the best work for fraternity between nations

Posted on Tuesday 13 October 2009

    … shall be divided into five equal parts, which shall be apportioned as follows: … and one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.
    from the Will of Alfred Nobel
Rush Limbaugh’s complaint about deficient accomplishments and Liz Cheney’s snark about Obama’s lack of belief in American Imperialism aside, most of the criticism was an analysis of the devious motives of the Committee [speaking for Europe]. But how was the Committee chosen?
    … and that for champions of peace by a committee of five persons to be elected by the Norwegian Storting. It is my express wish that in awarding the prizes no consideration be given to the nationality of the candidates, but that the most worthy shall receive the prize, whether he be Scandinavian or not.

    from the Will of Alfred Nobel
In a world where the largest military power has invaded two countries in its last Administration – one for cause and the second as part of a policy of preemptive war undertaken unilaterally with the express goal of asserting its place as the world policeman [with an ulterior motive to gain access to the invaded country’s natural resources]. In such a world, what would be "the most or the best work for fraternity between nations" possible? I would think that if someone were to succeed in changing the foreign policy of that country to one that emphasized diplomacy and cooperation with the charter and mission of the United Nations – that would be an accomplishment of immeasurable worth to the cause of peace. And if the offending nation were to have a policy of torturing its prisoners of war, ignoring the Geneva Conventions, and that policy was abandoned and the validity of the Geneva commitments reestablished as the law of that country – that would be another major accomplishment in the pursuit of peace.
 
So what if a single person were to check the militarism of the world’s largest pugilist? Would that justify giving that person the Nobel Peace Prize? If I were one of the five persons chosen to select a prize winner, I’d select the person who did the things I just mentioned. It’s hard to accept that our country really is the biggest pugilist on the planet. We don’t think of ourselves as having a policy of world domination, but that is exactly what we’ve had for the last eight years. It’s called the Bush Doctrine and includes preemptive military strikes, unilateral military action, strength without peer, and actively promoting our form of government [throw in terms like American Dominance and Regime Change]. And many of us worried that our government would bomb Iran, rather than talk to them.

So we are still involved in two leftover wars and closing our torture center in Cuba is going slowly. So what? At least, the world doesn’t have to watch our every move to be sure we don’t go off half cocked for the flimsiest of reasons. The world doesn’t have to deal with the fact that our Ambassador to the U.N. didn’t even believe in the U.N. In one single day [January 20, 2009], the world regained a member of the family of nations – having lost that valued member for almost a decade.

Barack Obama, a minority candidate in a country still in the throes of a conservative mood and deep in the middle of a financial recession, was able to change the course of history by being elected President — to tame a growing monster. That’s the biggest accomplishment in the service of peace possible in 2009. All it takes to understand is to look into a mirror and see what we had become…
  1.  
    Joy
    October 14, 2009 | 6:30 AM
     

    I agree. I want to point you to Maureen Dowd’s column today because it is not going to make any of the Cheneys happy and they need a little of their own medicine of reality.

  2.  
    October 14, 2009 | 9:55 AM
     

    Mickey — this is the best reasoning about why Obama deserves the Nobel Peace Prize that I have read anywhere.

  3.  
    Woody
    October 14, 2009 | 3:44 PM
     

    Ralph’s right. No one has said it quite as well as you have here.

  4.  
    October 29, 2009 | 9:53 AM
     

    […] north. The answer is pretty obvious. It’s the same reason the Nobel Committee gave Obama the Nobel Peace Prize. At long last, America was back in the hands of a competent person, a person of integrity. Being […]

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.