Shaun Groves
At the end of the year my kids get a trophy from their gymnastics coach. Not because they can climb the rope and ring the bell. Not because they can do a roundoff or back handspring. Nope. They get a trophy for trying.
The deadline for submitting nominations to the Norwegian Nobel Prize committee was February 1st, only twelve days after President Obama took office. What did he do in those twelve days to merit a nomination? And how did he beat out the record-setting number of nominees to win the prize? He tried.
President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for effort. According to the committee: “efforts to strengthen international diplomacy.”
Gideon Rachman’s view is in line with the majority of commentators this morning when he writes:
I am a genuine admirer of Obama. …But I doubt that I am alone in wondering whether this award is slightly premature. It is hard to point to a single place where Obama’s efforts have actually brought about peace – Gaza, Iran, Sri Lanka?
…while it is OK to give school children prizes for “effort” – my kids get them all the time – I think international statesmen should probably be held to a higher standard.
Obama is a great orator, great thinker, savvy diplomat and may turn out to be a tremendous history-making agent of peace. But, the majority of headlines seem to agree, it’s too soon to tell. Even the Huffington Post and the Associated Press – both routinely supportive of President Obama – are scratching their heads. Effort?
Why not give the trophy to those who have had time to climb the rope, ring the bell and flip across the room a few times too?
Why not recognize Zimbabwe’s Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai for his successful standoff with the dictator President Mugabe? Or how about Fr. Christopher Hartley for his battle against American sugar companies and their virtual enslavement of Haitian plantation workers in the Dominican Republic?
Geir Lundestad, the secretary of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, answered the naysayers this way (via The Guardian):
“We do of course hope that there will be many concrete changes over the years, but when a president makes all these changes on these ideals, which are the ideals the Norwegian Nobel Committee has had for 100 years, we felt it was right to strengthen him as much as we can in this further struggle for these ideals.”
In other words, the committee is standing on the mat. President Obama has his hands on the rope and his eyes aimed at the bell. He’s started his long shimmy up. And the Norwegians are cheering him on. Maybe he’ll climb faster now. Maybe he’ll get farther. Maybe. And looked at that way, I can’t really begrudge a group of people applauding a leader they think stands a chance at reaching the top. Can you?
But, meanwhile, there are about 200 nominees exhausted from their climb whose only prize is a blistered pair of hands. Muscles aching. Brows sweaty. Seems wrong, some are suggesting, that these tattered workers for peace would lose to a guy who hasn’t made their long climb yet.
As I read many articles, blog posts and Facebook status updates expressing “outrage” and “disgust” over the “injustice” of awarding Obama the Nobel Peace Prize this morning, I thought about those 200 or so beleaguered nominees myself. Many of them devoted years or entire lifetimes to fighting injustice, conflict and evil. How ironic that today so many would fuss and fight on their supposed behalf. Over a peace prize, no less.
The majority of us may not think President Obama is fully deserving of a prize for accomplishing peace just yet, but I hope we can all agree his receiving it – even if premature – is no true injustice: no slavery on a sugar plantation. There’s no real evil being perpetrated against humanity here: no murderous dictator at work.
So much outrage and argument over this? Over a medal? That’s a real trivializing disservice to those nominees who have sacrificed themselves combatting actual injustices and evils in the world. And possible evidence that our own perspectives need tweaking, our own knowledge of the world and the evil in it may need expanding.
Cards Fan says:
I’m glad I’m not the only one who read about the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to Obama and thought … “huh?” As a sports fan, I really wish my team could be awarded a championship based on their great off-season.
You’ve hit on the real travesty, namely deserving men and women around the globe risking their lives and livelihood to end injustice. Maybe our president will get there … maybe he won’t. But, it’s certain that nothing before February 1 warranted the award.
On a final note, maybe I’ve read too many Left Behind books, but this one feels eerie!!
