Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Peaceful Resistance

The world was shocked, animated, and maybe appalled with the awarding and acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize by President Barack Obama. Citizens of inner-Chicago, while no doubt saddened by their inability to host the Olympics, may now take pride in the peaceful triumph of their esteemed Community Organizer, who has risen well above the rampant violence in Chicago and continues to lead by example. In his acceptance speech, Obama said he was both humbled and honored to receive the award. While admitting he may not have done enough yet to equally share company with the “transformative figures” who have also draped the peaceful medal over their peaceful shoulders, he was nonetheless resolved: "I will accept this award as a call to action, a call for all nations to confront the challenges of the 21st century." No peace pipes were passed around the White House Garden, but the Norwegian Nobel Committee cited the president's creation of a "new climate in international politics" and his work on nuclear disarmament as enough of a qualification, despite his comparatively short stay in international politics.
It is difficult not to be preoccupied with Obama’s inexperience and greenhorn credentials on the international stage, much less as President, but this really is a secondary concern. The deadline for this year’s Nobel Peace Prize nominations was February 1st, 2009, which means that Obama was actually nominated only two weeks into his presidency. Taking into account that he is currently pushing for a troop surge in Afghanistan, people may be well skeptical of declaring him the most peace-loving person of 2009, but the Nobel Prize Committee, it must be remembered, is not behaving without precedent.
The “transformative figures”, Obama’s peaceful prize predecessors, are as diverse in cause and origin as they are supposedly peaceful. Al Gore’s acceptance in 2007 received a lackluster reception, perhaps because the runner-up who helped sixty Jews escape Nazi concentration camps seemed a bit more deserving, and if Obama is to bring a new climate to politics—as the Committee suggested—he may indeed be unable to share Al Gore’s company. Woodrow Wilson received the Prize for his peaceful involvement in World War I, and in fact, ever since the Nobel Prize Committee gave to award to themselves in 1928, they have embarked on a peaceful journey of epically unsettling proportions. The International Labor Organization (international communist party) received the award in 1969, and three separate persons, each in a different decade, have been awarded for bringing peace to the Middle East. The United Nations Peace-Keeping forces shared the award in 1988, despite Alfred Nobel’s stipulation that recipients should have done the most for the "abolition or reduction of standing armies". To counterbalance, Egil Aarvik, Chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, rebutted Nobel’s opinion on his own prize, citing "mobilization of troops from countries all over the world as a tangible expression of the world community's will to solve conflicts by peaceful means". It is strangely fitting and perfect then, that a peace prize having nothing to do with peace, is gifted to a U.S. President who has nothing to do with America.

No comments: