Why Obama Deserves The Nobel Peace Prize

Yesterday morning the world was surprised by the news of that the current President of the United States of America had won the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize, and everyone went nuts. And once again the left turned defensive, finding themselves defending ridiculous and sound attacks and questions by the right and left.

Why? (was the question of the day)

Why does Obama deserve this award? What has he done?

The deadline for nomination was February 1, 2009, Obama had been inaugurated on January 21st. He’d been in office for 11 days.

Well, one thing he did was rally a massive portion of the population in his nation to elect him into the Presidency of the nation. One of the things he promised was carving a path to nuclear disarmament. Another was to end the practices of waterboarding, to order the shutting down on Guantanamo Bay detention center and a greater effort taken in pursuing multilateral solutions to international problems.

The prior President’s eight year foreign policies were not supported by many of the other countries of the world. The world expected more of the same if Obama’s opponent had won.

What was American’s foreign policy before Obama?

It was waterboarding to get any kind of connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda among other types of torture and other types of prisoners. Some of which were guilty and some were not. Some were arrested for possible crimes against the U.S. military others were drunks, thieves, graffiti writers, cab drivers and other everyday criminals. We were “arresting”(I’d say kidnapping, cause that’s how the parents view it) children of possible (and possible only) militants and terrorists to get to them.

The previous President initiated two wars as part of a larger “War on Terror” after 9/11. During which the government and military took part in activities that were seen as questionable, if not hostile.

Many in the world no longer viewed the U.S. as the bully on the world stage, by the time Obama was nominated for the Peace Prize.

What had he done? He’d won the Presidency in the most powerful nation in the world with a message of tolerance, cooperation, human rights, equality, diplomacy and other messages that changed how the world felt about us.

Then he came into office and stopped the waterboarding and ordered the closing of the Guantanamo Bay prison, the most prominent symbol of the torture and detention of terrorist and militant suspects.

What has he done since the nomination?

He’s taken steps to follow up on the promises of his election campaign.

American foreign policy is almost the polar opposite of what it was previously. We do not have the same view on unilateralism anymore; the biggest change the world sees of America is the multilateralism.

Europe and many others in the world praise Obama for bringing the U.S. closer to a more mainstream global perspective on issues as climate change and multilateralism.

Huffington Post reported, “A 25-nation poll of 27,000 people released in July by the Pew Global Attitudes Project found double-digit boosts to the percentage of people viewing the U.S. favorably in countries around the world. That indicator had plunged across the world under President George W. Bush.”

To those that think this is an anti-Bush sentiment, I don’t agree. This seems like an approval of Obama more than a disapproval of W.

If anything, this is disapproval of unilateralism more than that of Bush.

What has he done to garner the praises of the Nobel committee?

President Obama gave the speech in Egypt that held up the changes in foreign policies as example of change in America’s role in the world. He gave a speech at the UN that he showed how practiced the change in U.S. foreign policies to lead by example.

He’s started talks with the Russians to bring down the numbers of nuclear weapons the two countries have. Something he more than hinted at while in Prague in April of 2008, before his nomination in February of 2009.

Obama has also shown how he is practicing the diplomacy and multilateralism promises by how he engaged Iran and its nuclear enrichment ambitions and the intentions of manufacturing a nuclear weapon.

His actions, as the most powerful world leader, in regards to nuclear disarmament are also an example of practicing diplomacy. He engaged the Russian President to start talks about that specific goal in July.

"He has shown an unshakable commitment to diplomacy, mutual respect and dialogue as the best means of resolving conflicts," Former Peace Prize winner Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna.

In July talks in Moscow, Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev agreed that their negotiators would work out a new limit on delivery vehicles for nuclear warheads of between 500 and 1,100. They also agreed that warhead limits would be reduced from the current range of 1,700-2,200 to as low as 1,500. The U.S. now has about 2,200 such warheads, compared to about 2,800 for the Russians.-Huffington Post

I think it’s important to know how the Nobel Prize is determined.

Fox News:

A record 205 nominations were received by the committee this year, including 33 organizations. The previous record was 199 in 2005.

A nomination is considered valid by the Nobel Foundation if it's submitted by a member of national assemblies and governments, including members of the Inter-Parliamentary Union; members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at the Hague and of the International Court of Justice at the Hague; members of Institut de Droit International; university professors of history, political science, philosophy, law and theology; former Nobel Peace Prize winners and board members of institutions that have previously won; and former permanent advisers to the Norwegian Nobel Institute.