Veretax says:
I will admit first that I’m not a fan of President Obama, but that being said, I don’t fault him for this committee chosing him. If he indeed kept pushing and found a solution in some of the international areas that he has already been pushing, then I have no doubt he’d have been a worthy candidate.
No I fault the committee, they acted too soon, and now, Obama could embarrass them badly. Though I’ll be honest, how badly can that be given this is the same group that gave the medal to Yasser Arafat. I just always thought the ideals were lofty and hard to meet, guys like Nelson Mandella, Martin Luther King Jr, or Mother Teresa, people who poured their lives into changing the now, and had already done a lot to earn the worlds respect if not this committees.
For Obama to be granted this so early, I really have to question their motives, and I hope the president is careful what he does with the so called prize money, the last thing this country needs is the appearance of bribery at the highest office, but that having been said, but given all the people they could have chosen, Obama seems like a choice to jump on a band wagon, to vote for him because he is popular or because of some other reason that we may never know, yet I am concerned that this will be like a millstone around Obama’s neck. That he will be expected to do what this Nobel committee wants, rather than being free to govern the way the law of this land, and God would have him govern.
That’s my concerns anyways.
Danny Bixby says:
“I hope the president is careful what he does with the so called prize money”
He’ll donate it to charity.
Danny Bixby says:
“The majority of us may not think President Obama is fully deserving of a prize for accomplishing peace just yet, but I hope we can all agree his receiving it – even if premature – is no true injustice: no slavery on a sugar plantation. There’s no real evil being perpetrated against humanity here: no murderous dictator at work.
So much outrage and argument over this? Over a medal? That’s a real trivializing disservice to those nominees who have sacrificed themselves combatting actual injustices and evils in the world. And possible evidence that our own perspectives need tweaking, our own knowledge of the world and the evil in it may need expanding.”
I like this post, especially those last two paragraphs I quoted.
Unfortunately, there’s just too many people who will never be satisfied until Obama actually turns out to the antichrist that he is in their minds.
Amy says:
I AM a big fan of Obama, and I think you’re backwards on this. There were many, many people deserving of the award, who worked tirelessly to create peace in 2008-2009.
Obama, bless him, worked hard to become the president to have a shot at creating peace. Even he recognizes that he didn’t deserve it this year.
Shaun Groves says:
SO what am I backwards on, Amy?
Amy says:
The idea that Mr. Obama won the award for his efforts at peace-making. He didn’t have time to do that. He won the award because he isn’t George Bush. And while that’s a wonderful thing, I don’t know that it’s good enough for a Nobel.
Jason_73 says:
Heck, Ghandi never won the prize. Arafat did. It seems too strange a process to get all worked up about.
Hopefully, this is a sign that the rest of the world sees the Pres of the US in a different light than before. A man of Peace. Hopefully.
Leeann says:
I’ve been an Obama supporter all along, but I was surprised by the prize as well. I like Jason’s perspective on it though: “Hopefully, this is a sign that the rest of the world sees the Pres of the US in a different light than before. A man of Peace. Hopefully.”
Krissy says:
I like Obama, and voted for him, but was completely shocked by the announcement this morning. It’s really just embarrassing–kind of like if the kid who scored 95% of the goals on the soccer team didn’t get a trophy, but another kid did, because the coach deemed that the second kid probably had the potential to be able to score all the winning goals next year. But then, who really cares what a bunch of Norwegians think–as a Swede, I could tell dumb Norwegian jokes from now until midnight. (Why don’t they have ice cubes in Norway? Because they keep losing the recipe! And so on and so on…)
Seriously, though, if the choice of Obama tells us anything, it’s probably something about how desperate the rest of the world is for a real change in U.S. foreign policy compared to the Bush years.
Brant says:
It takes creative thinking — honestly — and serious effort to make the subject here Obama’s critics, on the very same day the award is announced. That’s not easy.
But this is a truly laughable — seriously, funny, in every sense — decision.
When something preposterous happens, people will point it out.
But no, it’s no big injustice. I agree with Jason. The award is already diminished to the point of meaninglessness.
