Obama was woken up this morning by one of his daughters with 3 announcements. That he had won the Nobel Prize, it was the dog’s birthday and that there was a long weekend coming up. I wonder if he had her repeat the first thing she said. I know I would have.
“Honey, could you repeat that first thing?”
“That you won the Nobel Peace Prize?”
“Yeah, that one.”
“You won the Nobel Peace prize.”
“That’s what I thought you said—Michelle!”
And now the naysayers are screaming that he hasn’t done anything to deserve this, that it’s a mockery, that it’s a political maneuver and any other type of general miserable-ness they can possibly can think up. And I’ll bet not one of them visited the Nobel Peace Prize website to find out the reasons as to why Obama won. And that’s the purpose of this post. To clear the air on the how’s and why’s of how this occurred.
So…
That’s the big question going around right now. Here’s the answer:
(Note: all quotes below are taken directly from the Nobel Peace Prize organization’s website)
The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.
Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama’s initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.
Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population.
For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world’s leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama’s appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges."
Oslo, October 9, 2009
I’d say that’s pretty straight forward, wouldn’t you? The next question then would be:
At the first meeting of the Nobel Committee after the February 1 deadline for nominations, the Committee’s Permanent Secretary presents the list of the year’s candidates. The Committee may on that occasion add further names to the list, after which the nomination process is closed, and discussion of the particular candidates begins. In the light of this first review, the Committee draws up the so-called short list – i.e. the list of candidates selected for more thorough consideration. The short list typically contains from five to twenty candidates.
The candidates on the short list are then considered by the Nobel Institute’s permanent advisers. In addition to the Institute’s Director and Research Director, the body of advisers generally consists of a small group of Norwegian university professors with broad expertise in subject areas with a bearing on the Peace Prize. The advisers usually have a couple of months in which to draw up their reports. Reports are also occasionally requested from other Norwegian and foreign experts.
When the advisers’ reports have been presented, the Nobel Committee embarks on a thorough-going discussion of the most likely candidates. In the process, a need sometimes arises to obtain additional information and updating from the group of advisers, especially if any of the nominees are involved in current political affairs. The Committee has as a rule reached its conclusion by mid-September, but has been known not to arrive at a decision until at its very last meeting before the announcement of the Prize at the beginning of October.
The Committee seeks to achieve unanimity in its selection of the Peace Prize Laureate. On the rare occasions when this proves impossible, the selection is decided by a simple majority vote.
I’ll point out one thing here in case anyone missed it. The deadline for nominations for the year (2009 in this case) is February 1st and I’ve noticed throughout the day that certain people have been ranting about the fact that the President was nominated only 11 to 12 days after he was sworn in.
Well, so what? Someone(s) wished to nominate Obama for the Nobel Peace Prize and they had only till February 1, 2009 to do it. It certainly didn’t mean that Obama had any chance whatsoever of winning the thing. The number of nominees for the 2009 Nobel Prize was 205, the highest in the organization’s history so he had just as much chance to eliminated or end up on the short list as any of the other nominees. And by the way, the nomination process is the only time sources external to the Nobel Committee have any influence in any phase of the selection process.
So the last question in my mind would be:
Each year between 150 and 200 different nominations are received of candidates for the Nobel Peace Prize. The number has risen steadily as the Prize has become increasingly globalized. There may occasionally be several thousand nominators behind one and the same nominee.
Who, then, may nominate candidates for the Peace Prize?
According to the statutes of the Nobel Foundation, a nomination is considered valid if it is submitted by a person who falls within one of the following categories:
Members of national assemblies and governments, and members of the Inter-Parliamentary Union
Members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at the Hague and of the International Court of Justice at the Hague
Members of Institut de Droit International
University professors of history, political science, philosophy, law and theology, and university presidents and directors of peace research institutes and institutes of international affairs
Former Nobel Peace Prize Laureates and board members of institutions that have previously been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize
Present and past members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee
Former permanent advisers to the Norwegian Nobel Institute
So, there you have it. Why he won, how it was done and who may nominate. It’s isn’t disclosed who nominated whom nor is the database of nominees made public for less than 50 years (see the website for more info).
As for myself, I think the guy deserves it as defined by the official reasons stated above. However, I don’t think it’s really going to help him any in fact, I think it may make his job all that much harder. Not that I don’t think he’ll keep right on trying, I’m sure he will. The trouble will come from that Nobel pry bar that’s going to take the already substantial rift between the republicans and the democrats and rip it wide open and, unfortunately, Obama’s going to have that to deal with as well.
Opinions always welcome.
