The question is what has Barack Obama actually accomplished to deserve the Noble Peace Prize?
Don't get me wrong I like Mr Barack Obama but I don't think he deserved the Noble Peace Prize, not just yet.
I have all this while questioned the credibility of the Noble Prize Committee that oversees the award of the Noble Prizes.In the past a number of less deserving and less prominent figures have been awarded the prize for so-called accomplishment.Will get back to that subject later.Let's deal with Mr Obama first.
Obama has been President for less than a year and he is still fighting wars on two fronts, Iraq and Afghanistan.He is sending more American troops to Afghanistan to fight the Taliban.The Palestinian conflict is still a hot issue and unresolved.The relationship with Iran is still tense.North Korea is still a pain in the ass.So, tell me what world peace has he achieved since taking office as President of the most powerful nation on earth.
Most people were under the impression that the Noble Peace Prize are for achievements in bringing peace to the world, to a region or to an area of conflicts.Obama has achieved nothing of that sort to deserve such an honour.
The Noble Prize committee should clarify whether the Peace Prize is for a person's achievements or for foreseen achievements.How do they gauge and determine what's likely to happen say two to five years from now, whether Obama can fulfill what foreseen as probable achievements by the Committee.Can he achieves lasting world peace during his term of office? The answer is probably a big NO.
The world will continue to have conflicts, where one conflict is resolved, new ones will emerge.The present conflict that would probably end up like the one in Vietnam is Afghanistan.
Death in jihad is the greatest honour for an Afghan.No where death is more revered than in this godforsaken country.Like the Russians, the Americans will leave Afghanistan with their tails in between their legs.
Obama is sending more troops to Afghanistan and Pakistan to widen the area of conflicts rather than trying to resolve it.If this is what the Committee termed as to enhance Mr Obama's diplomatic efforts than my suspicion that the Noble Prize is as political as any political crap can be is true.
The Noble Prize has always been mired in controversies, not only in the Peace Prize, but also in its other disciplines.However, I will only confine my area of interest to the Peace Prize.
The biggest hypocritical achievement ever made by the committee and an unforgivable blunder was Mahatma Gandhi.Though, the most qualified during his time and nominated 5 times he was never awarded the Noble Peace Prize.Gandhi also didn't get a posthumous award due to prohibition of such award but in 1948, the year Gandhi died, the hypocrites in the Committee awarded a posthumous Noble Peace Prize to their fellow Scandinavian Dag Hammarskjold who was nominated but died in a plane crash.If any of you know this name than you should be awarded honorary Phd in World Politics.
Is the Dalai Lama more deserving than Gandhi? What are his achievements that have benefited mankind or his kinds? Tibet is still under Chinese rule and the Dalai Lama lived in exile and conned the whole world to gain sympathy for him and a country that he doesn't dare set foot on.Has he got Tibet back and free his people of Chinese hegemonic rule like what Gandhi did to the British in India or Nelson Mandela, who spent half his life in prison because of his conviction that all humans are equal, broke down apartheid and brought equality and independence to his people?
Without any doubt, Mandela was much more deserving than the Dalai Lama and Aung San Suu Kyi, both of whom I think do not deserve the Noble Peace Prize.Only yesterday, the American government awarded the Dalai Lama with the inaugural Lantos Human Rights Prize, that angered the Chinese government.
After so many decades Myanmar is still under dictatorial military rule, its door half- closed to the outside world, she under house arrest and her people living in fear of a ruthless regime.What has Aung San Suu Kyi achieved to deserve the Noble Peace Prize?
In 1994, hypocrisy prevailed again, Noble Peace Prizes were given to three personalities, Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin for their efforts to create peace in the Middle East.That probably stood as a joke today, peace in the Middle East? The three have done more for conflicts than peaceful efforts as far back as my memory takes me.It goes to show the politics of this so-called prestigious body.Why don't they just give to one of the most deserving among the three? They didn't dare give to Arafat alone.That would definitely upset the Jews.
Those highly glorified awards are as highly explosive as the dynamites of Alfred Noble.Some are less deserving than others, not all are deserving.
Alfred Noble is kicking in his grave trying to get out to give those in the committee a good kick in the asses.
Barack Obama ! no, not yet.
Watch out! Anwar Ibrahim may be next.