The blogosphere must be going crazy today, especially the right wing ones. When Al Gore won the prize, Fox News suggested that he should have rejected it because the prize was tainted by the previous award to Yaser Arafat. Wonder what they are saying about Obama's win - I am sure Jon Stewart will have an outtake.
I thought I would weigh in before I read any of them blogs (not that I follow any) or hear from the TV pundits. I was shocked to hear about the prize being given to Obama this morning as I am sure the vast majority of people were. It still doesn't make sense to me. Does it dilute the prize or does it put enormous pressure on Obama? After all the Nobels have historically been given to recognize actions that have been deemed a success. Obama's election victory is certainly of historical significance to the US, perhaps even to the world given the prominence that the US holds in the world. However, is historical significance sufficient?
Then you flip the coin over and consider what message the Nobel committee may be trying to send. Perhaps they believe that the change of tone in the manner the US engages with the rest of the world is a sufficient achievement. In a round-about manner, perhaps they are trying to take the pressure off of Obama - "You are already a success, you can relax a bit now." Or maybe it tells us something about how Obama is viewed in the rest of the world - as a world leader who has fundamentally changed the way the global dialogue is held. His Cairo speech, the recent address to the UN, the attempts to engage with Iran, the backing off from the missile shield for Eastern Europe, are all signs of a more open, flexible approach to the world. After all the arguments have been aired and all the words are thrown back and forth, this will remain a choice that can only be vindicated by the passage of time.
The person I feel for most is Bill Clinton. He has been on the short list for a while and with his recent headlining activities, I would have thought that he would have been a good choice. One more Clinton aspiration dashed (hopefully only delayed) by Obama!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
First, the good news: the 2024 March primaries do not feature a Prop related to dialysis clinics. This can't last of course, but let&...
-
I was feeling anxious, tense even. It was Jan 23rd, the day before the 2010 Carlsbad Marathon and I had a sense of foreboding - surely somet...
-
The outing was taking longer than expected. It was the penultimate day of our short trip to Japan and Prem, Malini, and I had left early fo...
2 comments:
I am equally puzzled at this choice for the award. Less than one year in office and still trying to establish himself (of course with a lot of promises and talking), I really don't think Mr. Obama is a justified recipient of the award.
My initial reaction was the same in the morning when I heard the news first but towards the end of the day I did develop a more sympathetic view towards Obama & the decision committee. I think the message is clear, "We are counting on you (Obama) to not start any new wars and bring the chaos in progress to a nice closure". It is a pat on the back for the president, who is expected to be a miracle worker. At the end of the day, it is at best a gesture, the world doesn't magically listen to anyone just because they have a peace prize. Iran, N.Korea or the Talibans are not going to care a hoot. May be better they don't or they may work extra hard to make sure he comes across as an underserving receipient. I do agree that only time can tell...
Post a Comment