This morning, much of the world is caught by surprise with the announcement from Oslo that U.S. President Barack Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
Fall is the season of the Big Prizes, especially the Nobels, and no Nobel seems to attract more attention and controversy than the Peace Prize. Certainly, there will be controversy in this case too. First and foremost, it will come from Obama's political enemies in the U.S., but this criticism should be ignored, since these opponents have demonstrated they wouldn't praise anything he does, even if Moses himself were to appear with a stone tablet pronouncing Obama the greatest human being ever known.
More justified, perhaps, will be criticisms that Obama hasn't actually accomplished much (and presumably had accomplished even less at the point shortly after his election when nominations were due). That's a fair statement, as far as it goes. But the fact is, if we review the list of Peace Prize winners of years past, that the prize has seldom been awarded to people who have accomplished specific achievements in "peace" (and certainly not lasting peace, which seems sadly elusive even after a century-plus of these awards). Instead, if there is any "theme" to the award, it seems tilted toward individuals who have demonstrated a commitment to peaceful solutions of problems, sometimes through perseverance over many years (à la Jimmy Carter), sometimes via a willingness to abandon unpeaceful habits (Arafat), and sometimes simply by their expressed intentions.
Of course the choice is subjective. I would guess that Obama's stated preference for discourse and diplomacy over might and main; his speech on race during the campaign, his address to the Muslim world in Cairo; his effort to minimize confrontation in favor of collaboration on contentious issues like nuclear nonproliferation; his move to rapidly wind down U.S. military presence in Iraq; his recognition that matters like climate change and the treatment of detainees also have implications for peace in the world -- all these have struck responsive chords in Europe, and must have appealed strongly to the Nobel Committee members.
Let's not forget the George Bush factor, either. Just as Obama probably owes his election as President to the extreme unpopularity and ruinous policies (especially in the economy) of his predecessor, he almost certainly gained an edge against other candidates because of Bush's extremely negative image in Europe. This irony won't be lost on those who supported Bush in the past but try to sweep his memory under the rug now. In fact, it will make them more vitriolic. Too bad.
We who remember how it was when we were all Americans, rather than just Democrats or Republicans, should celebrate the fact that a sitting U.S. President has been selected for this prestigious (if subjective) honor, and hope that it will in some indirect way help him achieve concrete results in the world.
Comments