"The candidates on the short list are then considered by the Nobel Institute's permanent advisers," the site reads. "In addition to the Institute's Director and Research Director, the body of advisers generally consists of a small group of Norwegian university professors with broad expertise in subject areas with a bearing on the Peace Prize. The advisers usually have a couple of months in which to draw up their reports. Reports are also occasionally requested from other Norwegian and foreign experts."

In his will, Swedish industrialist and inventor Alfred Nobel said the Peace Prize, presented annually in Oslo, should be 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."

The multilateralism is not really disputed by most. The “holding and promotion of peace” is a little bit more disputed. And the “abolition or reduction of standing armies” perhaps is the most disputed.

With the troops still in Iraq and the escalation of troops in Afghanistan being decided upon taking place as he is being given a prize about peace is understandably questionable.

But actions for “reduction” have taken place. They are taking place right now.

Previous winners include U.S. presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson (who’s attempts at no future wars have not yet come true), former President Jimmy Carter (who’s goals for peace in the middle east have not been realized), former Vice President Al Gore (who hasn’t stop pollution and global warming), Israeli President Shimon Peres, Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat (who after getting the prize did things not considered to be peaceful) and former U.S. Secretary of State Henry. And quite a few more people have been awarded for their efforts and work.

Other previous members include Archbishop Desmond Tutu who was awarded for trying to end apartheid in South Africa, a decade before it actually happened. Carl von Ossietzky was a German journalist that was given a Nobel Peace Prize for opposing the rise of Hitler in Germany domestically, before Hitler came out of power.

President Obama after finding out that he had won said this in a speech:

But I also know that this prize reflects the kind of world that those men and women and all Americans want to build, a world that gives life to the promise of our founding documents. And I know that throughout history the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes.

We cannot tolerate a world in which nuclear weapons spread to more nations and in which the terror of a nuclear holocaust endangers more people. And that's why we've begun to take concrete steps to pursue a world without nuclear weapons: because all nations have the right to pursue peaceful nuclear power, but all nations have the responsibility to demonstrate their peaceful intentions. We cannot accept the growing threat posed by climate change, which could forever damage the world that we pass on to our children, sowing conflict and famine, destroying coastlines and emptying cities.

And that's why all nations must now accept their share of responsibility for transforming the way that we use energy. We can't allow the differences between peoples to define the way that we see one another. And that's why we must pursue a new beginning among people of different faiths and races and religions, one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect. And we must all do our part to resolve those conflicts that have caused so much pain and hardship over so many years. And that effort must include an unwavering commitment to finally realize that -- the rights of all Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace and security in nations of their own.

We can't accept a world in which more people are denied opportunity and dignity that all people yearn for: the ability to get an education and make a decent living, the security that you won't have to live in fear of disease or violence without hope for the future. And even as we strive to seek a world in which conflicts are resolved peacefully and prosperity is widely shared, we have to confront the world as we know it today. I am the commander in chief of a country that's responsible for ending a war and working in another theater to confront a ruthless adversary that directly threatens the American people and our allies.

The speeches that many of his critics cite as his only accomplishment are in fact a progress report of sort. Each speech highlights what has been done and mostly talks about what is there still to be done.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy says the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama embodies the "return of America into the hearts of the people of the world."

In a message to the U.S. president, Sarkozy expresses his "very great joy" for Obama and says the honor should strengthen the U.S. leader's determination to work toward peace, justice and "maintaining our planet's great balances."

Could someone else have won the Peace Prize, yes. Did someone else also deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, yes. Does Obama deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, yes.

The answer is always yes to those questions. It’s been yes for every other Nobel Peace Prize winner.

The Nobel Peace Prize is given out by a bunch of Norwegians intellectuals. They believe that Barack ObamaBarack Obama met their criteria for the award. Great! Another prestige bestowed on an American leader.

There’s nothing wrong with that.

In my opinion this places more pressure for the President to accomplish the goals he has set out to reach. In my opinion this allows for us to keep him in check. It shows that there are people counting on him to do what he said he is trying to do. And I don’t see anything wrong with pressuring the President to pursue the values he talked about in his election campaign.

An Article That Talks About Why He Deserves The Peace Prize For What Obama's Done Domestically

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/hayling/detail??blogid=129&entry_id=49319