Thorbjoern Jagland of the Norwegian Nobel Committee in Oslo, Norway
The Nobel Committee in Oslo, Norway, have leapt to the defense of U.S. President Barack Obama, the recipient of this year's Peace Prize.
Many have spoken out, stating the President has not done anything of great accomplishment yet, to merit receiving the award. The criticism has been quite heavy and harsh, with some even calling for the award to be rescinded.
The Examiner.com pointed out an article in the New York Times, published days before the award was bestowed upon Obama, hypothesizing when and how the committee should rescind a Nobel Prize given to a recipient deemed unworthy of such an honor.
Yes, it's getting ugly out there.
AP Newsbreak: Nobel jury defends Obama decision
OSLO – Members of the Norwegian committee that gave Barack Obama the Nobel Peace Prize are strongly defending their choice against a storm of criticism that the award was premature and a potential liability for the U.S. president.
Asked to comment on the uproar following Friday's announcement, four members of the five-seat panel told The Associated Press that they had expected the decision to generate both surprise and criticism.
Three of them rejected the notion that Obama hadn't accomplished anything to deserve the award, while the fourth declined to answer that question. A fifth member didn't answer calls seeking comment.
"We simply disagree that he has done nothing," committee chairman Thorbjoern Jagland told the AP on Tuesday. "He got the prize for what he has done."
Jagland singled out Obama's efforts to heal the divide between the West and the Muslim world and scale down a Bush-era proposal for an anti-missile shield in Europe.
"All these things have contributed to — I wouldn't say a safer world — but a world with less tension," Jagland said by phone from the French city of Strasbourg, where he was attending meetings in his other role as secretary-general of the Council of Europe.
He said most world leaders were positive about the award and that most of the criticism was coming from the media and from Obama's political rivals.
"I take note of it. My response is only the judgment of the committee, which was unanimous," he said, adding that the award to Obama followed the guidelines set forth by Alfred Nobel, the Swedish industrialist and inventor of dynamite, who established the Nobel Prizes in his 1895 will.
"Alfred Nobel wrote that the prize should go to the person who has contributed most to the development of peace in the previous year," Jagland said. "Who has done more for that than Barack Obama?"
Aagot Valle, a left-wing Norwegian politician who joined the Nobel panel this year, also dismissed suggestions that the decision to award Obama was without merit.
"Don't you think that comments like that patronize Obama? Where do these people come from?" Valle said by phone from the western coastal city of Bergen. "Well, of course, all arguments have to be considered seriously. I'm not afraid of a debate on the peace prize decision. That's fine."...
http://news.yahoo.com
Should the Nobel Peace Prize Committee have the power to revoke unworthy prizes?
October 11, 6:26 PM Miami City Buzz Examiner Robbin Swad - In an almost eerie foreshadowing of the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to President Obama, the New York Times online published an article just days prior to Obama's winning, discussing the suitability of reversing past honorees who received the Peace Prize. Randy Cohen, syndicated columnist and ethics writer for the New York Times' Sunday magazine authored a post entitled, Taking Back Nobel Prizes in which Cohen makes the following argument:
"Past winners comprise a roster worthy of esteem, but the list also includes a few clinkers, people who, in retrospect, seem curious choices at best. On Friday, when this year’s winner is disclosed, shouldn’t the Norwegian Nobel Committee do what we encourage in other realms: acknowledge error, and then rescind those past awards bestowed on the conspicuously undeserving?"
Cohen posted his reflections a week before the world learned that President Obama was to earn the prize. In the past few days, following Obama's "victory", various observers both nationally and internationally have noted that the selection of President Obama was premature, at best and unearned at worst. A surprised Barack Obama additionally echoed such sentiments:
"Let me be clear: I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations.
To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize -- men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace."
It is true that awards are usually presented for achievements, as in fait accompli. Despite the Nobel Peace Prize committee's judgment, the jury is still out on the success of the President's actions, as in Iraq and Afghanistan. And who can predict how yet-to be agreed-on talks with North Korea on nuclear issues will fare? Combine all Obama's many international policy question marks to Obama having been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize only weeks after arriving fresh from the campaign trail back in February-- some have argued that Obama's prize is undeserved. Nonetheless, the Nobel Committee has stated, that it is the "hope" for peace embodied in President Obama that impresses them-- indeed, the "world"-- immensely.
"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." ...
http://www.examiner.com
