Peace or politics?

Obama was an unlikely recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, but so were many others
Megan Stiles, Cavalier Daily Viewpoint Writer

Opinion
October 14, 2009
Source: www.cavalierdaily.com

President Barack Obama has recently been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize amid a great deal of controversy. He received the award on his 262nd day in office, a truly astonishing feat considering the deadline for nominations was a mere 12 days after he had been inaugurated. The committee who selects the recipient praised their choice saying that “only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future.”

The Peace Prize is awarded by the Norwegian Nobel Committee, which is comprised of five members who are appointed by the Norwegian Parliament. All of the current members are either former or present members of the Norwegian Parliament. This is not the first time the committee’s selection has been met with controversy. Other past recipients who created a stir include Henry Kissenger, who, among other things, played a key role in the controversial bombing of Cambodia during the Vietnam War. Another is Cordell Hull, former U.S. Secretary of State who was awarded the Prize in 1945 for his role in crafting the United Nations. Cordell famously advised President Roosevelt to deny entry to the S.S. St. Louis which was carrying Jewish refugees fleeing the Nazis. After also being denied entry in Cuba, the ship eventually returned to Europe where many people onboard were eventually victims of the Nazis. The committee has also been criticized for failing to recognize five-time nominee Mahatma Gandhi, the nonviolent leader of the Indian Independence movement. Also, the fact that the members who comprise the selection committee are all politicians, had led to criticism that some of the selections are nothing more than political statements. Many have theorized that the selections of Jimmy Carter and Al Gore were simply statements regarding the unpopular foreign policy of then-president George W. Bush.

In Alfred Nobel’s will he proclaimed that the Peace Prize should be awarded to the person who “shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reducing of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.” So what exactly has President Obama done in such a short time to deserve such an award? The Committee argues that the decision was based primarily on his work to achieve a nuclear-free world, in particular his desire for the United Nations to pass a stronger Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. While nuclear-free world may (or may not) contribute to a more peaceful world, the fact that Obama is the head of a nation currently conducting two wars seems to have been forgotten by the committee. Just 17 days after the deadline for Peace Prize nominations, President Obama approved sending 17,000 additional troops into Afghanistan. Since Obama became president, there have been an estimated 886 civilian deaths in Afghanistan and 2,629 civilian deaths in Iraq. In its press release, the Committee praises Obama for strengthening “democracy and human rights.” Yet, 262 days after being inaugurated, there are still dozens of prisoners being held in Guantonamo Bay without charges, trial dates, or hope of being released. At the beginning of the year, the president signed an executive order vowing to close Guantanamo Bay by the end of the year but even the White House admits this goal is unlikely to be met.

Obviously President Obama’s selection was met with both criticism and praise. Nobel Laureate Jimmy Carter said that Obama’s selection “shows the hope his administration represents not only to our nation but to people around the world.” While hope can be a powerful thing, which President Obama does bring to a lot of people, should we really be giving awards for effort instead of results? Siv Jensen, the opposition party leader in Norway, believes results are more important. “It is just too soon,” she said. “It is wrong to give him the peace prize for his ambition. You should receive it for results.”

There is plenty of reason to be surprised or even outraged at the selection of President Obama as this year’s Peace Prize recipient, but before we take to the streets in protest, let’s take a minute to remember what the award really is. Yes, the award is generally respected and admired all over the world, but it is chosen by five politicians from Norway. Just imagine if the committee were composed of the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Mitch McConnell. No doubt people would be just as upset at the choice of these prominent members of Congress, which according to Gallup boasts a whopping 31% approval rating. So, yes, President Obama’s selection was undeserved, but let’s remember that the recipient is selected by five normal politicians. The president has simply joined a long list of people who were most likely awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for political reasons rather than their peace-seeking efforts.

Megan Stiles is a Cavalier Daily viewpoint writer. Her column runs on Wednesdays.