The surprise award of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama speaks more, we think, to his promise rather than to what he has produced in his short tenure on the world stage.
It also increases pressure on Obama to turn his eloquently expressed vision into real improvements in what are some of the world’s most difficult problems.
It’s true that those who singled out Obama for this award were adamant in saying the prize was a recognition of his efforts during the past year. Not everyone will agree on whether those efforts have achieved much, but the Nobel committee did offer a few specifics.
The five-member committee gave the prize to Obama for what it called his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy” and cooperation between peoples.
The committee highlighted what it described as Obama’s “vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.”
But what did the committee see as a laudable result of that vision?
A Nobel committee member told The Wall Street Journal the idea of selecting Obama gained traction after Sept. 24, when Obama became the first sitting U.S. president to chair a U.N. Security Council summit-level meeting.
The Security Council then passed a resolution calling for a stronger Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
“International law is not an empty promise, and treaties must be enforced,” Obama said at the meeting.
Obama’s appearance was meant to rebuild the council’s authority, and that move obviously struck a chord with the Nobel committee.
More broadly, the committee also spoke of Obama’s leadership in having the U.S. play a “more constructive role” in addressing climate change, and his creation of a new outlook in international politics.
It very well may be that the committee’s choice, and its support for a multilateral approach to diplomacy, were as much an expression of approval of Obama’s philosophy as they were a rebuke of the policies of former President George W. Bush.
The former president’s relationship with the United Nations was rocky, and his invasion of Iraq was regarded poorly by those who believe Bush should have sought the U.N.’s explicit approval first.
But there also can be little doubt that Obama’s gift of oratory and his ability to appeal to those common beliefs that unify people across traditional boundaries of religion and culture have captured the world’s attention. His speech in Cairo in June, in which he reached out to the Muslim world, was an example of that ability.
Then, as now, the question has been whether the president can translate that vision into policy that defends this country’s interests yet lives up to the promise of his graceful words.
The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama only ups the ante on that important question.
