First, I was surprised this morning by the Nobel Peace Prize itself: going to President Obama. What? Who? He hasn't been in office for a year yet. He's still presiding over those wars and all.
Next up, surprised by the reaction from various sides. Yay: He's moving us forward on the path toward nuclear disarmament. Boo: He's still presiding over those wars and all.
And now... I believe it was a wise and risky choice. It wasn't just about Obama the man; it was about his vision, and his leadership, and the sea change that he represents. It was about a new world order; as he himself put it in his remarks, it was about a "call to action."
And the action -- is for a new world. It's hard for us, I think, in the U.S., to understand how Obama has shifted the entire global landscape. In his speech at the UN, he removed the U.S. as the military superpower; and made us citizens in the world. We are now cooperating (!) with other countries (!) to establish peace and prosperity and democracy. He named those four pillars for a more secure world: and then he named the actual things that would have to happen to establish those pillars.
And to rid the world of nuclear weapons. And that may be the issue that compelled the Prize committee most. So the Prize is about the urgent, overwhelming need for us to take the hard, necessary steps toward stopping proliferation and dismantling the nuclear stockpile.
From Joe Cirincione's post...
The Nobel Prize is recognition of the international support for a new direction, for a new strategy of how to prevent new states and terrorists from getting the bomb and how to prevent any of the existing bombs from being used.
Because it's only a matter of time until someone uses one. How could we not be heading toward that end? So the committee, and Obama himself, have used this moment to put out the call -- we must act.
(And also? It is fair to say that he didn't make the world he's now dealing with. Yes, he's the commander in chief while we've got two wars and hundreds of military bases around the world. But he has done what no President has done before: made real steps to challenging the military-industrial complex, starting with the end of the F-22. He has begun the hard work of converting our economy from a giant military machine... It's a start. If we aren't compelled to wage war, maybe we won't...)
Great observation. I think you really hit the nail on the head.
Jody Williams, the Nobel laureate as part of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, had an interesting comment on the BBC website: "I think that it is kind of foolish to think that the Nobel Prize isn't politicised - it's not a humanitarian prize, it's a prize in recognition of change in the world to contribute to peace, sometimes its a recognitions of visions for peace. He is facing huge contradictions as well - he is going to be sending 40,000 new American troops into Afghanistan just as he receives the Nobel Peace Prize? I think that is a contradiction that needs to be seriously looked at."
Those words remind me that the Nobel is an opportunity for us on Afghanistan. Now we must press Obama to live up to the award. I prefer that strategy to the criticisms from some that Obama shouldn't get the prize at all because of his position on Afghanistan. The Nobel committee is recognizing his leadership on multilateralism and nuclear disarmament, so let's use that to strengthen our work.
And in that spirit, I like Nicholas Sarkozy's statement too. "It confirms, finally, America's return to the hearts of the people of the world... you can count on my resolute support and that of France."
Posted by: www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1053644091 | October 09, 2009 at 03:40 PM