President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize has attracted considerable debate and controversy
about whether his accomplishments deserve such recognition. (At least one pundit thinks
Nobel Peace Prizes are "aspirational" and designed to encourage peace
rather than retrospectively reward efforts to cultivate it.) Despite
the push for Obama to decline the prize
he has announced that he will travel to Oslo to accept
it. What will this most international of prizes mean of him and for America? Some argue it could be a boon for American interests abroad, while others believe it could backfire by inflaming Obama's opposition.
- Prize Could Be Diplomatic Tool Marc Ambinder suggests Obama use the Nobel to further American goals abroad. "Winning the award is one thing; figuring out how to use it to
accomplish things, to pressure Iran, to bring the Palestinians and
Israelis back to the final table, to bring the bloodshed in Darfur to a
close -- this is what Obama needs to figure out," he writes. "And as irritating as this may be to European diplomats,
regaining some stature at the United Nations, or among the peoples of
the world, even with this aspirational prize, is probably going to help
the President internationally."
- A Boost in Europe, Not in MidEast Michael Crowley predicts an increased standing in Europe. "Overseas, the Nobel might help marginally--although in some ways not
at all. It's impossible to imagine the news from Stockholm moving
either the Israelis or the Arabs to make peace-process concessions.
(Neither Bibi Netanyahu nor King Abdullah are great sentimentalists.)
The award is a useful affirmation to Obama's faith in internationalism
on issues like global warming and nuclear disarmament. And it's likely
to re-energize his standing in Europe, from whence it comes, and where
such honorifics carry the most currency. But there's an irony here: Obama doesn't need Europe's help
primarily for achieving world peace. He needs NATO support for putting
a lid on Afghanistan, and Germany and France's backing for tough
economic sanctions on Iran should diplomacy fail to defang its nuclear
program. The most important impact of this prize may be a slight boost
in Obama's ability to pursue a war and confront his Persian rivals."
- Helps Obama's Peace-Promoting Agenda Robert Naiman argues
the Nobel committee wants to help Obama out, citing the prize's
aspirational quality. "The Nobel Committee gave South African Bishop
Desmond Tutu the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984 for his leadership of
efforts to abolish apartheid in South Africa. Apartheid wasn't fully
abolished in South Africa until 1994. The committee could have waited
until after apartheid was abolished to say, 'Well done!' But the point
of the award was to help bring down apartheid by strengthening Bishop
Tutu's efforts. In particular, everyone knew that it was going to be
much harder for the apartheid regime to crack down on Tutu after the
Nobel Committee wrapped him in its protective cloak of world praise.
That's what the Nobel Committee is trying to do for Obama now. It's
giving an award to encourage the change in world relations that Obama
has promised, and to try to help shield Obama against his domestic
- Wrongly Excuses Obama's Capitulations Glenn Greenwald worries
that this will give Obama free pass for his hedges on Afghanistan and
torture. "But far more important than the lack of actual
accomplishments are some
of the policies over which Obama has presided that are the very
opposite of peace. Already this year, he not only escalated the
American war in Afghanistan, but has ordered air raids that have
produced things like this," he writes. "And it's possible that he could bring about their end, along with an
overall change in how America interacts with the world in terms of
actions, not just words. If he does that, he would deserve immense
credit -- perhaps even a Nobel Peace Prize. But he hasn't done any of
that. And it's at least as possible that he'll do the opposite: that
he'll continue to escalate the 8-year occupation of Afghanistan,
preside over more conflict in Iraq, end up in a dangerous confrontation
with Iran, and continue to preserve many of the core Bush/Cheney
Terrorism policies that created such a stain on America's image and
character around the world."
- Inflaming the Right Marc Ambinder warns
that the anti-Obama far right will become even angrier. "[O]ne argument
I'm hearing and reading from Democrats and others who are skeptical of
the prize: it will turn the volume and enthusiasm level all the way to
the extreme end of the dial for conservatives -- overmodulating at
110%; the resulting hyperpolarization will hurt Obama's agenda."
Want to add to this story? Let us know in comments
or send an email to the author at
mfisher at theatlantic dot com.
You can share ideas for stories on the Open Wire.