Obama's Nobel Peace Prize and its message to the world

I think most people are missing the point.  Even before Obama won the election, he presented a platform for world peace involving engagement with respect, a common future with hope, and multilateral decision making for resolution.  This formula for success has already given the world some momentum in moving towards peace, and has laid the groundwork for long-term success.  This is an American ideal that Obama has clearly articulated, and he is in the process of executing the platform. The Nobel Peace Prize Committee recognized this, and spoke up with their votes.  The people who are critical of this decision don't understand most things of this scale ARE in fact momentum driven, and those that want world peace get behind the momentum to push.  Those that stand on the sidelines and bicker about the timing of the award aren't doing anything good for Barack, our country, or global peace.

There should be no doubt about whether Brother Obama( I hope we can still call him that in the hood and still be allowed to visit the White Crib). He is a master of effective elocution and a giver of hope. These are no mean measures of merit and the Nobel Peace Prize Committee was correct in giving the award to President Obama based on them. However, its weight did not rival the weight of the awards given to the likes of Mandela, King Jr, Roosevelt etc. As such, he should not receive the full sum of $1.4million. In addition to saying and inspiring people, these luminaries actually did tangible feats. Obama has yet to translate his words into action.

I can agree with everything in this article, EXCEPT the idea that any of this has anything to do with Obama deserving the Nobel Peace Prize.  Perhaps it is a wonderful thing that the American people elected Obama as their President, but if so then shouldn't the Nobel Peae Prize go to the American people, not Obama?  The Nobel Peace Prizes go to people who have done something truly great, often requiring the dedication of an entire lifetime.  Perhaps someday Obama will do something worthy of such a prize.  He is certainly in the position to do something.  But I see nothing in this article that suggests Obama has done something already that deserves such a prize.  He won the presidential election, of course, which is very impressive, but do we give prizes for winning other prizes?  Is there an Olympic Gold Medal for winning the Ironman Triathlon or the Eco-Challenge?  Is there a Grammy award for winning the most VMAs?  No.  Likewise, there is no Nobel Prize for winning the US Presidency, even if it is a historic "first time ever" type of election.  For example, no one gave John F Kennedy a Peace Prize for being the first Catholic president.  Of course, I will admit that being the first Catholic president is not quite the same.  After all, the Catholics never worked as slaves on Protestant farms.  So perhaps the fact that Obama is the president, as opposed to McCain, Biden, or any other "old white guy" is in itself a symbolic step forward in American history, much more significant than electing a Catholic.  But again, color and creed are not things we do.  They are things we are.  And Nobel prizes go to people not for who they are, but what they do.  Martin Luther King Jr. was a great African-American leader, but that is NOT why he recived the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964.  He received the prize because he was a great leader regardless of color or creed.  He received the prize because he dedicated his life to ending racial segregation and discrimination through non-violent means.  He received the prize because he made the ultimate sacrifice standing up for what is right and good and true.  Now compare that to what has Obama done so far.  Actually, I think Obama has done quite a lot, but none of it really compares to what Martin Luther King Jr did.  The article says that Obama WILL do all sorts of good things for the world, such as "accelerate the call for democracy on the African continent", and perhaps the article is right.  But the Nobel Prize goes people who have done something already, not to people who might do something at a later date.  If Obama brings democracy to Africa, great.  Give him the Peace Prize than, not beforehand.

Thank you for expressing my sentiments much better than I could ever do it. He instills the hope we are all desperately looking for. FInally we have a President who is a role model.

Thank you!  Finally. someone with an appropriate understanding of the historical context that must be weighed in any fair and cogent discussion of Obama's Nobel Peace Prize.  To those who have railed and ranted about this award, let's put it simply:  this award to the president is an award to America.  Piity on those who don't understand this!

after reading your Obama's defense, I only request to the Nobel Comitee to add a new category:

the Nobel Democracy Prize, the place for the politicals matters, NOT = peace

Your piece does very little to convince serious reader the Nobel committee didn't make a huge blunder.

To confuse Obama's popularity in Europe with anything other the enormous relief that Bush is no longer in office is a simple-minded and ignores the context in which he came to power. Further, the prize isn't not meant to be a popularity contest or an affirmation of an election victory, no matter how historic.

At its best, the Nobel Peace Prize ought to shine a light on otherwise overlooked people who, often at great risk to themselves the their families, dramatically improve the circumstances of the people in their communities / countries. The recognition that goes with the prize often is a tremendous help in for the winner's cause when they most need the help.

