Monday 19 October 2009

Nobel prize for... peace?

It's been a while since I wrote the last entry of my blog and I decided I should retake it with this year's Nobel laureate for peace: Barack Obama. I was quite surprised (probably as many of the readers of this blog) when I found out that the Norwegian academy had awarded the peace prize to the president of the United States.

I must admit that what most shocked me was that the prize for peace was awarded to a president that's involved in two wars. Moreover, hours after the announcement, Obama had a meeting with the Department of Defense to decide by how many would he increase the number of troops sent to Afghanistan. Even more astonishing is the fact that the military budget of the US has increased since he's in office.

Looking back in history, it's not surprising that Obama has been awarded the prize considering that also Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt and Henry Kissinger have been Nobel peace laureates. Although remembered for being the founder of the League of Nations, that was later to become the UN and that was never quite successful in keeping world peace, Wilson involved the US in the first World War, occupied Haiti and bombarded Mexico.

Roosevelt brought peace between Japan and Russia, but also helped Cuba liberate from Spain while setting US influence over the island. He was also president during the war with the Phillipines. Finally there's Kissinger, who ended the war in Vietnam which he had helped start and supported Nixon's bombing of peasant villages in Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam. All of them were found worthy of a prize that supposedly rewards peace. Unbelievable.

Keeping this in mind, it's hard to find reasons why the Norwegian academy has decided, yet again, to award a peace prize to someone so involved in war. Some say that more than rewarding Obama for his promises (one cannot say deeds, for he hasn't accomplished any), the Nobel Committee has sought to punish George W. Bush for his actions. Even though this may be true, it still seems paradoxical for the above reasons to give a prize to someone that promises so much and, in the end, does so little for peace.

No comments:

Post a Comment