By snoadmin
The Nobel Foundation openly acknowledges that the awarding of some particular prizes has attracted a sizable amount of controversy. It also has made no secret of some awards that spark international concern for the committee’s legitimacy. Most recently, there have been talks of plans to revoke Pres. Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize awarded to him in 2009. And if the plan proceeds, Obama will be the first ever recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize to have it revoked. This is not good for our country or the organization, and we feel stripping the president of the award’s prestige and its benefits is incredibly unreasonable and pointless.
In 2009, Turkey’s English Daily The Hurriyet expressed their utmost disappointment with the Nobel Committee’s choice to award newly appointed Pres. Barack Obama as the Peace Prize recipient, yet the committee still followed through. And now, two years later, critics see little progress as far as what Obama was being awarded for and what he has actually done to meet these goals.
During the Norwegian Nobel Committee’s presentation speech, the chairman praised Obama for helping regain multilateral diplomacy and promising to close Guantanamo Bay. With 2011 already upon us, those in favor of rescinding the award have no trouble pointing out that Obama has not carried out any of these plans. Just as the case was in 2009, it seems much of what Obama has provided us with is empty promises.
Many believe the only respectable thing the president can do now is to return the Nobel Peace Prize along with all of the benefits and honor associated with it.
Why allow a man who oversees devastating military action to keep his trophy for peace? The holder of the award should be focused solely on restoring it. However, one must keep in mind that this year the award was given to the United States President and Commander in Chief, meaning half of his job is deciding military action. So it is perhaps the committee’s fault for selecting an individual who is already juggling so many different responsibilities.
It is said that peace does not necessarily mean the absence of conflict, but rather the ability to cope with it. What more is our president doing — and our country for that matter — if not sending aide to another nation fighting for reform and eventual peace? The road to political stability is not always smooth, and right now, our country is being recruited to bring about a revolution. That is something our president need not be criticized for. Keep in mind that United States intervention in Libya is part of NATO efforts, not solely Pres. Obama’s.
The committee believes time is needed for perspective. Maybe that is all the situation needs. Americans are angered with our president’s refusal to action, and — naturally — to think he was recognized for actively bringing about peace when we are now involved in the Libyan crossfire is a bit unsettling. But, at the same time, if we revoke the award now, it would serve as a symbol of blatant disregard to the organization’s authority, thus it would be an inappropriate way to deal with the committee’s disagreeable oversight.
A little more time may give Obama the necessary means to hold true to his promises. After all, what is the award if not an incentive to bring about peace no matter how long it takes?
Disclaimer: The Daily 49er is not responsible for Postings made on www.daily49er.wpengine.com. Persons commenting are solely responsible for Postings made on this website. Persons commenting agree to the Terms of Use of the website. If Postings do not abide by the Rules of Conduct or Posting Regulations as listed in the Postings Policy, the Daily 49er has all rights to delete Postings as it deems necessary. The Daily 49er strongly advises individuals to not abuse their First Amendment rights, and to avoid language suggestive of hate speech. This site also encourages users to make Postings relevant to the article or other Postings.