Obama is nothing but "Hope" so far. I wish him the best with his ambitious agenda, but as the other commenter points out, he is yet to accomplish anything of significance in his pursuit of a more peaceful planet.

I am not always able to explain why I felt such joy at O'bama's election of President of the United States; you stated it well - thank you.

You failed to identify what HE did to deserve a once prestigious prize. I heard the arguement of what Americans did... But HE has done NOTHING to deserve this prize, as so noted in HIS speach after the annoucement. This prize is generally reserved for INDIVIDUALs who have contributed to world peace, i.e. MLK jr., Mother Theresa, etc.. He has done absoultely nothing to deserve this, as your article clearly demonstrates since it fails to outline any particular advancements HE has contributed to world peace. It needs to be returned. I apologize for the ignorance populations of other countries may have had, when you landed in Germany, in their confidence of a so-far-failed new president. Dismissing the politics behind the selection is a sign of an ignorant author. Please avoid incorporating personal opinions in your articles and stating them as facts. Its hiliarious to say the least.

Thanks for such a broad perspective of the importance of this honor.   To some of you naysayers---take some spelling and grammar lessons before you get all puffed up and act like you are intelligent!!

Mr. Stith's rationalizing the selection of Obama to win the Nobel peace prize is quite a stretch.  Upon reading the aticle further, its plain to see he is just stricken ga-ga over the President.

Bogus argument. The prize should go to someone for what they did, not what they represent. Mandela had endured years of hard labour in prison before becoming the ANC's leader, plus he overcame the apartheid system by the act of his being elected. That's peace-prize-worthy. Barrack merely overcame the Republican's stuffed ballot boxes, to continue many controversial Republic policies.

I think authors arguement would much better suit the american voter than President Obama.  I think the authors arguement is quite a strech and full of holes.  It is rediculous to to even try and pass your arguement as being valid.

Yes, the Prize committee sent the wrong message.

Obummer deserves nothing .He is a socialist scumbag period.

The article makes a compelling argument for awarding the Noble Peace Prize to the American voter, not President Obama.

The prize is to the American people for rising above racism.

Well put, and absolutely accurate as the Nobel Committee would attest. It is unfortunate that those that have the loudest voices, instead of being proud of America and the message that she has sent the world in Defense of democracy, prefer to chew handfuls of mind numbing drugs and wish for a leader who instead of global appreciation, has shoes thrown at him.

Finally, some one who gets it.  Obama absolutely deserved this prize.  His very existence in the White House sent an incredible message of hope that the most powerful country in the world was now going to put "peace" on its agenda.  The reaction in the USA to this prize reveals how ignorant most Americans are about how we are viewed in the rest of the world.  Others know that the character and aspirations of the US President will profoundly affect everyone on this planet.  Look what resulted from letting Bush/Cheney make decisions in our name for 8 years.  Obama has already done more for the cause of peace than most of the previous winners - it's just going to take time for that to become obvious.

Believing that Obama was awarded this supposedly "prestigous" award only further solidifies my opinion that the Kool-Aid just didn't flow freely here in the addle minded simpletons who voted for him but also in the "Oh we're so Holy" lands abroad who constantly degrade and diminish the accomplishments of past presidents and the good ol' US of A. This "award" says that OBama is nothing more than a "Beta" male in an "Alpha" male role. He roles over and bares his privates for the dominant Males to take a bite. Yeah, real good going there Nobel Committee. No matter how you much you polish a turd, it's still a turd.

I agree with you that many people see great hope in Barack Obama... to be honest with you I am not one of them but that is neither here nor there. What I would like to point out is that even you, as someone who has obviously been involved in the political process cannot deny that at the time he was nominated for the prize (or by the time he had received the prize) he had done anything to deserve it. Prizes such as the Nobel Peace Prize are not given on mere promise of achieving something (at least not up to that point). That would be like giving a doctor whose work to cure cancer looks promising the prize. No recipient before him had been given the prize based on what they might do, but rather based on what they had done. Keep in mind I am not saying that he will not eventually deserve it (I honestly do think he might EVENTUALLY deserve it), what I am saying is that he had done nothing to deserve it up to that point, or up to this point for that matter. He has not yet closed Guantanamo, he has not yet fixed healthcare, he has not brough the Middle East together. He has in fact not accomplished any of the things he said he would during his presidential bid. Again, I am not saying that he will not eventualy deserve this (only time will tell), but I am saying that he did not deserve it when he got it. There is absolutely no logical reasoning based of presedence of how the prize was given out to justify giving him the price when it was awarded to him. Furthermore, it is quite irresponsible to put Mr. Obama in the same class as Nelson Mandela. Mr. Madela helped to bring down apartheid while and after serving 27 years in prision. Mr. Obama has not done anything even closely ressembling something of that magnitude. In conclusion, the one thing Mr. Obama has done is getting groups like the Taliban, Al-Qaeda, Iran, Israel, Rush Limbaugh, and many other groups that have never agreed before to come to an agreement that Mr. Obama did not deserve this prize.

