President Barack Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize


obama1President Barack Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize this morning in a stunning decision designed to encourage his initiatives to reduce nuclear arms, ease tensions with the Muslim world and stress diplomacy and cooperation rather than unilateralism. Many observers were shocked by the unexpected choice so early in the Obama presidency, which began less than two weeks before the Feb. 1 nomination deadline and has yet to yield concrete achievements in peacemaking.Some around the world objected to the choice of Obama, who still oversees wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and has launched deadly counter-terror strikes in Pakistan and Somalia.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee countered that it was trying “to promote what he stands for and the positive processes that have started now.” It lauded the change in global mood wrought by Obama’s calls for peace and cooperation, and praised his pledges to reduce the world stock of nuclear arms, ease American conflicts with Muslim nations and strengthen the U.S. role in combating climate change.

The peace prize was created partly to encourage ongoing peace efforts but Obama’s efforts are at far earlier stages than past winners’. The Nobel committee acknowledged that they may not bear fruit at all.

“He got the prize because he has been able to change the international climate,” Nobel Committee chairman Thorbjoern Jagland said. “Some people say, and I understand it, isn’t it premature? Too early? Well, I’d say then that it could be too late to respond three years from now. It is now that we have the opportunity to respond – all of us.”

The selection to some extent reflects a trans-Atlantic divergence on Obama. In Europe and much of the world he is lionized for bringing the United States closer to mainstream global thinking on issues like climate change and multilateralism. At home, the picture is more complicated. As president, Obama is often criticized as he attempts to carry out his agenda – drawing fire over a host of issues from government spending to health care to the conduct of the war in Afghanistan.

U.S. Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele contended that Obama won the prize as a result of his “star power” rather than meaningful accomplishments.

“The real question Americans are asking is, What has President Obama actually accomplished?” Steele said.

Obama’s election and foreign policy moves caused a dramatic improvement in the image of the U.S. around the world. 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.

“Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future,” Jagland said.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who has made no secret of his admiration for Obama, called the decision the embodiment of the “return of America into the hearts of the people of the world.”

But Obama’s work is far from done, on numerous fronts.

He said he would end the Iraq war but has been slow to bring the troops home and the real end of the U.S. military presence there won’t come until at least 2012.

He’s running a second war in the Muslim world, in Afghanistan – and is seriously considering ramping up the number of U.S. troops on the ground and asking for help from others, too.

“I don’t think Obama deserves this. I don’t know who’s making all these decisions. The prize should go to someone who has done something for peace and humanity,” said Ahmad Shabir, 18-year-old student in Kabul. “Since he is the president, I don’t see any change in U.S. strategy in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Obama has said that battling climate change is a priority. But the U.S. seems likely to head into crucial international negotiations set for Copenhagen in December with Obama-backed legislation still stalled in Congress.

Former Polish President Lech Walesa, who won the prize in 1983, questioned whether Obama deserved it now.

“So soon? Too early. He has no contribution so far. He is still at an early stage. He is only beginning to act,” Walesa said.

“This is probably an encouragement for him to act. Let’s see if he perseveres. Let’s give him time to act,” Walesa said.

Last year’s prize winner, former Finnish President Martti Ahtisaari, saw the award as vindication that Obama “is ready to seriously seek a solution to the question of Israel and Palestine,” he told Finnish broadcaster YLE.

“Of course, this puts pressure on Obama. The world expects that he will also achieve something,” Ahtisaari said.

Unlike the other Nobel Prizes, which are awarded by Swedish institutions, the peace prize is given out by a five-member committee elected by the Norwegian Parliament. Like the Parliament, the committee has a leftist slant, with three members elected by left-of-center parties. Jagland said the decision to honor Obama was unanimous.

The award appeared to be at least partly a slap at Bush from a committee that harshly criticized Obama’s predecessor for his largely unilateral military action in the wake of the Sept. 11 terror attacks. The Nobel committee praised Obama’s creation of “a new climate in international politics” and said he had returned multilateral diplomacy and institutions like the U.N. to the center of the world stage.

“You have to remember that the world has been in a pretty dangerous phase,” Jagland said. “And anybody who can contribute to getting the world out of this situation deserves a Nobel Peace Prize.”

Until seconds before the award, speculation had focused on a wide variety of candidates besides Obama: Zimbabwe’s Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai, a Colombian senator, a Chinese dissident and an Afghan woman’s rights activist, among others. The Nobel committee received a record 205 nominations for this year’s prize, though it was not immediately apparent who nominated Obama.

“The exciting and important thing about this prize is that it’s given to someone … who has the power to contribute to peace,” Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg said.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa, who won the prize in 1984, said Obama’s award shows great things are expected from him in coming years.

“It’s an award coming near the beginning of the first term of office of a relatively young president that anticipates an even greater contribution towards making our world a safer place for all,” Tutu said. “It is an award that speaks to the promise of President Obama’s message of hope.”

Obama is the third sitting U.S. president to win the award: President Theodore Roosevelt won in 1906 and President Woodrow Wilson was awarded the prize in 1919.

Wilson received the prize for his role in founding the League of Nations, the hopeful but ultimately failed precursor to the contemporary United Nations.

