Obama's recognized accomplishment -- bringing the US back into the international community -- seems less than usual for the Nobel Peace Prize. So why did they give it to him? Was it really about him?
We awake to rather surprising news -- but why did President Obama win the Nobel Peace Prize? It's clear that he didn't have much under his belt by this point in the presidency.
What he has accomplished -- and what the Nobel committee explicitly cited -- is changing the international tone, especially about the role of the U.S. in the global community. He has reconnected us to the overall international mainstream, including on climate change, Iran, and (my personal priority) nuclear weapons control.
Yet this is basically a restoration of the previous status quo. We used to be a leader in the world, we used to be part of the main flow, if lagging in climate change. We shepherded the UN into existence, we led the UN action in Bosnia-Herzigovina. Even Gulf War I was actually a UN-based operation because Bush Sr. made it so.
We were all that until George W. Bush became president. This is not news. His neocon advisors (or puppet masters, your choice) led him into a morass of U.S. exceptionalism and unilateralism.
But now W is gone. And our new President has led us back into the international community. This is absolutely wonderful, but it isn't exactly the kind of major accomplishment the Nobel Peace Prizes generally mark.
This is not Obama's Nobel Peace Prize, though I wish him well of it.
This is George W. Bush's anti-Nobel. For years, I believe, the Nobel Peace Prize Committee wanted to awarded George W a Nobel War Prize. Now they have.
Congratulations, Mr. President! Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. The right person in the right place at the right time. Enjoy that Nobel!
Now go earn it.