Will it matter at home? The stunning news that Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize is bound to enhance his global reputation, but will it give him more juice domestically? I don't claim to know the answer but a few thoughts:
It Can't Hurt. By the end of the day, I'm sure Limbaugh and Hannity and the right chorus will have made fun of Obama for the win, cited it as proof of his European Socialist tendencies. But are many Americans going to feel offended that he's in the company of Teddy Roosevelt, who won for negotiating the end to the Sino-Russian conflict in 1905? Would any American feel embarrassed? Not really. By the way, doesn't this guarantee the president's third trip to Scandinavia, and a redemptive one? He went for the humiliating experience of lobbying for Chicago for the 2016 Olympics. I bet he goes back for the big climate summit in Copenhagen. Now he has to go and accept the prize. Kind of puts the Chicago episode in perspective.
It Gives Him Room on Afghanistan. I think it gives him more of a
he-knows-what-he's-doing cred. At some level I think it gives him the
political space to sell whatever he comes up with on Afghanistan. If he
chooses to revamp the U.S. strategy there to make it more of an anti-Al
Qaeda mission and to do more to reach out to elements of the Taliban,
that's going to be controversial, but something like this gives him the
space to say, tacitly: "The world respects what I do. I can move
mountains. Trust me."
Bill Clinton is So Pissed. After
everything Clinton did to promote peace in Ireland, the Balkans and
especially the Middle East. After his global initiative to save lives,
can he not be kicking himself this morning? Obama wins less than a year
into his presidency with no major peace agreement under his belt but
just gauzy applause for contributing to global good will. Nick Kristof
thought it an odd choice. I bet Clinton, um, feels the same way. And
since they're unlikely to give it to another American anytime soon, let
alone another American president, the odds of Clinton ever getting the
Nobel just got a lot dimmer. Forget about Hillary.
Where's His Oscar?
Obama's won a Grammy, now this. Where's his Oscar? Seriously, it's such
a capstone to one's career, you have to wonder what he could do on the
global stage that would top this. I suppose a real Mideast peace
agreement, capturing Bin Laden, or a huge nuclear arms deal would be of
greater significance and would top this. But at the moment it's hard to
imagine anything that would enhance his prestige abroad more than this.
More later.
Dumb question: does winning the Peace Prize actually enhance your standing with anyone? Is there anyone who doesn't like/love Obama now who's gonna say, "Well, I was skeptical about the guy, but now that he's one the Peace Prize I'm gonna have to reconsider." Maybe there are, my own personal standards aren't exactly universal. (I think the Olympics are silly but a lot of people seem to think that they're important for some reason.) If anything it kinda seems to set him up for a backlash, no? Mickey Kaus suggestion that he should politely turn it down seems like the genius move.
Mickey Kaus suggestion that he should politely turn it down seems like the genius move.
Anytime you're thinking that Mickey Kaus has a genius idea, it's probably time to stop and think some more and then do the opposite.
A gratuitous dig at Mickey, but there is no polite way to turn down the Nobel Peace Prize. He has to accept it.
"Anytime you're thinking that Mickey Kaus has a genius idea, it's probably time to stop and think some more and then do the opposite."
As Mr. Kaus would say: Good point.
I think it probably can and will hurt. The "what has he done" line of questioning has dogged him for some time. The recent Saturday Night Live skit making this point was widely disseminated. People got a chuckle out of it because it hit home. This brings that question to the fore again -- What has he done for a Nobel Peace Prize? That's a little hard to answer.
I am a strong supporter of President Obama and his efforts both domestically and internationally, proud but surprised by this.
The President should decline the award, politely and humbly saying he is grateful for the honor, but has too much unfinished business. At minimum, he should donate the award money to charities. Maybe divide it three ways between Mr. Gore's climate change efforts, Mr. Carter's initiatives to expand democracy, and Mr. Clinton's global initiative.
Although I understand the Norwegian Nobel Committee's wanting to encourage Mr. Obama's diplomatic efforts, and perhaps celebrate the departure of George W. Bush from the international stage, the Peace Prize should be awarded for a longer track record of achievement in diplomacy and humanitarian affairs. Mr. Carter was cited for a "lifetime" of achievement. Mr. Obama doesn't yet have a single identifiable achievement, much less a lifetime. With him, we are still living in hope.
As a strong Obama supporter I must agree with "jpeckjr". Although no one can blame Obama for having been awarded the nobel prize, I believe that it would be an excellent move to turn down the award. Although the committee explicitly said that they were not giving him the award in hope for the future but rather for his accomplishments in the past year, I believe that it is pretty obvious that this is an award given in hope of what is to come. A pat on the back would have sufficed but an award that is generally given for lifetimes of achievement (I wonder how Mandela feels) should not have been handed out for a year's work.
And I am seriously baffled as to why Clinton has not received a nobel peace prize...
"And I am seriously baffled as to why Clinton has not received a nobel peace prize..."
Ditto.
But folks, there is no way you can turn down the Nobel Peace Prize. You can accept it humbly - and I'm sure that's what Obama will do - but turning this thing down would be hubris and narcissism defined. And it would piss off much of the world. And that's why contrarians like Kaus and the wingnuts are encouraging him to reject the honor. Remember, Mickey and the crew at The Corner aren't really looking out for Obama's best interests.
Of course you can turn down a Nobel Peace Prize. Don't be silly. This is especially true when the Committee is clearly in the process of embarrassing itself and the President with what looks to be a fawning and thoughtless accolade that diminishes the value of past prizes.
