Times of India Obama Peace Prize win has Americans asking why? REUTERS 9 October 2009, NEW YORK: The award of the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday to U.S. President Barack Obama had many puzzled Americans scratching their heads "It would be wonderful if I could think why he won," said Claire Sprague, 82, a retired English professor as she walked her dog in Manhattan's Greenwich Village. "They wanted to give him an honor I guess but I can't think what for."
Itya Silverio, 33, of Brooklyn, was also surprised. "My first opinion is that he got it because he's black," she said. "What did he do that was so great? He hasn't even finished office yet." Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, who won the peace prize himself in 2002, said Obama's win showed the hope he had inspired worldwide. "It is a bold statement of international support for his vision and commitment to peace and harmony in international relations," Carter said in a statement. When told of Obama's win Robert Schultz, 62, a retired civil servant and Vietnam veteran, asked: "For doing what? "The guy hasn't solved any conflict anywhere so how can he win the peace prize? But if we don't reelect him the next go around we will all look like idiots because the world has anointed him," said Schultz, who lives in a suburb of Dallas. Some said the choice could damage the Nobel committee's credibility and that of the award. "It looks less like an objective award than it does a political endorsement," said William Jelani Cobb, a history professor at Spelman College in Atlanta and author of a forthcoming book on Obama. "Guantanamo is not closed yet and it makes it difficult for him to increase the number of troops in Afghanistan," he said, referring to the U.S. prison in Cuba where some detainees have been held for years without trial. Haag Sherman, director of Houston-based investment firm Salient Partners, said it politicizes the award. "Largely left leaning U.S. leaders have been recent recipients of that award. It will clearly be viewed as political by the right," he said. "It illustrates that the U.S. is still the prevalent power in the world and that the world really is seeking engagement with the United States." Opera singer Carissa March, 30, said she was surprised but the win might help Obama achieve some of what he had started. "Although he's trying to open up talks with nations we haven't spoken with we haven't had enough time to see if it's worked," she said. "Sometimes when things like this happen it forces people to view things more positively so hopefully other leaders around the world will take (the talks) a little more seriously and open up more." In Chicago, retiree June Latrobe, 68, was also nonplused. "In all candor he hasn't done anything yet," he said. Many seemed happy even if they weren't sure why Obama won. "How wonderful, I think that's fantastic," said David Spierer, 48, from New York who works in medical sales. "I know what he's doing but what has he done? Change is coming but you don't win a Nobel Peace Prize for the future." "Obama won? Really? Wow," said David Hassan, 43, of Pine Brook, New Jersey. "He deserves it I guess, he's the president. He's a smart guy and I guess he's into peace." ============================================ Two Minute Nobel for Barack Obama? _Abantika Ghosh_ (http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/justso) Friday October 09, 2009 Being the first black president of the United States of America has big perks. Sometimes as big as the Nobel Peace Prize. That too within less than a year in office and without any significant achievements to show! It certainly pays to be Barack Husain Obama. Obama’s first year in office (not over yet) was devoid of any earth-shattering peace initiatives or milestones. For one, the year saw the 26/11 mayhem but minus rhetoric, there has been little else that has changed in the US attitude to Pakistan. What peace are we talking about? The specific example cited by the Nobel Committee – promoting nuclear non-proliferation in Iran - is yet to actually yield concrete results. This is like awarding a student first prize even before the papers are checked just because he made an effort – good or bad remains to be decided. And Obama is already anointed for the gold medal and the $1.4 million prize money. Which raises some questions. Are the standards of the Nobel Committee being compromised? Most others who have got the peace prize in particular have had to prove themselves over substantially long periods or have had achievements striking enough. Take Mother Teresa, Nelson Mandela, The International Committee of the Red Cross (which has three prizes to its credit), Yasser Arafat, Muhammad Yunus…the list is fairly long. Even by the standards of US presidents – four of them have got the prize – Obama seems to have got it fairly easy. Theodore Roosevelt got the prize (for brokering peace between Russia and Japan) in 1906, five years after he had become the President of the USA. Jimmy Carter won it in 2002 as an ex-president for ``decades’’ of work. Woodrow Wilson who won it in 1919 had an important role to play in the signing of the Treaty of Versailles at the end of World War One. If there is indeed a dearth of deserving candidates any given year why can’ t the prizes be given as and when deserving candidates surface – there may be annual announcements – just to preserve the prestige and sanctity associated with process of distributing the prizes? The Committee has done that on numerous occasions earlier. It certainly sounds like a better proposition that to lower it to a level where it almost reeks of being a PR exercise rather than any real effort to honour excellence. Nevertheless, congratulations Mr Barack Obama for your instant Nobel.
_______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected] http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/
