A Prize for all Intents and Purposes
>> Friday, October 9, 2009
It was announced earlier today that President Obama had been awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. It's also been announced that he had been honored with this prestigious award for “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples”.
And a whole bunch of people went "huh?" And phones started ringing, and tv and radio commentators started commentating, bloggers started blogging, and people everywhere started talking - and I think if I hear one more person coming down on President Obama because he won this prize "without accomplishing anything", I will scream loud enough for them to hear me in Norway.
First of all, I am very "middle of the road" politically. I don't vote party lines, I read as much as I can to be able to make the most informed choices I can when it comes time to vote and the bottom line is that I like to think that I can see through a lot of what is campaign rhetoric, so none of my views are ever based on political "sides".
I think it only fair to put the responsibility where it belongs, so if anyone is going to find fault with the Nobel Prize committee's decision, that angst should not be directed toward President Obama. He did not nominate himself or vote for himself. If you have issues with the decision, blame the committee that gave it to him.
Since this prize is awarded to "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", there are many who believe that it should not have been given to the leader of a nation who is currently engaged in war. Perhaps not, but perhaps the dream of actually moving forward in any significant way to achieve "world peace" during a single lifetime is nothing more than a pipe dream - at least for purposes of the Nobel Peace prize. But consider the reality that the path to peace must start somewhere and is often laden with switchbacks and cloverleafs, and sometimes you even have to stop and back up a bit to make sure that the path you've chosen is the best one...and chances are good we won't ever get there, much less make it in the span of a presidential term. I would like to believe that after 8 years of unilateral diplomacy that left our country in a less than desirable state of affairs, a return to multinational diplomacy is a good direction to seek. My opinion for what it's worth.
The fact of the matter is that President Obama has been honored with this award, and sometimes being proclaimed "honorable" inspires one to be even more determined to achieve the goals that are expected of someone in his position. What I will say about this president is that I believe that the basic tenets of change that he seems to espouse are more down to earth and "of the common man's concern" than any president during my 50+ year lifetime... Is it just rhetoric? I honestly don't think so - because it's not always what we want to hear - it is what we need to hear. He challenges "business as usual", he ventures into areas of foreign affairs that many of his predecessors could not or would not, and he seems to have a sense of desire to do the best he can with what he has been given.
It is a small man who berates a man for winning an honor he did not seek or expect to win - and I have met and heard many small men today... I often wonder where all of these small minds were when politics opened the door for the best man to win. Why weren't they themselves in the running? Because from the sound of it, they all feel they could have done a much better job. I say - let them walk a mile in President Obama's shoes before they can comment on what should be done and how quickly and at what cost. Change takes time, and whether or not President Obama is up to the challenge - we can make it harder for him to do his job, or we can take an active part in trying to find solutions to the problem. That is our call to action.