Nobel Conflict



Kayla Johnson
Undergraduate/Print Journalism

It seems lately that the leading trend in America is to engage in an all out contest to see how much finger pointing and name-calling can be directed at President Obama whenever he is involved in anything. This time, the commentary isn’t for his part in the choosing of the next site for the Olympic Games or even for his role in the ongoing healthcare battle, but for his winning the Nobel Peace Prize. 

Many have taken it upon themselves to decry the decision, calling it premature or just plain wrong. One of the more outspoken people regarding the issue is none other than Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele. He’s taken pains to make it very clear where he stands, and more than one article I perused contained at least one of the man’s carefully crafted opinions on the recent pick for the prize. Seeing as he's an elected official with lots of experience and knowledge regarding these sorts of things, he must know what's up, right? I'm sure Mr. Steele's ideas can shed some light on this whole Nobel problem. Our friend Michael had this to say concerning Obama being selected, "The real question Americans are asking is,' What has Obama actually accomplished?'” 

There you have it. Apparently our president has done nothing to deserve the honor. It must have been some other guy meeting with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev concerning the diminution of nuclear weaponry in both countries. In fact, it seems that it wasn’t Obama at all who worked with Palestine and Israel to try and negotiate peace between the two warring nations. Some other world leader had to have stepped in on that one. 

The whole ordeal may seem laughable, but in reality it’s no joke. This prestigious award is only given out once a year to the one person, in the collective opinion of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee, who has done the most work towards achieving and promoting peace. Five Norwegians chosen by their parliament are bestowed with the duty, and you better believe they take that duty seriously. Their decision is no laughing matter, and because choosing the winner of the peace prize is their only concern, one would think that they’d be damn sure that whomever they deem worthy deserves it. These five officials have vehemently defended their decision to give Obama the prize, saying that they feel they are confident in his ability to further his agenda for peace and that he has already helped alleviate some of the global tension with what he has managed to do thus far. 

Despite these convictions, people like Steele continue to express their dissent through derogatory comments and scathing pieces of literature. You don’t even have to watch the television news or actually buy a newspaper to see it either. Sometimes, one can look a little closer to home and find good examples of this. What I’m talking about here is The Spectator. More specifically, I mean a certain article in the editorial section of The Spectator written by one Sara Nemec. In her article, Nemec not only argues against the decision to award President Obama the Nobel Prize, she declares any leader of a nation in a state of war to be an unfit choice. It is an arbitrary statement, and one can most definitely argue against her point. Why should a nation’s leader be deemed unfit for a peace prize simply because his country is in a state of war? The principle behind the Nobel Peace Prize is in working toward peace. In an ideal world, perhaps a president could maintain a state of peace in the world and thus qualify under Nemec’s standards. However, it must be understood that in a world where different people are constantly clashing and posing as threats to each other, a concept like that is highly unrealistic. 

To be honest, I don’t really see what all the fuss is about over Obama not being a fit choice for the Nobel Prize. It seems to be that he has been doing what he can to promote good relations internationally, what with trying to work at reducing the amount of nuclear armaments in both the United States and Russia, his efforts at assisting Israel and Palestine at resuming negotiations between themselves, and his goals of easing tension between the U.S. and the Muslim nations. That’s even without mentioning the fact that Obama has, simply by being elected, improved the rest of the world’s opinion of America in general. Seriously, it’s true. After Obama was elected, the world’s positive attitude towards America increased considerably. Since just last year, we have gone up six places in terms of how much other nations admire us. Maybe I’m being a little forward, but it seems to be that our leader has certainly done more than what choice others would have us all believe. 

Almost any way you look at it, all the controversy surrounding this latest issue with Obama is all just another way to try to minimize his accomplishments. Some people out there can’t just allow even one little thing to happen without trying to stir up trouble or smear our president’s name. At any rate, no matter what these petulant naysayers declaim, the Norwegians have spoken. Barack Obama is their choice, their most definite final answer, and maybe we all can just leave it at that.  
Sources:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/33237202/ns/politics/whitehouse/
http://www.msnbc.com/id/33291989
The Spectator Editorial/Opinion Section; October 15, 2009.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33279775/ns/travel-destinations/


The Flip Side is a publication dedicated to providing an alternative media outlet and forum on the UW-Eau Claire campus by welcoming the writings, views, and involvement of all students and community members. By reporting on news, perspectives, and opinions on all issues, we seek to develop and maintain our freedom of speech.

All published material remains the property of the individual contributors. Opinions of the writers and contributors are their own. Articles found within, in no way reflect the opinion of The Flipside Press as a whole. The Flipside Press rserves the right to reject any advertising, articles, letters, images, or other material submitted for publication.