I'm not a huge expert on how the committee works, but the last few years they've explained that they want the prize to be not just of work already done, but supportive for people trying to change things. So I think this can be taken as the committee lending symbolical support to Obama.
On the Nobel Institute pages they state that the prize is their response to Obama's appeal of "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges". And that he in a very short time has changed the international political climate etc.
they want the prize to be not just of work already done, but supportive for people trying to change things.
That's interesting to know! I tend to agree, it feels premature, but on the other hand that statement makes me think it's a refreshing perspective shift to say, we're not going to wait around to applaud a significant body of work which is unanimously approved - instead we're going to encourage change as much as we can, not only with our money but with our cachet and soapbox. So I guess Obama, whether he agrees or not, has a multiplier effect for what the Nobel folks want to say.
I have a mental picture of the Nobel committee deliberating, and they're all, "quick! Let's nominate him now while we can!" :) (And it probably doesn't hurt that he serves to balance out, at least right now, some of the more questionable awardees in the past.)
So I guess Obama, whether he agrees or not, has a multiplier effect for what the Nobel folks want to say.
I think you put the finger on the reason for the committee's decision there. In the statement and the press conference they kept stating that it was Obama's use of diplomacy and his work with the UN that had been vital in their decision. They also cited his visit to Cairo early in his presidency as exemplary, and I think the wish to highlight that kind of foreign policy was an important factor in the selection.
And it probably doesn't hurt that he serves to balance out, at least right now, some of the more questionable awardees in the past
Hee! I think everyone can agree that the committee has a rather interesting and many-faceted past.
Of course, if it makes Glenn Beck's head actually explode then the world WILL be a better place.
You know, if even we Obama "fans" are puzzled by this decision, I imagine it will only lend fuel to the idea that the Peace Prize is all totally political and has nothing to do with actual achievements.
Still, he's certainly a better choice than Henry EFfing Kissinger was!!
I imagine it will only lend fuel to the idea that the Peace Prize is all totally political and has nothing to do with actual achievements.
Oh definitely, and I even suspect that to some extent that was the idea. This was the first prize to be handed out by the committee's new leader, and unlike the previous one (who was a staunch conservative and a deeply religious man) the new leader is known as a bit of a lefty with a fondness for making big political statements.
he's certainly a better choice than Henry EFfing Kissinger was!
the new leader is known as a bit of a lefty with a fondness for making big political statements.
it's just so strange and puzzling! I'm a big fan of President Obama and I still find it weird that they would make this award so soon in his Presidency. What if he doesn't live up to the intentions? So strange!
no subject
Date: 2009-10-09 09:23 am (UTC)I love Obama, but I feel like this may be a tad premature.
Of course, if it makes Glenn Beck's head actually explode then the world WILL be a better place.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-09 09:27 am (UTC)I'm not a huge expert on how the committee works, but the last few years they've explained that they want the prize to be not just of work already done, but supportive for people trying to change things. So I think this can be taken as the committee lending symbolical support to Obama.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-09 09:30 am (UTC)OTOH, if we needed proof that Obama is restoring a bit of goodwill in the world for us, after 8 years of shame? Done.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-09 10:12 am (UTC)if we needed proof that Obama is restoring a bit of goodwill in the world for us, after 8 years of shame? Done.
Hey, we've always loved you - we just felt a bit awkward saying it with all the Karl Rove's and Donald Rumsfeld's running around. ;P
But seriously, I cannot see this award as anything other than a huge political statement.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-09 10:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-09 01:35 pm (UTC)That's interesting to know! I tend to agree, it feels premature, but on the other hand that statement makes me think it's a refreshing perspective shift to say, we're not going to wait around to applaud a significant body of work which is unanimously approved - instead we're going to encourage change as much as we can, not only with our money but with our cachet and soapbox. So I guess Obama, whether he agrees or not, has a multiplier effect for what the Nobel folks want to say.
I have a mental picture of the Nobel committee deliberating, and they're all, "quick! Let's nominate him now while we can!" :) (And it probably doesn't hurt that he serves to balance out, at least right now, some of the more questionable awardees in the past.)
no subject
Date: 2009-10-09 04:13 pm (UTC)I think you put the finger on the reason for the committee's decision there. In the statement and the press conference they kept stating that it was Obama's use of diplomacy and his work with the UN that had been vital in their decision. They also cited his visit to Cairo early in his presidency as exemplary, and I think the wish to highlight that kind of foreign policy was an important factor in the selection.
And it probably doesn't hurt that he serves to balance out, at least right now, some of the more questionable awardees in the past
Hee! I think everyone can agree that the committee has a rather interesting and many-faceted past.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-09 01:18 pm (UTC)Of course, if it makes Glenn Beck's head actually explode then the world WILL be a better place.
You know, if even we Obama "fans" are puzzled by this decision, I imagine it will only lend fuel to the idea that the Peace Prize is all totally political and has nothing to do with actual achievements.
Still, he's certainly a better choice than Henry EFfing Kissinger was!!
no subject
Date: 2009-10-09 01:35 pm (UTC)Oh definitely, and I even suspect that to some extent that was the idea. This was the first prize to be handed out by the committee's new leader, and unlike the previous one (who was a staunch conservative and a deeply religious man) the new leader is known as a bit of a lefty with a fondness for making big political statements.
he's certainly a better choice than Henry EFfing Kissinger was!
Not the proudest moment in Nobel history that. ;)
no subject
Date: 2009-10-09 02:15 pm (UTC)it's just so strange and puzzling! I'm a big fan of President Obama and I still find it weird that they would make this award so soon in his Presidency. What if he doesn't live up to the intentions? So strange!