Those trophies — for, you know, just being you, and darn it, we love you, no matter what you do or don’t do, sweetie — are a very apt analogy.
Shaun Groves says:
I heard this news on your morning show, actually. Yep, that’s where I get my news: Morning’s With Brant. I know all kinds of important stuff.
Good show this morning. Especially liked the bit about “Christian” not being an adjective. Heard that before…but not on Christian radio…I mean radio for Christians. And Loverboy? Seriously?
Brant says:
I saw Loverboy… twice. And I would pay American dollars to see Shaun Groves do an acoustic cover, after a heartfelt Compassion appeal, of “Hot Girls in Love”.
THAT, my friend, would warrant the Nobel AND a Dove, and maybe a Templeton Foundation grant.
Texas in Africa says:
I would only pay for that in Euros. Or possibly Chinese yuan, since that’s apparently the currency that’s about to take over the world.
Shaun, this was really well said. It’s been an interesting day at my historically black men’s college where almost all the students count Obama as a personal hero. They mostly seem to think it was a premature award, but we talked about things like how Wiley Brandt won a Nobel long before he did the things that made German reunification possible. Sometimes, a vote of confidence is really needed to spur someone on.
That said, I always like it better when somebody obscure wins the peace prize. The woman who planted trees in Kenya for 30 years, the guy who figured out that loaning money to the poor was possible – these are the people who deserve the platform that the Nobel gives its winners.
Shaun Groves says:
I reposted your comment over on the discussion taking place on my Facebook page (Yes, two discussions at once…every. day. Exhausting.)
It was that good.
Leeann says:
Yes, great points by Texas in Africa.
Elizabeth says:
As a supporter of Obama, I also said, “Huh?” When I heard this news. I think this is just added pressure on him, and more for his nay-sayers to chew on. I understand their intention, thinking that their support may bolster support for him, but I hope it doesn’t backfire.
Mamasboy says:
Hooray. We give a guy a peace prize who tries to tell the Honduran supreme court and legislature that their constitution isn’t fit to be followed; that they need to reinstall the former President Zelayas, who wanted to be president for life, and that the upcoming elections in which the interim president is unable to run are to be considered invalid by the US. That’s a real peaceful kind of guy. One who favors imposing a Hugo Chavez wanna-be on the Honduran people and who withholds aid to the country unless they tow the line and ignore their constitution. Sounds like a recipe for peace to me.
I suppose Obama’s actions are outweighed by his grandiose talk, in the minds of the Norwegian committee. Or perhaps they just don’t care about poor countries like Honduras. For my part, actions speak louder than words and the plight of poor countries matters.
MB
Andy says:
Shaun,
You’re right. No tragedy. No injustice.
It does, however, in my opinion complete the undermining of this award. There will be those who disagree, but I was equally surprised when Gore won it. It’s not politics, for me. It’s simply the idea that Gore, Obama, and many of the other recipients were more worthy than others doing real work to bring about peace within communities, or between nations.
Obama may one day prove to be a peacemaker worthy of this award. But he might not. Which is the issue. Right now, he simply hasn’t done anything to deserve it. Which does more to tear down the award than it does to build up Mr. Obama.
FzxGkJssFrk says:
Hey Shaun,
I totally agree that there’s no serious injustice perpetrated through this award. I’ve read a lot of online commentary on it, though, and I have yet to come across the words “outrage”, “disgust”, or “injustice”. To be fair, you’re probably looking in places I haven’t. I have read a lot of “shocked”, “ridiculous”, “joke”, and “for what?!”.
I also agree that surely there was someone else in the world more deserving of the award, as you pointed out.
Shaun Groves says:
The words “outrage” and “injustice” are courtesy of Facebook “friends.” The insinuation of outrage and injustice are courtesy of the majority of the bloggers and media folks commentating yesterday morning.
