Barack Obama, the 44th President of the United States, received the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009. The Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded 89 times to 119 Nobel Laureates between 1901 and 2008 – 96 times to individuals and 23 times to organizations. Since the International Committee of the Red Cross was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1917, 1944 and 1963, and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1954 and 1981, that means 96 individuals and 20 organizations have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Given to any other person at any other time and this is a cause for celebration. Only in America can the bestowing of an award meant to recognize the champions of hope and equality be met with derisiveness. The main argument being that President Obama hasn’t accomplished enough in his little over eight months as president. First of all, Barack Obama didn’t have to be president to be nominated for the award, so his accomplishments shouldn’t be confined to his presidency. Secondly, if by accomplished nothing you mean becoming the first minority candidate to be elected President of the United States, at the same time running on a platform of open discussion with all nations both friend and foe, political and ideological differences aside. The award was given to Barack Obama the man, not Barack Obama the President.
The Nobel Peace Prize (NPP) is different from other awards in the Nobel confluence of honors. It’s the only award that takes both the physical body of work as well as the intentional body of work equally into account. Not to say that the body of work and research performed by the laureates in other areas (physics, chemistry, medicine or physiology, literature and economics) won’t have an impact on future generations but these are areas of study where the bulk of the results are tangible. Peace, even when pursued by the most ardent of searchers, remains a constantly fleeting idea, and therefore the concept of peace must be reexamined and reaffirmed. So almost as important as the works themselves is the inspiration and hope that is fostered. The prize has been awarded to individuals as well as organizations such as International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Amnesty International, International Labour Organization and the United Nations. Primarily based on their actions but also in recognition of the mere existence of their work, the fact that in the given times there is an entity willing to serve the harmony of the world whether anyone is listening or not.
In 1994 the NPP was awarded to Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin. These men are not exactly the leaders of a region known for amicable games of checkers let alone peace. The reason they received the award was because of their participation in the Oslo Accords, at the time a ground breaking effort to form an understanding between Israelis and Palestinians because the two sides were at least speaking in the same room to each other, but hindsight being what it is, the accord has had little to no effect on the stability of the region. Since then, Rabin was assassinated in 1995, Arafat never adhered to ceasefire protocol or realistically attempted to control the radical factions of the PLO and Peres was quoted recently reminding Iran that "it could be wiped off the map," this from a NPP laureate. Basically the award was given in promotion of the idea of peace in the Middle East, a Pavlovian reinforced behavior modification on an international scale. So, the concept of using the award as a reassuring slap on the back instead of a celebration of accomplished works is nothing new.
What I don't understand is the disdain and in some cases acrimony towards this man for receiving an honor, which some people don't believe he deserves simply because of a difference in policy, this being America after all. Any American should be proud that the elected leader of our country has, arguably, by his mere position, demeanor, and ideology impacted the view of the international community towards America in a positive way, especially in light of events in the past decade. The only way this country, or any country for that matter, will survive is through active cooperation with the other nations of the globe. Any attempt to cross social, political, economic and religious boundaries in an attempt to unite the world against the problems facing all of humanity not just individual countries should be acknowledged and supported. Hunger, fear, climate-control and social equality have no political affiliation or agenda. It will take everyone working together and communicating in peace.
III,
