Nobel Prize as incentive

Nobel aims to encourages Obama to implement principles of policy he outlined

Alon Pinkas|Published: 10.10.09 , 16:32

George W. Bush woke up Friday morning somewhere in his ranch in Crawford, Texas, and asked himself with amazement: Did they despise me that much? At about the same time, Barak H. Obama woke up in the east wing of the White House in Washington and asked himself with an equal measure of amazement: They love me that much?

Both questions are in place, and in both cases the world may have exaggerated, yet the decision made by the Nobel Prize committee in Norway reflects global opinion. Obama is the man who can repackage and rebrand the US, while making the world fall in love with America again. He is the fourth president to be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, but the first one in an era where the US is a sole and not-always-loved superpower; an era where the American economic model collapsed and where America still deploys troops in two states it invaded.

Obama was awarded the Nobel Prize because of an intellectual effort, rather than diplomatic action. He won for his attempt to shatter old thinking and formulate policy and diplomacy of cooperation, not because of his achievements. The prize is meant to encourage and adopt the policy Obama has been speaking about; policy that has not yet faced an ongoing test at a time of crisis, simply because his presidency is merely 10-months old.

Hence, the most amazing fact in the decision to grant him the Nobel does not necessarily pertain to the absence of achievements, but rather, to his short time in office. It is a Nobel Prize used as an incentive, rather than as a display of appreciation. It is a prize awarded to a president whom we, the world, wish to see succeed.

The committee based its decision on Obama's “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” In other words, the committee adopted Obama's Cairo and UN speeches and determined that Obama is from now on the absolute antithesis to Bush's awkward and arrogant unilateralism. Reaching out to the Islamic world and the call for formulating policy through international institutions and means. Obama's message was better received outside the US.

In fact, "global public opinion" (an elusive and vague concept) encourages Obama to implement the principles of the policy he outlined: Engagement with the Muslim world, with Iran, and with Russia. The decision to refrain from, in practice, deploying anti-missile systems in Poland, the (yet to be implemented) decision to close down Guantanamo, the desire to forge multi-party coalitions (as in the case of policy vis-à-vis Iran,) and the decisions to leave Afghanistan and Iraq.

Soft words, inspiring statements

Obama gave respect to the world; this is what the world feels at least. In practice, Obama treats Europe with the same sense of superiority adopted by Bush, yet he envelopes it with soft words and inspiring statements. The same is true for Latin American.

A close examination of the history of Nobel Peace Prizes attests to considerable expansion of the term and conditions for granting the prize. Henri Kissinger was awarded a Nobel for the agreement to end the fighting and bring peace to Vietnam – but there was neither an end to fighting nor peace. The same was true of Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, and Arafat, who received the prize in 1994. In both cases the Nobel was awarded for breaking paradigms, an effort to shatter an intellectual impasse, and political courage, rather than achievements.

The Dalai Lama worked for peace and received the prize in 1989. Yet it's difficult to quantify his contribution to peace. It's also difficult to say that IAEA Chief Mohammed ElBaradei, who was awarded the prize in 2005, contributed to world peace in a more concrete manner than Barak Obama. The apex was of course in 2007, when the prize was given to Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In the expanding world of the term "peace," Al Gore contributed to world peace by encouraging international cooperation on a worldwide problem.

There is no doubt that Obama's critics will rush to utilize the opportunity to continue claiming that he is a president of glorious speeches and unfocused policy. His supporters, on the other hand, will say: The man promises multilayered change, and change scares people. He is not the Wizard of Oz; he's merely the US president. Give him some time.

More importantly: The Nobel Prize and the media and political mayhem to be expected in the coming days will impose greater pressure on Obama to deliver: To prove that he indeed intends to and is able to change American foreign policy dramatically.