the legislation refers to as man-portable air defense systems, or MANPADS.
The bill's provisions were incorporated into a House bill that passed later that year and was signed into law in January 2007.

I do think that this is too soon, and I daresay the President agrees; he looked uncomfortable with the whole thing when he made his acceptance statement, pointedly noting that

I am both surprised and deeply humbled by the decision of the Nobel Committee. Let me be clear: I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations.

To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize -- men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.

But I also know that this prize reflects the kind of world that those men and women, and all Americans, want to build -- a world that gives life to the promise of our founding documents. And I know that throughout history, the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes. And that is why I will accept this award as a call to action -- a call for all nations to confront the common challenges of the 21st century.

[Shodan]

It would appear that Lugar deserved the Prize more than Obama, then.

Apparently the Prize committee thinks Obama has already peaked. He will never achieve anything more significant than he already has.

It's all downhill from here.

Regards,
Shodan

[Hatshepsut]

Apparently the Prize committee thinks Obama has already peaked. He will never achieve anything more significant than he already has.

It's all downhill from here.

Regards,
Shodan

It's a shame if that turns out to be correct, but it does raise an interesting question - generally speaking, what happens next to Nobel winners? Do they go on to even greater glory, new discoveries, earth-changing accomplishments? Or not?

[ivan astikov]

Apparently the Prize committee thinks Obama has already peaked. He will never achieve anything more significant than he already has.

It's all downhill from here.

Regards,
Shodan

Or, alternatively, they have endorsed his potential to truly make a difference and provide a model for world leaders to come.

It depends on your perspective, I suppose.