Award of Nobel Peace Prize to President Obama

by Justin Morahan Sun Oct 11, 2009 20:42

http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2009/10/06/substitute-o...phtml

He came in with the good will of many millions of people. People outraged at the conduct of George W Bush gave Barack Obama " a free shave" in the hope that all would be different.

Some things have changed for the better - at the very least he has made efforts with regard to health, Guantanamo, openness, nuclear disarmament, peace in the Middle East. Some of his efforts were better than others. On all fronts he has failed so far. I don't hold failure against him. What I notice and don't like is his lack of resolution on the causes that he has upheld.

For me his most disappointing performance has been on the military front. In Afghanistan, his soldiers continue to kill civilians in a bloody and useless war. Different from George W Bush in so many ways, he is not different in this: he is an advocate for the "war on terror". His battleground is mainly Afghanistan, not Iraq. We had been warned but hoped otherwise. As Bush promised to rid the world of Saddam Hussein, Obama promised before his election to kill Osama Bin Laden. So his troops continue to kill and be killed in a country that is not theirs. It is in a way his admission that the strong arm, in this case war, is the way to bring peace - so long as it is in a country called Afghanistan or Pakistan.

The situation changes drastically when he studies the unlawful occupation by Israel of the West Bank, the holocaust perpetrated by Israel in Gaza last winter and the ongoing injustices against Palestinians carried out by IDF soldiers on a daily basis.

Not that I advocate the use of military might against injustice in Israel or elsewhere. What would be welcome would be the exertion of moral force by depriving the present State of Israel of its favoured status vis-à-vis the USA, the status of the spoiled brat who can do no wrong - no matter what wrong he does. The US could stop the endless flow of dollars that props up this regime, insist on regular inspections of its nuclear arsenal by the IAEA, stand up to the regime, not just talk about justice but act.

The protests outside the White House are now as common as they were under George W Bush. Last week there were a few hundred protestors on one day. There have been too many unfulfilled promises. The orange jump suits, the coffins, the placards, the plastic handcuffs, the arrests - all should remind Barack Obama that he is now walking in the shoes of George W Bush. It is a walk of shame for a man who appears to have been a decent type who had good intentions.

If Guantanamo had closed, the troops had gone home, Israeli-Palestinian talks - real talks - were afoot, I for one would say "well done" to the President. He would still have much to do in order to dismantle the empire around the globe.

But even if these things had happened, there should be no prizes. The best prize that a politician could win for himself or herself would be the inner peace that comes from the knowledge that one is doing what is right.

by pat c Sun Oct 11, 2009 19:41

Here are some more reactions to Obama winning the Peace Prize. Full articles at links.

Warmonger Wins Peace Prize
By Paul Craig Roberts

http://www.countercurrents.org/roberts101009.htm

It took 25 years longer than George Orwell thought for the slogans of 1984 to become reality. “War is Peace,” “Freedom is Slavery,” “Ignorance is Strength.” I would add, “Lie is Truth.”

Tarnished Gold
By Guy R McPherson

http://www.countercurrents.org/mcpherson101009.htm

War is peace. Life is death. Left is right. And this Orwellian world grows more Orwellian with each passing day

War And Peace Prizes
By Howard Zinn

http://www.countercurrents.org/zinn101009.htm

The Nobel peace committee should retire, and turn over its huge funds to some international peace organization which is not awed by stardom and rhetoric, and which has some understanding of history

The Nobel War Prize
By Bill Van Auken

http://www.countercurrents.org/auken101009.htm

Awarding a peace prize to the US president is farcical. There are widespread warnings that the selection may well prove only an embarrassment for the Obama administration. How is it possible to proclaim a “commander-in-chief” who is responsible for war crimes, such as bombing the civilian population of Afghanistan—one such attack having claimed the lives of over 100 men, women and children just last May—as the champion of peace?

Audacity In Norway
By Kim Petersen

http://www.countercurrents.org/petersen101009.htm

Obama is a man who has yet to shut down a global gulag, who has yet to end the warring in Iraq, who has yet to oversee the return of the elected president of Haiti (deposed by US, Canadian, and French forces), who stands unflinching on the coup d’etat in Honduras, who runs cover for Israeli massacres of Palestinians and Israeli violations of the Geneva Conventions (i.e., supporting war crimes), who seeks to proliferate military bases in Columbia, who has ramped up the killing in Afghanistan, and who has overseen the spillover of war into Pakistan. Is this the criteria that is deserving of a Nobel Peace Prize?