Politics

The Inclusive Nobel

Jocelyn Rousey

In July 2008, Senator Barack Obama spoke in Berlin about the necessity of tearing down ideological walls and fostering trust and cooperation in the international community. His message of unity, respect, and multilateralism, though simple, resonated in the crowded streets of a city whose recent history, after all, was marked by the rise and fall of a very real and physical wall. In a telling moment, the gathered crowds began to chant the American presidential candidate’s campaign slogan and the cries of “Yes we can!” echoed in the Berlin evening.

In the ten months since his inauguration, President Obama has received no small amount of criticism for his optimistic worldview. His notion that the world’s problems can be addressed through diplomacy is a far cry from the guns blazing approach of his predecessor. Obama aims to renew the so-called “soft power” of American diplomacy, the sort of diplomatic influence that is based on respect rather than military might.

On October 9th, the Norwegian Nobel Committee decided to award Obama the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize for, it said, “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” The Committee made special note of his “vision and work for a world without nuclear weapons.”

All in all, it was a confusing moment in his 10-month-old presidency. Most Americans, even the president himself, were left scratching their heads. Given Obama’s ambitious agenda when he assumed office, his track record thus far doesn’t seem all that impressive. The U.S. is still entrenched in two wars, climate change plays second fiddle to Iran, and Guantanamo has yet to close. Critics are quick to point out that the nomination deadline for the award was last February, a timetable which afforded the young president even less time to make his case in the international community. The general consensus among Obama’s opponents seems to be that Obama has yet to do anything to merit the award. He only won because he’s “not Bush.”

While there are, indeed, significant differences between Obama’s diplomacy and that of his predecessor, George W. Bush, it’s worth noting that the underlying goals of American foreign policy in the post-Cold War era haven’t changed all that much. From George H.W. Bush to Clinton, from George W. Bush to Obama, post-Cold War foreign policy has been a matter of exploiting that beloved notion of American exceptionalism. Seemingly vindicated by hegemonic military power, American politicians routinely cite some variant of the old “city on a hill” or “light in the darkness” metaphors to justify their taking of an active, meddling part in the affairs of other nations. As the only nation with blood on our hands from the use of nuclear weapons, this purported exceptionalism is a shallow, if not downright ironic, justification for our policing of nuclear technology.

To be fair, it would be political suicide for a president to publicly question American exceptionalism. But whether or not America is, in fact, exceptional is beside the point. Obama, just like his predecessors, sees something special in what American has to offer the world. Clearly, though, something about Obama’s particular brand of exceptionalist thinking appeals to the Nobel committee. “Not Bush,” it seems, is a rather superficial dismissal of Obama’s diplomacy.

George W. Bush brought plenty of cowboy bravado with him to the White House. Coupled with his unflappable belief that America must play a special, guiding role in international affairs and bolstered by the strain of neoconservative paranoia that served as common sense for his Administration, this brand of American machismo encouraged the former president to use his nation’s hegemony to engage in carte blanche diplomacy. While Bush was willing to work through international institutions when it suited him, Bush willingly bypassed the façade of multilateralism in favor of unilateral action when he invoked his pet “coalition of the willing.” Exceptional America became an arrogant America. In the face of such presumptuousness who can blame the international community for growing frustrated?

This is where the current president distinguishes himself from his predecessor. In his Berlin speech, Obama outlined his vision of a multilateral world where trust, rather than hegemony, encouraged cooperation. Obama emphasized his determination to work through the U.N. and other international institutions and above all he highlighted the necessity of diplomacy through dialogue rather than through military force. America might be exceptional, but that no longer implies a divine green light for its policies.

Obama’s emphasis on cooperation and mutual respect between nations is what appeals to the Nobel Committee and the wider world. After eight years of complete disregard for the opinions of the international community, this new president is willing to listen and share his dream of an exceptional world. Exceptionalism is no longer an exclusively American idea. Instead it’s a notion that can be shared by any who come to the diplomatic table willing to engage in constructive dialogue. Obama said as much in his press conference following the Committee’s announcement. “This award must be shared with everyone who strives for justice and dignity; for the young woman who marches silently in the streets on behalf of her right to be heard, even in the face of beatings and bullets; for the leader imprisoned in her own home because she refuses to abandon her commitment to democracy; for the soldier who sacrificed through tour after tour of duty on behalf of someone half a world away.”

Critics are far too quick to dismiss this award and it’s implications for the world. There’s no measure for the intangible effect that Obama, his vision, and his ascension to the American Presidency have had on the world. Yes, in actual hard terms, Obama hasn’t accomplished much by way of nuclear disarmament or climate control. But he has effected a vast change in the world’s consciousness. The French President Nicolas Sarkozy perhaps puts it best. “The award marks America’s return to the hearts of the people of the world.” Inspiration and hope are hard to measure yet some images stand as a testament to their existence; the packed streets of Berlin and the echoing cheers; Obama’s speech at Cairo University in June and the stark contrast it creates with Iranian President Ahmedinejad’s visit to Columbia University in 2007; and of course the Committee’s willingness to confer Obama with the Nobel Prize.

The truth of the matter is that by the February nomination deadline, Obama had accomplished two very important things. All along the campaign trail, though most obviously in Berlin, Obama had clearly outlined his vision for a world order based on respect and diplomacy. Once such a dream had been articulated, however, he went on to convince the people of the world’s most powerful nation that this was the vision worth electing to their highest office. Obama is an inspirational leader and that, rather than his not being Bush, is what won him the Nobel Prize.

Yes, it’s ironic to award a peace prize to a wartime president. But it’s important to remember that he inherited those wars. What took eight years to dig ourselves into will take longer than ten months to sort out. As Obama contemplates a further escalation in Afghanistan and as the world winces at the thought of another Vietnam, Obama has been granted a generous accolade by the international community, one that translates roughly as, “We like your style, so don’t screw it up.”

As Obama himself acknowledged, the Nobel Prize isn’t always awarded in recognition of a lifetime of achievement. Historically, the Prize has often been used to instead generate momentum for a given cause. With a cause as important as nuclear disarmament and renewed relations in the international community and with a leader as inspirational as Obama, why should the Nobel Committee pass up the opportunity to help? If anything, this award will keep that fickle notion of American exceptionalism in check for our president. There’s nothing like the collective pantheon of Nobel laureates weighing on a man’s conscience to help him keep his policies in perspective. Obama has a lot to live up to but his Nobel Prize ought to be a mark of pride rather than shame for the American people.

Jocelyn Rousey is an editor for American Polymath and a student at Boston College where she studies English and Economics.