Saturday, October 10, 2009

Not So Fast

Obama, Nobel peace and Israel

Israeli columnist, Herb Keinon, argues that Obama's unearned Nobel prize may make the maintenance of Middle East more difficult for Israel:
"For just as the Saudis are unlikely to heed Obama's calls to make normalization gestures to Israel, and the Palestinians are unlikely to do as Obama says and sit down immediately with Israel to negotiate just because the Nobel prize committee awarded him its prize, surely Israel need not bend now to his every will and dictate.

Jimmy Carter won the award in 2002, and government officials - with the exception of Peres - refuse to meet with him when he comes to the region.

Máiread Corrigan-Maguire of Northern Ireland, co-winner of the 1976 award, regularly rides one of the Free Gaza boats from Cyprus with an assemblage of other extreme leftists.

But still. Carter is not a sitting president, and Corrigan-Maguire - well, who really cares.

But in many corners of the world, and especially in Europe, the Nobel Peace Prize will grant Obama even more luster and moral authority than he already has, and when Israel says no to him - as it inevitably will to some of his demands - it will be portrayed as spitting in the face not only of an American president, but also of an internationally recognized champion of peace.

The Saudis and Palestinians, of course, will come under no such opprobrium for bucking Obama's will.

And then there is the question of Iran. By giving Obama the award, rather than - as The Washington Post suggested - to the Iranian democratic movement and posthumously to Neda Agha-Soltan, who was killed protesting the election there, the Nobel Committee seemed to be trying to steer Obama away from any confrontation with Iran.

Imagine the headlines in Oslo if the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize winner approved the launch of a preemptive military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities."

Forcefully and logically argued, albeit, but who says Obama's stature will give him more sway in the world just because the Nobel Peace Prize committee decided to break the rules and play politics with the award. Based on the reaction we've seen over the past 24 hours, I would say the Nobel Peace Prize Committee will be the biggest victim here - of its own presumption. As the opening paragraph in Kienon's piece says, he (Obama) has done nothing to deserve it and many are saying the Committee besmirched itself, perhaps beyond repair. And besides, the notion that Obama would authorize a military strike against Iran was already pretty remote, although this certainly casts a pall on his soon to be known decision regarding Afghanistan.

And Europe? I'm not so sure he has the big players in Europe correctly pegged, either. Berlusconi is practically history, beset as he is with scandal swirling around his personal life. Britain is basically leaderless at the moment and I'm reasonably certain that the Labour Party is history as soon as the next election is called (faster, please). Sarkozi certainly has no love for Obama, nor for Iran. Eastern Europe just had their defense shield taken away from him by The One so they are hardly in the mood to celebrate the Committee's decision, unless leaving them more vulnerable to the ruminations of the Russian Bear or the Iranian tyranny is considered peace building! Who's left that really matters and that wasn't already in the Western sphere? Besides, just one more year away from mid-term Congressional elections, and if my reading of the mood of the American electorate is correct, I expect we'll have a very different dynamic in Washington and after all, it is Congress that authorizes military strikes, not the President.

1 Comments:

Blogger Indigo Red said...

"... it is Congress that authorizes military strikes, not the President."

Sort of. The President as Commander-in-Chief authorizes military strikes. Congress authorizes the funds to carry out the operations. The decisions by POTUS/CiC are most often made with already appropriated military contingency funds which Congress can cut off in the next budget cycle not affecting current ops which Congress is usually loathe to defund.

To complicate things further, subsequent Congresses and Presidents are not obligated to the actions of any previous government... makes Constitutional Revolution easier.

Once again, Louise, your analysis is spot on. None of the players will read their lines or hit their marks as directed. We forget the Nobel Prize is not something important like a daytime Emmy or an Oscar. Carter got a Nobel for not being George Bush one, and as SNL said, Obama got his Nobel for not being Bush, too.

Ooooo, nice word play!!

October 11, 2009 1:24 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home