Like many others, I did not think President Obama deserved to win the Nobel Peace Prize. At the same time, I thought it was unfair for some people to criticize him for winning the prize and to suggest he should refuse to accept it. President Obama didn’t ask for the prize, he didn’t campaign for it, and he had no control over the committee that awarded the prize to him. The only thing he could control was the tone of the speech he would give when accepting the prize. In my opinion, the speech President Obama gave this week when he accepted the Noble Peace Prize was his best speech since he became our President and Commander-in-Chief.
When you hire an attorney to represent you, you expect him to be your advocate—not your critic. Likewise, when the American people elect a President of the United States, they expect him to be an advocate for our country. The President should be the country’s number one cheerleader. Prior to this week, President Obama all too often has come across as being a critic of—rather than an advocate for—the United States of America. In my opinion, this is the primary reason he won the Nobel Peace Prize in the first place. In recent years, the Nobel Committee has shown animosity toward America. Many observers believe President Obama was awarded the prize because of his frequent and unrelenting criticisms of his own country and of his predecessor as President.
My guess is the members of the Nobel Committee were not too happy with President Obama’s acceptance speech. They probably anticipated more of the rhetoric for which President Obama is known. As for me, I was very happy with the acceptance speech, which I have read in its entirety. I do not agree with everything President Obama said in the speech, but overall I think it was an excellent speech.
President Obama began the speech by showing humility. In what could be viewed as a criticism of the Nobel Committee for awarding the prize to him, President Obama, in effect, acknowledged he had not earned and did not deserve the prize. He said, “Compared to some of the giants of history who have received this prize—Schweitzer and King; Marshall and Mandela—my accomplishments are slight. And then there are the men and women around the world who have been jailed and beaten in the pursuit of justice; those who toil in humanitarian organizations to relieve suffering; the unrecognized millions whose quiet acts of courage and compassion inspire even the most hardened of cynics. I cannot argue with those who find these men and women—some known, some obscure to all but those they help—to be far more deserving of this honor than I.”
As the Commander-in-Chief of a nation involved in two wars, President Obama did not apologize for his country, as he has done so frequently in the past, but he instead emphasized that some wars are just and necessary. As an example, he said “it is hard to conceive of a cause more just than the defeat of the Third Reich and the Axis powers” during World War II.
Many liberals, including President Obama, have frequently criticized the United States for causing wars and for seeking to impose its will on other countries. During his acceptance speech, President Obama took a different approach. As he should have, he recognized the important role played by the United States in the pursuit of peace. He said, “[T]he United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest—because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if other peoples’ children and grandchildren can live in freedom and democracy.”
President Obama also emphasized that evil in the world exists and must be addressed. He talked about the threat to world peace posed by terrorism and pointed out that “modern technology allows a few small men with outsized rage to murder innocents on a horrific scale.” He made reference to the non-violent strategies advocated by Gandhi and Martin Luther King, but then added, “A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda’s leaders to lay down their arms.”
Although we are constantly seeking peace, President Obama said, “We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth that we will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations—acting individually or in concert—will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.” He added, “I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in other places that have been scarred by war. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later. That is why all responsible nations must embrace the role that militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace.”
I was encouraged by President Obama’s speech. I was encouraged because he actually praised the country he was elected to represent. I was encouraged because he acknowledged the important role the United States has played and is continuing to play in pursuing peace and in seeking freedom for oppressed people throughout the world. I was encouraged because he recognized the need for a strong military to keep the peace. I was encouraged because of his recognition that terrorism poses a huge threat to peace and must be combated. Most importantly, I was encouraged because the speech shows President Obama recognizes reality.
Maybe the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Obama was a good thing. It gave him a forum to become an advocate for his country and to discuss the problems of evil in the world. We all want peace. It is clear to me, however, that we cannot achieve peace by sitting back and doing nothing or by talking without acting. President Obama and I may be on the same page for once.
Posts
