College Media Network - Search the largest news resource for college students by college students Jobs and internships for students -

Obama's Nobel Peace Prize prompts questions

By Matthew Chacey

|

Published: Monday, October 19, 2009

Updated: Sunday, February 14, 2010

As I was sitting in my political science class, a student asked my professor about the Nobel Peace Prize and how recipients are selected. It was not until later that day I realized why he was asking that, and now I think it is obvious to most people reading this. Last week, President Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize. I know a great deal of the public is skeptical, and to be completely honest, I thought it looked like President Obama himself was equally doubtful about this prestigious award being bestowed on him. 

This has caused a very serious debate about our current president and his work to improve our country. President Obama has currently been in office for more than 270 days and critics say many different things. Some people argue he did not deserve it, while others argue they could not find a better candidate. The purpose of this essay is not to argue one side or the other but to provide information that will help you decide. At the start of every selection process the Norwegian Nobel Committee looks back to the original charter of the prestigious organization, Alfred Nobel's will and testament. In it he calls for the establishment of an organization that honors our world leaders in several different fields. Nobel goes into more detail about how the committee must go about selecting a winner of the peace prize, "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."

I firmly believe conservatives and liberals can agree those are rather restrictive boundaries, and the Nobel Committee acknowledges that peace can be found in a multitude of actions. They try to honor the different types and throughout the years they have indeed done so. If you look over the committee's long history they have honored a great number of inspirational leaders that have without a doubt made a serious impact on our planet. Some of them include Martin Luther King Jr., Jimmy Carter, Yasser Arafat, Nelson Mandela, Mikhail Gorbachev, Betty Williams, the Dalai Lama (14th), Elie Wiesel, Mother Teresa and Norman Borlaug. While some of these are harder to realize than others all of these people have actively sought peace on this planet. Whether it was an attempt to find peace in the Middle East, fighting against injustice in their homelands, caring about every person with a beating heart or finding a way to produce more food to feed people, all of these men and women have made this planet better just by being in it. What the Nobel Prize stands for is something larger than political beliefs or agendas. The prize supersedes any one nation's beliefs or struggles but focuses on how they seek to benefit the world. Both sides can make valid arguments about whether Obama deserved the prize or not, but he shouldn't be judged.

In the Nobel Prizes history only two sitting American presidents have ever received the prize during their presidencies, Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. Roosevelt won the price because of his constant work on international peace plans and diplomatic methods. He was instrumental in the creation of the International Court of Arbitration in 1902, the first international body to review world policy and international disputes. Woodrow Wilson received his award based on his outstanding work on creating a peaceful planet in the ruins of World War I, including the Treaty of Versailles and his Fourteen Point Peace Plan. He also established the first form of the United Nations, the League of Nations.

President Obama received the award "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." Now I think it is fair for you to either agree or disagree, but I think you need to be informed when you discuss the topic. It is not about the fact that "he hasn't done anything for the American people" or "it is just because he wrote two decent books," or any other excuse that you have heard without a legitimate reason. Argue the facts that have a legitimate bearing on the argument.

Matthew Chacey chaceyme@muohio.edu

Recommended: Articles that may interest you