Nobel committee head Thorbjoern Jagland defends Barack Obama peace prize

Source: Agence France-Presse

THE head of the Nobel Peace Prize committee has defended its controversial decision to give the award to US President Barack Obama, saying his work so far justifies the honour.

"He could have also had it too late," Thorbjoern Jagland said.

"Can someone tell me who did more than him this year? It is difficult to name a winner of the peace prize who is more in line with Alfred Nobel's will."

(snip)
The leader of Norway's main opposition called for Mr Jagland's resignation, a newspaper reported.

Read more: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26194359-12377,00.html

---

Opposition urges Nobel chief's resignation
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26194319-12335,00.html

be a repuke.

same.

PO should have gotten the NPP and this is the piece de resistance~

"Can someone tell me who did more than him this year? It is difficult to name a winner of the peace prize who is more in line with Alfred Nobel's will."

What's sad is that the head of the NNP Committee has to defend their choice to the idiots.

Shall I hold your hand while you weep?

"Progress Party brochure sparks racism charges
Reactions were swift and strong after the populist Progress Party's new election campaign brochure appeared, its cover featuring a man wearing a balaclava and brandishing a shotgun alongside the quote: "The perpetrator is of foreign origin ...!""

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article1097512.ece

link:
http://nobelpeace.eu/

I think that would just about say it all

of America.

to those who can't stomach Obama winning this, I say "suck it, swallow it... not a goddamn thing you can do about it."

Nonproliferation
President Obama was active on the issue of nonproliferation when he was a Senator. He and Senator Lugar crafted a rather unique nonproliferation bill in 2005 and it was signed into law in 2007. What they did was recognize that not only nuclear weapons need to be reigned in, conventional weapons also need to be controlled. Conventional weapons kill many more people than nuclear weapons.

but we all know this will only enrage the 'he didn't deserve it' crowd....

over this is astonishing.

A decision was made, that's the end of it.

Just because some jugheads w/o any better answers have the "power" to make this an "article" is beyond the pale.

hostilities with Iran to prevent war. The heads of Doctors without Borders did more. A whole lot of international peace activists did more. But that committee has a long history of ignoring the mere workers in the trenches. They like to honor celebrities.

There have been a few exceptions where they honored dissidents who struggled daily for peace, but then they gave it to warmongers like Kissinger.

If they really believe that nobody has done more for peace this year than Obama, while escalating one war, continuing another, threatening a third, continuing torture in Gitmo, continuing secret CIA prisons, increasing the already largest military budget in the world, expanding our use of the military industrial complex, etc. then they really aren't paying attention.

:wtf:

Pretty speeches really are Not the same as accomplishing something.

got the Nobel several years ago. So much for THAT argument.

Oh, I can't wait to hear this one explained.

Scott Ritter has explained in many public interviews that Iran has not violated any of their international agreements regarding nuclear development. It is the US who broke the agreement by backtracking and attacking their development of nuclear technology for energy purposes, claiming that Iran should now not be allowed to have ANY nuclear technology.

So here we are escalating hostilities with Iran, with constant talk about going to war with them, having war games to prepare for war. There are news stories about Isreal being the nation that will strike the first blow, bringing us in as their ally. Obama is participating in the retoric and the hostility and doing nothing to resume the diplomacy to end this hostility.

He is not going back to the international agreement that said that the US recognized and accepted that Iran could have nuclear technolgy for peaceful purposes. He is not accepting the word of international monitors that Iran has accounted for 100% if their nuclear material and technology and is not developing a weapons program.

THAT is how we are threatening a third war.

I hope your wait was worth it. In the future you might want to pay attention to the news.

I think you're seeing what you want to see. We actually didn't choose the warmongers this time--we chose the smart guy who doesn't think diplomacy's a dirty word.

And don't talk to me like I'm three years old, you patronizing ass.

ended torture too when they said they did. Even though every person released from Gitmo has reported that the torture and abuse still hasn't stopped.

You probably believed the reports that we would have a timetable for leaving Iraq. Still waiting?

or that diplomacy would restore "respect for the rule of law" while we are instead still pushing military tribunals using cooked evidence.

:eyes:

You were the one who showed up and posted the condescending snark towards me, so it's a bit late to get upset about it when I throw it back at you. It it bothers you, stop being so naive and ill-informed. Say something smart that shows you actually know something and then we'll have something to talk about. :P

it's a way of life with President Obama.

but, you have to have been paying attention..

<snip>

October 9, 2009

By Steven Leser

As a supporter of President Obama, I knew that this day would come, I just didn't think it would come so soon. I believe the President deserves an enormous amount of credit for changing the tone of American diplomacy in his first 8-9 months in office. This tone change is responsible for a dramatic improvement in the way Americans are perceived abroad. In a recent poll reported in Time Magazine (see http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/10/07/barack-obama... / ), America is now the most admired country in the world, up from seventh only a year ago.

For all of that, the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama at this time was a bit surprising to me, to say the least. I read through some of the articles and reports to see if I could gain some insight into the thinking of the Nobel committee as to what brought this about. Sure, there are the jokesters and one liners about the President not being George Bush and all of that, but how did this all come about and why.

