J.C. Derrick, Executive editorIt’s ironic that the man who created the Nobel Peace Prize, Alfred Nobel, was also the creator of dynamite. The juxtaposition of those two facts is almost laughable.
Kind of like the award itself these days.
For those of you who know me as the resident political conservative, you might be surprised to find out that I’m glad Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. Not that I think he was the most deserving person in the world at the time, but because that helped me realize just how ridiculously politicized the award has become.
It came as no surprise, therefore, when President Barack Obama was awarded the prize last week.
I suppose next, Obama will receive Cy Young Award for his prowess throwing out the first pitch at Major League Baseball’s Midsummer Classic.
The Norwegian Nobel Committee cited Obama’s “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples” as reasoning for its decision.
I heard a rumor that Michelle Obama is up for the Nobel Prize for science because of the amazing chemistry between the first couple.
Apparently, the rules for receiving the Nobel Peace Prize have changed. In the past it was awarded based on what you had accomplished, not on what you said you wanted. It seems as if Obama has been given this award based on his ability to dream big.
While Obama’s efforts to bring about peace are admirable, regardless of what you think about his strategy, even his most staunch supporters recognize that those things have not come to pass, yet. How can they after eight months in office?
An even better question is how Obama can make such a global impact in just two weeks. The nominating deadline for this year’s award came just two weeks after Obama took office, causing some people to wonder on what merit such an honor is now based.
Years ago, with people such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Mother Teresa, winners didn’t need to point to what they said as reason for winning. Yes, King delivered the famous “I have a dream” speech in 1963, but he also had the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to prove he was helping make his dream a reality.
Hey, even Al Gore had a documentary film to show for his award.
When Obama was nominated, he had won an election.
I certainly don’t fault Obama for winning the award. He is aggressively working on his agenda as every other president. You can’t blame the man for giving good speeches.
Still, for a president quickly finding himself mired in the politics of Washington like predecessors, creating controversy is probably not the kind of prize he is looking for.
I think TIME Magazine writer Nancy Gibbs said it best when she wrote, “The last thing Barack Obama needed at this moment in his presidency and our politics is a prize for a promise.”
Regardless of what the award does for (or to) Obama’s presidency, the Norwegian Nobel Committee needs to get its act together if it hopes to continue to be taken seriously when we have a world full of deserving recipients.
For example, a bipartisan, bicameral effort led by members of Congress sought to honor Greg Mortenson.
You might not have ever heard of Mortenson, but that’s because he is busy working, and he doesn’t hold a press conference to let you know about it.
The author and founder of two organizations, Mortenson “has overcome great adversity, escaping brutality and death, to continue his commitment to providing educational opportunities to children, especially girls, living in Pakistan and Afghanistan,” said Congresswoman Mary Bono Mack, R-Cal., in the nominating letter. “He has established more than 78 schools in rural areas of Pakistan and Afghanistan after witnessing, first-hand, children being schooled on sand lots with nothing more than wooden sticks to use for writing in the dirt.”
Of course, Afghanistan has been in the news a lot lately because of an increasing amount of insurgent activity which has made it one of the most dangerous places in the world.
So here we have a man who has made it his life’s mission to build schools for girls in places where drug dealers and warlords kill those who try to help.
Sounds like exactly what Nobel had in mind when he created the award.
It’s too bad the current committee thought giving speeches was more important.
As the Jerusalem Post put it, “Alfred Nobel must be spinning in his grave.”
J.C. Derrick is a sophomore communications major from Longview.