Probably the main political impact of the news that the Nobel Committee has pronounced Barack Obama “the one” is that it will enhance his international standing, giving a major boost to his foreign policy agenda, so opponents of that agenda are already hard at work to de-legitimize the Nobel win.
Domestically, it will force a debate over what, precisely, Obama has accomplished. Indeed, the early line from conservatives and other critics on the news, which will have major international reverberations today, is that it proves once again that he’s a showboat who continues to float along on words, not accomplishments, with some calling on him to turn it down. Here’s a quick roundup of early opinion:
John Miller, National Review:
Obama isn’t the first American president to win the Nobel Peace Prize, but he’s the first to win it without having accomplished anything…Obama’s award is simply the projection of wishful thinking.
Mickey Kaus, Slate:
Turn it down! Politely decline. Say he’s honored but he hasn’t had the time yet to accomplish what he wants to accomplish. Result: He gets at least the same amount of glory–and helps solve his narcissism problem and his Fred Armisen (’What’s he done?’) problem, demonstrating that he’s uncomfortable with his reputation as a man overcelebrated for his potential long before he’s started to realize it.
Michael Binyon, the Times of London:
Rarely has an award had such an obvious political and partisan intent. It was clearly seen by the Norwegian Nobel committee as a way of expressing European gratitude for an end to the Bush Administration, approval for the election of America’s first black president and hope that Washington will honour its promise to re-engage with the world.
Instead, the prize risks looking preposterous in its claims, patronising in its intentions and demeaning in its attempt to build up a man who has barely begun his period in office, let alone achieved any tangible outcome for peace.
Rachel Abrams, The Weekly Standard:
Not A Parody…This is too perfect. Obama could turn it down on the grounds that not all his peace plans have come to fruition yet, but why should he?
Gideon Rachman, the Financial Times:
I am a genuine admirer of Obama. And I am very pleased that George W Bush is no longer president. 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? The peace prize committee say that he is being rewarded for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy”. But 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.
And, last but not least, the Taliban:
“We have seen no change in his strategy for peace. He has done nothing for peace in Afghanistan.”
It’s gonna be a long day.
Popularity: 12% [?]