Updated October 09, 2009
Nobel Committee Rewards Obama For Not Being Bush
, FOXNews.com
It is somewhat ironic that the award comes as President Obama decides whether to redefine America's engagement in Afghanistan, his "war of necessity," and reduce or surge American forces there.
The decision to award Barack Obama the Nobel Prize rewards him for not being George W. Bush and for his aspirations rather than his achievements, his promise rather than his performance.
The committee was rewarding America's welcome change of tone under the eloquent young president and encouraging his commitment to abolish nuclear weapons, ease tensions with the world's Muslims, and elevate diplomacy and multilateralism over unilateralism. Indeed, President Obama, in his acceptance remarks, said he regarded the prize, which he said he felt he did not deserve, as a "call to action" for the causes he has embraced.
The good news is that he listed his determination to ensure that the world will not tolerate the "spread of nuclear weapons to all nations," and that "all nations have a responsibility to demonstrate" that the intention of their nuclear programs is peaceful. Is Iran, whose president praised the award to Obama, listening?
It is somewhat ironic that the award comes just as President Obama is deciding whether to redefine America's engagement in Afghanistan, his "war of necessity," and reduce or surge American forces there. The Nobel committe chairman readily acknowledged that he hoped the prize would encourage Obama's "emphasis on negotiations" in resolving that conflict, too. -- Tell that to Al Qaeda and its militant ally the Taliban, who instantly criticized the award decision.
Even Lech Walesa, Poland's candid former president and Nobel Prize winner, suggested the prize was premature: "Who? What? So Fast?" the shocked former leader replied when reporters told him about the newest member of his club.
Obama is the third sitting president to win -- President Theodore Roosevelt won in 1906 for his role in helping end the Russo-Japanese war and Woodrow Wilson in 1919 for helping create the League of Nations. Neither of those achievements lasted long.
But American presidents who wage war to make America or take other courageous decisions that make the world safer usually don't win that prize, especially conservatives. Ronald Reagan did not win for helping to end the Cold War. George H.W. Bush did not win for invading Iraq to force Saddam Hussein to withdraw from Kuwait. Even Bill Clinton didn't win, though he confronted Serbian president Slobodan Milošević and saved thousands of Muslim lives in his bombing campaign in the Balkans. -- We've come a long way since 2004 when George W. Bush and Tony Blair were nominated for invading Iraq and removing Saddam Hussein. Obviously, neither of them won either.
Judith Miller is a writer and author, Manhattan Institute scholar and FOX News contributor.
Fox Nation
-
Couric Recites Health Care Poem on 'Evening News'
November 24, 2009 15 comments
-
Seinfeld in the Year 2009
November 24, 2009 1 comments
-
JLo Falls During Live Performance
November 24, 2009 1 comments
-
Amateur Hour
November 24, 2009 2 comments
-
Dobbs Mulls Running for President
November 24, 2009 4 comments
-
ACORN Caught Dumping Documents in Dumpster
November 24, 2009 9 comments
-
Woman Loses Health Insurance Over Facebook Photo
November 23, 2009 4 comments
-
Union Leader Quits After Scout Backlash
November 23, 2009 1 comments
-
Man Happy With Simple Life in Utah Cave
November 23, 2009
-
U.S. Stalin Memorial Plan Under Fire
November 23, 2009 32 comments
Most Commented
-
Why is the White House Still Attacking Fox News?
October 19, 2009 2,226 comments
-
Did 'Curb' and HBO Cross the Line?
October 28, 2009 1,430 comments
-
Should Justice Investigate ACORN?
September 10, 2009 1,398 comments
-
Do You Agree With Decision to Release Lockerbie Bomber?
August 20, 2009 1,275 comments
-
Did Carter Cross the Line?
September 16, 2009 1,210 comments
-
McGurn: The Other Senate Maverick
November 23, 2009
-
George Melloan: Government Deficits and Private Growth
November 23, 2009
-
Global Warming With the Lid Off
November 24, 2009
-
Obey's Afghan War Surtax
November 24, 2009
-
Liberals and Mammography
November 24, 2009
-
Would a soldier serving on the Chilcot committee be ruthless enough?
November 23, 2009
-
I do not accept that £64,000 a year for politicians is peanuts
November 23, 2009
-
It’s OK, you’re allowed to laugh at Cast Offs
November 23, 2009
-
Dave’n’George: there may be trouble ahead
November 23, 2009
-
Strip away the figleaf and reveal naysayers
November 23, 2009
-
Irresponsible Krugman, Again
November 23, 2009 5 comments
-
Our Entertainer-Monarchs
November 23, 2009 7 comments
-
Update: Don't Mess with the Scouts
November 23, 2009 3 comments
-
Religion and Capitalism
November 21, 2009 17 comments
-
New York Times Gets One Right
November 20, 2009 7 comments



recommend


Subscribe to Comments