Empty suit writing about an empty suit.

Very thoughtful piece. Much more substance than the resentful opposition arguments.

He hasnt done anything to deserve the award. these prizes should be earned, not given away with hopes of greatness... Al Gore did way more to earn his award than obama has, and all he did was make a stupid movie. This is a continuing trend to cheapen the Prize that should only be reserved of people who do great things like Mother Teresa, or Mr. Ghandi.

barf

The world loves Obama because He like them is anti-american,socialist and weak.If America is weak, they(Russia,venezuela,China and all the Arab states) have nothing to fear from us.Therefore they become stronger and richer.In the meantime all the other countries of the world will drill for oil and gas while we sit on our backsides waiting for alternative energy to comeabout in the next 10 or 15 years. Oil will become $200.00 a barrel and the American dollar will be useless. Mark my words, history is repeating itself,dark days are in the offing for this nation unless we wake up.

Your thesis that the awarding of the Nobel Peace prize was a statement about the character of democracy is an argument that would support the awarding of the prize to those who elected Obama, the American people, not to Obama himself. To quote from your fourth paragraph and adding italics for emphasis, "America took a dramatic step in perfecting its promise." In other words, you have possibly justified awarding the prize to the people of the United States for a dramatic step forward that they have taken, but you have not justified the awarding of the prize to Barack Obama, who has not yet had the opportunity to accomplish anything prizeworthy. Perhaps he will one day, but until his rhetoric transforms into accomplishment, the prize will be seen by most as a political statement that lessens its meaningfulness.

Its like saying we dont care abouht america  our grandparents being killed or the fact he swore into senate on the koran he’s colord yea! I dont care about my native land or the fact that when the dude is done there wont be america he’s colord yea! I dont care about the the fact that he dosn’t represent his race he’s coler yea!!!!

What a bunch of drivel.

Thanks for stating the real significance of Obama's award so eloquently.  That the Committee's apparent consideration of Obama for the award before he was elected president is testament to his already transformative affect on not only the American people, but people worldwide.  Just as Lech Walesa in his Solidarity Movement was a symbol of hope for Polish workers BEFORE he became a politician, Obama was then and is now a tremendously admirable symbol of the hope that lies deep within us for a better world.  Obama embodies this hope more than any other domestic or world figure.  His tremendous appeal in the big picture is that he speaks to the best in all of us; that is, those who are not mired in prejudice, bigotry,condemnation, fear and hate.

I dont care about race its like you are gonna be murderd by a black guy and you say its all right you black so you can kill me

Its just wishful thinking.

Thank you, Ambassador Stith, for taking the high, apspirational view of the inevitably "politcal" motivation for the Swedish Academy to award Obama a Peace Prize he himself admitted he does not deserve when compared to Teddy Roosevelt's or Wilson's peace brokering--nevermind to the sacrifices of a Ghandi, King, Tutu, or Schweitzer.

I liken this "promissory" peace prize to Obama to that won by Carter after he left office--his promise unfulfilled. But in this case, the political--and moral--pressure is on Obama to fulfill his promise over the next four, perhaps eight years. 

Finally someone gets it! All the pundits should try being oppressed or discriminated against for a decade or so, and after that maybe they will come to understand what Obama represents for millions of us here and around the world.

What I want to know is what did he DO exactly to receive such an award.

From what I can see, if he watches a College football game next, he'll win a Heismann Trophy. His receiving the Nobel Peace Prize makes no sense. What criteria was changed in order for him to win?

Reading the article, you obviously have a biased view of Obama and would be happy with anything award that he receives.  What people have a problem with is that he was not even president when he would have been nominated, and he was has yet to institute any of the policies he has promised and he is already awarded the prize.  It thows the credibility of the award right out the window. 

If he has given hope to a number of people and countries, then give him some other type of recognition for what he has done, but I think Obama himself is uncomfortable with the way all of this appears.

So when it's all said and done, it still boils down to the color of a man's skin after all?  And I thought we were all past that by now.

Thank you for describing very well the "bigger picture" of the meaning of this award.