Perhaps I shouldn’t be so specific. Let’s just say that if a person is ANGRY about Obama getting this or any award I suspect their perspective is a little skewed…meaning it’s not the same as mine ; )
Talena says:
Shaun, thank you for this insightful analysis. You are so right–but it’s no surprise that the media has blown the unimportant out of proportion, while trivializing the actual issues that are debasing humanity in general. We hear about things like this. How often is a headline devoted to those Haitian slaves, anyway?
I haven’t actually been “standing here” for a while–I usually catch your stuff via Google Reader. I love love love the new look. Trés cool.
McNair says:
President Obama as man of peace: Let’s review. He “said” he would close the prisoner camp at Gitmo (it remains fully functioning). He “said” he would “get us out of Iraq, yet troop reductions are on a steady timetable negotiated by Pres. Bush. He “said” we will not use torture, or water boarding, or loud music on terrorists, yet we continues to use “rendition”—turning terrorists over to Egypt and other allies where water boarding would be a welcome relief from who-knows-what they use. This man of peace has also stepped up the use of un-manned predator drones to bomb remote areas of the war with terror.
The President of peaceful intentions and grand words was unable to talk down sea pirates and so he “said” to kill them, all three of them. Apparently this man of peace is the recipient of the Nobel Prize for Peace for his intentions and his words.
Maybe they should have given the Peace prize to President Obama’s speech writers or, just hung the Nobel medal on his teleprompter.
Emily says:
Thanks for this post!
I have been an Obama supporter for a very long time. I didn’t expect him to be a messiah for our country, but I was thrilled to see him elected and continue to give him the benefit of the doubt. Yet, even I did a double (okay, triple) take when I saw the headline.
I was in a hotel lobby with several others who were attending a Christian leadership conference. I heard a LOT of negative, hateful comments from Christians, so I am feeling ya on the “outrage” and “injustice.”
I also heard an interesting view from a CNN analyst- they said that there was one thing Obama had already done that was a MAJOR change in the eyes of other countries. He admitted that the US has made mistakes, and he admitted that we have improvements to be made in the areas of national diplomacy. He brought a humility to the leadership that was absent in previous administrations.
Does that make him a shoo-in over other worthy candidates? No. But it does help me understand what the awarding committee might have been seeking to reward. At the conference I mentioned, leaders from Andy Stanley to Chuck Swindoll to Malcolm Gladwell to Rob Bell all impressed upon us the idea of humility and accountability in leadership. So I “get it” a little more now, although I still think it’s too early. I think Obama himself probably thinks so too.
BTW, everyone who doesn’t like Gore or An Inconvenient Truth loves to say that the Nobel lost its value with his award. And that could be. But I’ve seen him give the talk in person to people of faith, and he makes strong ties between global warming and food/water supplies in developing countries (and eventually war over resources). To those who believe in global warming, this is a very noteworthy effort. Again, I’d hate to say it trumps other worthy candidates, but that’s why I’m not a judge. I’d declare a 200-way tie and really blow the whole process!
Finally, Shaun, just wanted to tell you that we saw somewhere between 500 & 600 Compassion kids sponsored this week at Catalyst. (I’m waiting to hear the final number). I saw a program graduate meet his sponsor for the first time. WOW.
Meredith says:
I’m not disgusted by any means. Surprised? Sure. Confused? A little.
But really, I’m encouraged. Cause the way I see it this: anyone is elligable! I could totally win it next year!
Carole Turner says:
Shaun, I heard freaky outcries on Twitter about this from MOST of the people I worship with. It was very surreal and sad. I posted a blog post about that day on Twitter, Cuz’ I had to unfollow some people just to stay saved and not want to punch preachers.
http://www.thewardrobeandthewhitetree.com/2009/10/follow-unfollow-tales-of-twitter.html
J. says:
I think there is cause for alarm. The man has been given award with no actions behind it. We live in a weird 1984ish era where terms matter more than truth and beliefs matter more than action. I am not disgusted by President Obama’s award but I don’t think to highly of it either. Its a paper tiger award at best. Its a shame because there are people out there really struggling and risking it all for the sake of peace.