Subscribe to Desicritics
President Barack Obama Awarded 2009 Nobel Peace Prize
Solilo
The conferral of one of the world's top accolades on a President less than nine months in office was greeted with gasps of astonishment this morning in our small town. I don’t know if it has to do with the almost 100% Republican community here but even from my neutral point of view I still can’t comprehend the reasons behind this honor to the President.
Obama was honored "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people," the head of the Norwegian Nobel Committee Thorbjoern Jagland said. [link]
"I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership," President Obama said from the White House Rose Garden. "I will accept this award as a call to action."
Obama is the third sitting US President to have won the prize after President Roosevelt and Wilson. Former President Jimmy Carter won in 2002 and former Vice President Al Gore received the prize in 2007.
In 1906, President Roosevelt won the prize for brokering a peace between Russia and Japan - two countries that turned against US in future. In 1919, President Wilson won it for his post-WWI peace efforts. This didn't prevent WWII. So the question is how can a President be merely awarded for initiative? Shouldn't final result matter? For a layman it seems he was awarded simply because he is not George W. Bush.
Another question that always lingers in my mind when I hear of the Nobel peace prize is why did Mahatma Gandhi never receive one? I am not bringing Mahatma Gandhi in here because I am an Indian by birth but simply because I don't know any person who deserves a peace prize more than Gandhi.
Mahatma Gandhi was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize five times between 1937 and 1948 but never received the prize, being assassinated on 30 January 1948 two days before the closing date for the 1948 Peace Prize nominations. The Norwegian Nobel Committee had very likely planned to give him the Peace Prize in 1948 as they considered a posthumous award, but ultimately decided against it, and instead chose not to award the prize that year. It was stated then that "there was no suitable living candidate" but in 1961, it was awarded posthumously to Swedish diplomat and the second Secretary-General of the United Nations Dag Hammarskjöld who died after being nominated. Years later, Nobel committee regretted their decision on Gandhi and when the Dalai Lama was awarded the Peace Prize in 1989, the chairman of the committee said that this was 'in part a tribute to the memory of Mahatma Gandhi'.
Going back to the burning question now, Does Obama deserve the Nobel Peace Prize so soon?
On a lighter note, President sure deserves a Nobel Prize in Chemistry for his magnetic chemistry with his wife Michelle. [picture link]
President Barack Obama Awarded 2009 Nobel Peace Prize
RSS:
- Subscribe to RSS 2.0 feeds for:
- » Comments on this article
- » Politics
- » Media: News
- » Media: Events
- » Culture: Celebrities
- » Politics: World
- » Politics: US
- » Politics: Peace
- » Desicritics.org articles by Solilo
- » All News articles
- » All Desicritics.org articles
temporal
URL
October 9, 2009
03:31 PM
now this is a thought
President sure deserves a Nobel Prize in Chemistry for his magnetic chemistry with his wife Michelle
and may i add hulk hogan for physics
yes, a bit of a stretch...physique;)
Ninja
October 9, 2009
03:42 PM
Obama doesnt deserve this award at all. None of his so called endeavors has bore fruit. Nuclear disarmament and peace are the hot words in every politicians vocabulary.
Temple Stark
URL
October 9, 2009
06:24 PM
I like this post, too, by the way Solilo; it's got a lot of great historical context and does help answer the amazing question why Ghandi was never awarded the honor. Cheers!
Chandra
October 9, 2009
10:02 PM
Did a non-white man ever win a Noble Peace Prize before 1948? Question is out of curiosity
commonsense
October 9, 2009
10:38 PM
sure i did. 1943. but i turned it down. way down. because i am good at creating non-peace.
Solilo
URL
October 10, 2009
12:28 AM
Temporal: That's a good one. :))
Ninja: Apparently closing date of nominations for peace prize was 1st Feb 2009. Obama was sworn in as President just 10 day before that.
Temple Stark: Thanks. It is Gandhi. :)
Chandra: Tagore won in 1913.
Ledzius
October 10, 2009
09:35 AM
The decision to award the Nobel prize to Obama was partly based on Europe's penchant to snub the US at every possible opportunity. Obama is considered a maverick by many Europeans who deviates from former presidents when it comes to foreign policy.
The decision to award the 2016 Olympics to Rio is another such example. Yet another example was demotion of Pluto from a planet to a planetoid. Pluto was the only planet discovered by an American, and this almost caused a divide among astronomers, along the Atlantic.
commonsense
October 10, 2009
10:21 AM
Chandra's question was nonn-white "nobel prize for peace" before 1948...Tagore? no. otherwise we can add CV Raman to the list too...
Solilo
October 10, 2009
12:09 PM
I didn't see 'peace'. I thought Chandra was asking if any Non-White got Nobel before 1948.
Thanks CS.
Daddy_Warbucks
October 10, 2009
12:26 PM
Economics Prize(not really Nobel Prize, it is actually called Bank of Sweden Prize) is down the drain as well(Krugman was awarded for some econometric work). The prize was generaly awarded to left leaning and econometric(now highly discredited) works.
Last years Nobel in Medicine-Physiology was a disaster. A candidate supported by drug industry was warded the prize.
Now the tenticles of sexual politics has entered the realm with female candidature being given increasing importance irrespective of their deserving the prize of or not.
No surprises there, as the boomers who now run the world(including Nobel) have to debase this award as well along with the global financial industry, morality, currencies, Hollywood, UN etc.
Michael Moore's 'Sicko' would be an apt title for the boomer generation. As GBS as "Never trust a man over forty."
commonsense
October 10, 2009
01:51 PM
Daddy_War:
"Now the tenticles of sexual politics has entered the realm with female candidature being given increasing importance irrespective of their deserving the prize of or not."
did you mean to write "the testicles of sexual politics"?
And when by the way was the Nobel Prize non-political, sexual or asexual?
Daddy_Warbucks
October 10, 2009
02:40 PM
Sexual politics should read as gender politics. Sorry for the brain fart, had too much channa yesterday!
Add your comment