The eureka moment came to me after reading two separate AP reports. In the first, the AP reporters interviewed a member of the Nobel Committee who articulated the reason for the nomination. Conspicuously mentioned was the Presidents commitment to reduce the world stock of nuclear arms. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/eu_nobel_peace :

The Norwegian Nobel Committee countered that it was trying "to promote what he stands for and the positive processes that have started now." It lauded the change in global mood wrought by Obama's calls for peace and cooperation, and praised his pledges to reduce the world stock of nuclear arms, ease American conflicts with Muslim nations and strengthen the U.S. role in combating climate change.

The peace prize was created partly to encourage ongoing peace efforts but Obama's efforts are at far earlier stages than past winners'. The Nobel committee acknowledged that they may not bear fruit at all.

"He got the prize because he has been able to change the international climate," Nobel Committee chairman Thorbjoern Jagland said. "Some people say, and I understand it, isn't it premature? Too early? Well, I'd say then that it could be too late to respond three years from now. It is now that we have the opportunity to respond — all of us.".

grantcart (1000+ posts) Fri Oct-09-09 02:14 PM
Response to Original message

"4. If I might add a little to your analysis."

I don't think it is so much that ElBaradei authored this sentiment but he represents what is a growing and pervasive understanding of what the President is doing outside the US.

When you live outside the US for extended periods of time you become aware that perceptions of what is important in the US and what is important outside the US are so different.

For example, establishing the defensive missle shield in Eastern Europe was seen as a very devisive, stupid and dangerous move and a real threat to peace.

1) It was perceived as devisive because it not only generated a totally needless hostility between Europe and Russia but it also divided Eastern and Western Europe (and that may have been one of the main reasons that Bush pursued it - hoping to increase American hegemony in Europe.

2) It was universally thought of as a modern Maginot Line because high tech defensive measures are (as the terrorists on 9/11 proved) easily defeated if there is a strong will to do so.

3) It was understood as a threat to peace because it took Russia out of world peace equation. As long as the US was ignoring their concerns then Russia was not going to help with Iran or any other issue that didn't impact directly on their immediate self interest. That would also give cover for China to obstruct the Security Council.

So by agreeing not to go ahead with an expensive, ineffective and divisive defensive missle shield in Eastern Europe a lot of things have changed. This was big big news in Europe but didn't raise a wrinkle here.

BTW Mohamed ElBaradei is one of the greatest unsung International Civil Servants."

<more>http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8692775

Michael Moore's take on PO being given the NPP.

<snip>

P.S. Your opposition has spent the morning attacking you for bringing such good will to this country. Why do they hate America so much? I get the feeling that if you found the cure for cancer this afternoon they'd be denouncing you for destroying free enterprise because cancer centers would have to close. There are those who say you've done nothing yet to deserve this award. As far as I'm concerned, the very fact that you've offered to walk into the minefield of hate and try to undo the irreparable damage the last president did is not only appreciated by me and millions of others, it is also an act of true bravery.That's why you got the prize. The whole world is depending on the U.S. -- and you -- to literally save this planet. Let's not let them down.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/10/9/791561/-Congratulations-President-Obama-on-the-Nobel-Peace-PrizeNow-Please-Earn-it!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8693353

'To think the US President is an undeserving Nobel winner misses the point' (UK Independent)

<more>
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8694329

"Rachel Maddow: Obama Derangement Syndrome"

<more>
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8694351

U.N. approves resolution to rid world of nukes
Security Council unanimously OKs initiative on nonproliferation, nuke terror"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33001551/ns/world_news-unit

"Douglas Brinkley: Obama has already confirmed his place of greatness
Well-Deserved Prize"

<more>
ttp://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8694906

Michael Moore's Second Thoughts on President Obama winning the NPP..

"My prediction for the future? You become the first two-time winner of the Nobel Peace Prize! Yeah!"

<much more>
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8695710

then let's hope it begins to produce some results at some point. That would be really nice.

When the military budget gets cut for the first time
or regulations get put into place that gut the power of the military industrial complex in the pentagon
or we really stop torturing people and appolgize for having tortured people for all these years
or we get out of Iraq and/or Afghanistan
or we stand up and put a stop to the warmongering rhetoric aimed at Iran, whom international monitors admit hasn't done anything wrong with their nuclear technology
or we close all the CIA prisons and propose new legislation prohibiting them from running secret prisons in the future

Then, when we have produced any kind of actual result I'll believe that it's more than just pretty words. I look for results. I would LOVE to be able to take his words seriously, but I have yet to see results.

I listened to his speech today in front of the Human Rights Campaign Fund. It was an amazing, beautiful speech. This was the first time I have ever heard him use language that unequivocally commits him fully supporting LGBT rights without any qualifiers, maybes or smoke and mirrors. I am willing to believe that he is FINALLY a real ally of the LGBT community after hearing this latest speech. But I'm still waiting to see results here too.

All the great speeches in the world mean nothing if we don't see results backing them up.