...President Obama to be Peace Prize Winner is that he has given the world 'hope for a better future' and is striving for nuclear disarmament. That despite the deadline for entry being Feb1st. Agreed, he then had another 8 months to achieve something, but he was nominated a full 11 days into his Presidency.
Since when do you get a Nobel Prize for making some people hope? Hope is a good thing, without it we would be in a very dark place, but next year can we expect Miss World to win ? After all, she always says 'I hope for a world without nuclear weapons'. Mr Obama has tried to advance peace in the Middle East and got nowhere, it's possible a third intifada is closer since he took office. Across the Middle East there is disillusionment after the heady and nieave optimism of the summer. His open hand to the Iranians has been re-buffed, he has ramped up the war in Afghanistan and increased the number of air strikes in Pakistan.
Obama's sincerity, and energy, in trying to do the right thing is not in question here. What is, is the number of marbles rolling around the distinguished grey heads of the Nobel Committee. Either that, or their political calucations.
I lean towards the latter. In recent years the Nobel Prize has received fewer headlines than normal. This is partially because in 2007 the prize was given to 'The Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change (and AL Gore). In 2006 it was a joint award, ditto in 2005. This diluted the impact.
Naming Obama guaranteed massive world wide coverage, but it might cheapen the award...
