Obama and the Nobel Peace Prize

It's extremely difficult to make an absolute call on whether Barack Obama was deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize this year. It comes somewhat as a surprise considering the short length of time he has held office, and even more surprising when you realise that at the time he was nominated, he had been President for only two weeks.

Whether or not he was a good choice depends on a number of criteria, although at the most fundamental level it is worth taking a look at the Will of Alfred Nobel, which states that the recipient of the Peace Prize ought to be "the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses".

To begin with, Obama had the colossal advantage of being the political successor to George W. Bush, whose gross unpopularity and incompetence was apparent to many Americans and virtually all people outside the United States. So, in a rather oblique way, he managed to become a point of commonality and unity amongst a wide range of people from all parts of the world. However, despite his campaigning point of promoting multilateral diplomacy, the goal of reducing standing armies does not appear to reflect his recent actions; it seems 34,000 extra troops will be headed to Afghanistan next year, for example.

On top of this, it's arguable that there were far more deserving winners of this year's peace prize - Morgan Tsvangirai (Zimbabwe's prime minister) and Hu Jia (a prominent critic of China's human rights abuses) immediately come to mind. Obama, by his own admission, was undeserving. The Nobel Committee is undoubtedly aware of the exposure it can create in awarding a prize, and it would've likely been far more effective in the pursuit of genuine peace to highlight work done by an individual who would otherwise remain relatively obscure compared to Obama. Presumably they were hesitant to risk offending Robert Mugabe or China - personally I believe that no concession or concern should be given to such groups that would react in a petulant or arrogant manner.

Regardless of whatever criticisms are directed at this choice of recipient, most could agree that the Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to far more controversial and undeserving figures such as Henry Kissinger and Yasser Arafat. So, whilst it can arguably be said that Barack Obama has contributed comparatively little to world peace, any criticism of him as a Peace Prize recipient falls short in light of what the aforementioned men have been responsible for.

Links:
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/10/09/dabashi.obama.nobel.prize/index.html
http://www.theroot.com/views/why-obama-deserves-nobel-peace-prize
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2009/10/2009109152410715115.html
http://en.rian.ru/world/20091012/156432294.html
http://www.mideastyouth.com/2009/10/09/why-obama-does-not-deserve-the-nobel-peace-prize/
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/79380.html