The Nobel committee chairman said after awarding the 2002 prize to former Democratic President Jimmy Carter, for his mediation in international conflicts, that it should be seen as a “kick in the leg” to the Bush administration’s hard line in the buildup to the Iraq war.

Five years later, the committee honored Bush’s adversary in the 2000 presidential election, Al Gore, for his campaign to raise awareness about global warming.

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 United States now has about 2,200 such warheads, compared to about 2,800 for the Russians.

But there has been no word on whether either side has started to act on the reductions.

Former Peace Prize winner Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, said Obama has already provided outstanding leadership in the effort to prevent nuclear proliferation.

“In less than a year in office, he has transformed the way we look at ourselves and the world we live in and rekindled hope for a world at peace with itself,” ElBaradei said. “He has shown an unshakable commitment to diplomacy, mutual respect and dialogue as the best means of resolving conflicts.”

Obama also has attempted to restart stalled talks between the Israelis and Palestinians, but just a day after Obama hosted the Israeli and Palestinian leaders in New York, Israeli officials boasted that they had fended off U.S. pressure to halt settlement construction. Moderate Palestinians said they felt undermined by Obama’s failure to back up his demand for a freeze.

Obama was to meet with his top advisers on the Afghan war on Friday to consider a request by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, to send as many as 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan as the U.S war there enters its ninth year.

Obama ordered 21,000 additional troops to Afghanistan earlier this year and has continued the use of unmanned drones for attacks on militants in Afghanistan and Pakistan, a strategy devised by the Bush administration. The attacks often kill or injure civilians living in the area.

Nominators for the prize include former laureates; current and former members of the committee and their staff; members of national governments and legislatures; university professors of law, theology, social sciences, history and philosophy; leaders of peace research and foreign affairs institutes; and members of international courts of law.

In his 1895 will, Alfred Nobel stipulated that the peace prize should go “to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations and the abolition or reduction of standing armies and the formation and spreading of peace congresses.”

The committee has taken a wide interpretation of Nobel’s guidelines, expanding the prize beyond peace mediation to include efforts to combat poverty, disease and climate change.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee decided not to inform Obama before the announcement because it didn’t want to wake him up, committee chairman Thorbjoern Jagland said.

“Waking up a president in the middle of the night, this isn’t really something you do,” Jagland said.

{Fox31 Newscenter}


  1. Arafat, Obama, I bet next will be Osama!!! Chazal say that anyone that opresses k’lal Yisroel becomes a leader. (Kol HaMeitzar L’Yisroel NaAseh Rosh)

  2. This just in: the NCCA Heisman Trophy committee convened an emergency meeting last night for an unprecedented early season final vote. The winner is… Barack Obama!

    Oh, and the NHL has cancelled the entire season and awared the Stanley Cup to… Barack Obama!

    Wait, there’s more! The current Mr. Congeniality has been stripped of his title for failing to fulfill his duties! The tiara and sash will be passed to… Barack Obama!

    But WAIT… this JUST in! A puff of smoke has appeared from the College of Cardinals! The new Pope of the Catholic church is… Barack Obama!

    And the gold medal for the 100 meter dash in the 2008 Olympics has been stripped from Usain Bolt! The new, rightful owner of the medal is… Barack Obama!

    Mmmm, Mmmm, Mmmmm!!!!!!

  3. #4: Which liberal propaganda are YOU listening to?
    There is no unbiased news, as far as I’m concerned. Either you believe one side or the other. The other news is so liberally biased/
    What Rush Limbaugh propaganda is it to say that Arafat also won the peace prize?
    Did you hear Obama’s speech recently that we should give back a huge chunk of Israel to the Arabs that we honestly won in a war?

  4. I heard a few minutes of Limbaugh today.He played Obama’s remarks at a faster than normal speed to make him sound silly. Then a called talked about Obama opening his fat mouth. At that point I was too disgusted to listen. This disrespect for the office holder of the highest office in the land is un American and it is a sad commentary on how alienated most frum Jews are that we join the nitwits and have disrespect for the elected leader of this country. We showed respect to the evil leaders of Romania and Poland and Russia but we can’t have derech eretz for the US President.Shame.

  5. #12:
    To the same people who have such rachamus on the president, why did all these liberals have no pity on the last President Bush? They only care about the honor of the office when they agree with his agenda.

    Do we have to love our president? I know it’s a severe exaggeration but along your reasoning- had you lived in Germany by WWII would you have said the same about Adolf Hitler- to honor and revere him just because he was a leader?

  6. 16, I’ve got to agree with 12. There is reasoned discourse, and there is over the top. It is very reasonable to hear this news and ask, huh? He was in office for two weeks, and presumably focusing on domestic issues and he was nominated for this?!?!

    But if you listen to left radio (which I do, it’s often entertaining), they’re taking the over the top soundbites and talking about how un-American the right is, how after the Olympics (again, the right wing radio was regrettably over the top) the right is showing their true colors of just how much they hate America. (Especially since both Hamas and [our new peace partners] the Taliban were also out of sorts over Obama getting the Nobel prize. “The right now is on the side of the terrorists!”)

    Reverence isn’t necessary but well-modulated talk, and dissent when necessary, is.