The Nobel committee did not elect President Obama, the "world" did not elect him, and public opinion in Norway is irrelevant. He answers to American voters and they will view this with extreme cynicism and distaste on both the left and the right (I am a supporter of Pres. Obama in case you're wondering). Accepting it so as not to embarrass the Committee by highlighting its hopeless gaffe while diminishing his own electoral stature at home is no trade-off at all, I would argue.
Reject the award. Tell them he'll be happy to accept if and when his efforts actually bear some fruit. Let the Nobel team deal with the consequences of their own silliness and stay focused on actually getting things done instead of what has clearly devolved into a cringe-inducing popularity-driven partisan beauty contest.
That's what a leader would do.
"He answers to American voters and they will view this with extreme cynicism and distaste on both the left and the right"
I'm betting against this. I'm putting my money on the likelihood that American voters - well, at least 70% of them..the folks who don't hold an irrational hatred toward Obama even if they don't really like his policies and don't think he's doing a great job right now - will view the right's childish response and the medias ridiculous concern trolling with extreme cynicism and distaste.
And can't you see that the Nobel committee was awarding the American voters who elected Obama as much as they are awarding Obama himself? I don't think it was the top reason many folks voted for Obama but I'm sure the fact that they felt he could improve our relations with the rest of the world was probably high on the list for many Obama voters last Fall.
And a leader would have the graciousness to humbly accept the award while pointing out that he now needs to go out and prove that he deserves the honor. That's what he just did in accepting the honor, correctly reject the advice of Contrarian Kaus, the wingnuts, and the media elites living inside the Beltway Bubble.
The new CW appears to be that our president won the Nobel Peace Prize and it's a bad thing for him, pretty much a joke that will damage his presidency. Seriously? WTF???
I'm not a media elite, not a right "wingnut," and I'm certainly not the "contrarian Kaus." Voted for Obama and continue to believe in him. That said, an unearned honor is an unearned honor and all the wishing in the world won't change that. Have not heard a rational non-partisan argument that this was 'earned,' especially if that word is actually to have any meaning at all. Handwaving about "the American people" can't hide the fact that this is an award for who he is not -- ie, our old pal W -- rather than who he is. Accepting such a thing does not show graciousness -- it compounds the original gaffe and demeans all who are involved. To say nothing of past winners.
Anyway.
Hadn't seen that he accepted. Too bad if he has. It is silly and ultimately is embarrassing -- only highlights how little he's done to earn it. Have to say I'm disappointed. With Guantanamo still doing brisk business, military tribunals still the law of the land, two wars on-going and no perceptible progress on any of our multiple flashpoints globally, farce is now the order of the day. And the US President is playing along.
Who is he trying to please, exactly?
PS:
"And can't you see that the Nobel committee was awarding the American voters who elected Obama as much as they are awarding Obama himself? "
I don't need a Nobel prize to pat myself on the back for my voting decisions, thank you very much. No more than I am willing to submit myself to war crimes trial for the nastiness that Bush and Cheney perpetrated.
Let's keep the awards for those who actually accomplish things rather than use them to play partisan games.
darius - I didn't think you were any of those things. What I find so ridiculous here is not the "for what?" argument - which may have some merits - but the right wing's attempt to somehow blame the committee's poor judgement (and I don't think it was all that poor...not perfect but not poor) on Obama. That's exactly what they are doing. As for the media, again, my problem is not them analyzing whether he deserved this honor...my problem is that they are somehow arguing that the fact that he was awarded an honor that he didn't expect at all by a committee over which has no control is somehow a problem for him and that it could, for example, help derail his domestic policy efforts.
If the first thing Obama has said upon hearing the news was, "I respectfully decline", you can be sure that the wingnuts would have said that this showed hubris on the part of our president, that he somehow thinks he's "too awesome" for even the Nobel Peace Prize. And the media would have talked about how turning it down would be a "problem" for Obama. Seems the only solution to this issue was for the committee to not have awarded Obama in the first place. Fair enough...but what influence did Obama has over that decision? How dare he get elected president, work to change the image of the US, and change our foreign policy approach to one of less guns and more diplomacy! How dare he act, well, like a president!
What Obama is trying to accomplish in accepting the honor is respecting a longstanding and prestigious award while taking this opportunity to note that it's not about him and that he alone can't solve the world's problems and that both he and the rest of the world need to work even harder to prove that this honor was not undeserved. It's clear from Obama's statement to the press earlier today that he is not using this as a bash GWB moment, even if that was the committee's intent.
And if the guy whose policies I support - who also happens to be the president of the country I love - wins an award like this, even if I think it's somewhat undeserved (at least to the point that I'm sure there were other, more worth candidates - I don't think Obama is completely undeserving), I'm going to be happy.
Conservative reaction to this is too funny!
The inevitable backlash from Fox and Friends:
http://www.gotchamediablog.com/2009/10/fox-and-friends-on-obamas-nobel-peace.html
Le Duc Tho turned down the Peace Prize, but that's probably not a precedent you'd want to follow. Better to give a genuinely humble speech that calls attention to all the deserving but lesser-known activists the committee could have honored.
I am suspicious of those who argue that Obama didn't deserve this award and should have turned it down.
Judging by the reaction of the totally normal, very intelligent, non-political scientist I work with (who serves for me as a good gauge of "regular American" opinion), he is jazzed that our president won this prize.