A Boost for Peace?

The news that U.S. President Barack Obama on Oct. 9 was awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize surprised many in the U.S. and around the world. After all, the president has only been in office for nine months; his name was proposed as a candidate for the prestigious award just weeks after his inauguration. Was he really “ready” for a peace prize?

Many people said no, citing the dearth of peace-related accomplishments on the Obama’s presidential resume. For example, one blogger wrote:

Anyone who shows up on the world stage willing to recite pre-approved bromides about “cooperation between peoples,” clumsily participate the kabuki dance of “international diplomacy,” and toss a few cliches on the alter of global climate change will duly receive his tchotchke.

However, contrary to popular belief, the Nobel Peace Prize isn’t necessarily awarded for work already done or peace work that are in the process of being done. Shortly after the announcement of the award, when many people were trying to figure out how the decision could possibly have been made, the Associated Press clarified the committee’s criteria. While Nobel Peace Prizes often go to those who have successfully negotiated or brought about peace in certain areas or certain times (such as past winners Martin Luther King, Jr., and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat for their efforts to bring about peace in the Middle East), the committee also may choose individuals who are at the beginning of their work, in order to “encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.”

Still, it was exactly because of Obama’s emphasis on dialogue and diplomacy that brought him the attention of the peace prize-awarding committee. In the speech announcing the president’s award, the committee said that thanks to Obama’s vision, the U.S. is meeting the world’s challenges constructively and paying attention to other voices and opinions from around the world rather than tackling problems unilaterally. According to the committee:

For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world’s leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama’s appeal that “Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges.”

The online news portal Global Post questioned whether Obama’s committment to listening and work in dialogue was enough to deserve a prize of that magnitude, especially considering that Obama is commander-in-chief of a military that’s currently involved in two wars. Will the prize, Global Post’s editors asked, spur Obama to move past good intentions into actual work to bring about peace?

It seems the judges in Oslo have awarded him for having a good ear for listening to the world. And that’s not a bad thing, even if he does still have a lot to prove. The big question now is whether being recognized by the Nobel committee this early will help or hinder the administration in carrying out the president’s great hopes for success in foreign challenges that include: reaching a settlement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, executing the U.S. draw down of troops in Iraq; continuing to build the institutions of democracy in Afghanistan; and containing the nuclear threat posed by Iran.

It’s a long list and there is a lot of work to do.

The Xenia Institute is providing a forum for this debate on our Web site. We asked Xenia fellows, bloggers, friends and community members to weigh in on the public discussion. Is dialogue enough of a criteria for the Nobel Peace Prize? Should the prize go to someone else? What does this prize now mean for Obama — and the world? Read their thoughts on the subject and post your comments here.