Obama deserved the Nobel Prize

Deserved: "to have earned or be worthy of something" (1) The Targets of the Nobel Peace Prize As the Nobel Prize was created by Alfred Nobel in 1901, this is his explanation for who and under what situation the Nobel Peace Prize (NPP) in particular is deserved. He says:"The said interest shall be divided into five equal parts, which shall be apportioned as follows: /- - -/ one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses. " (2) Therefore, it is not a part of the criteria that the work be done through the course of a lifetime. It is rather the criteria that the person awarded have done "the most or the best work" for friendly and peaceful relations among nations, or the reduction of armies and promotion of institutions of peace. The debate henceforth would need to adhere to the authority of Nobel's criteria as the basis of justification or invalidity. Did Obama do the most or the best work for friendly international relations, or for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and the promotion of institutions of peace? What did Obama accomplish prior to earning the awardThe following is a derived list of Obama's activities: January 21: Obama met with the ambassador to Iraq, commander in Iraq, and regional commander to receive a complete briefing on the war. January 22: Obama ordered the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention center. January 22: Obama signed an executive order explicitly prohibiting the use oftorture and ordering all U. S. forces to obey the Army Field Manual. He also ordered a review of the case of Ali Saleh al-Marri, a detainee held on a Naval brig in South Carolina. January 23: Obama rescinded the Mexico City policy, which had prevented nongovernmental organizations from receiving government funding if they supplied family planning assistance or abortions abroad. January 26: Obama announced his appointing of Todd Stern to the new position ofspecial envoy for climate change -- recognizing the environment as a pressing foreign-policy concern(3) Obama's speech in Prague to the denouncement of Nuclear weapons and the reduction and abolition thereof. (4) “I think it’s extremely well deserved. … I think it will take some time before people put together all the different moves that linked his speech at the U. N. on the abolishing of nuclear weapons, his shift on the missile defense program in Eastern Europe and the movement of Russia to joining the international consensus that confronted Iran to abide by the nonproliferation treaty. ” — Former Vice President Al Gore. " (5)Referring back to the criteria of the award, we see that in Obama's image and campaign for a world without nuclear weapons, the closing of Guantanamo Bay, and the explicit prohibition of torture, which had been compromised in the Bush regime, he is qualified under the "promotion of peace congresses. " We also see that in Obama's diplomatic confrontation of foreign and previously shunned regimes, he is qualified under "fraternity between nations. " "A central element of Barack Obama's plan to change American foreign policy is his intention, upon becoming president, to meet with foreign leaders of extremist regimes -- the type of rogue-state dictators that George W. Bush has generally shunned during his time as president. " (6)What other presidents have won the Award and Why? In order to better understand how Obama fits in to deserve the award, we must look at what other presidents have done to deserve the award, and compare and contrast. The following is a list of previous presidents who have receievd the Peace Prize award, and why: Teddy Roosevelt won it in 1905 for helping to end the Russo-Japanese War. Woodrow Wilson won it in 1919 after pushing to join the League of Nations. Jimmy Carter won it in 2002 (not while he was elected in office) for humanitarian efforts. (7) Take Woodrow Wilson's reason for winning, he simply pushed to join the League of Nations. This was a tremendous step under the criteria of "fraternity between nations. " Now take Obama's new approach to foreign governments, combine that with his strong presidential advocation of nuclear weapon abolition. They both exist on the basis of mere "promotion" hopefully translating into action. It is often the misconception when visualizing the Nobel Peace Prize that the winners do something spontaneously heroic or lifelong and valiant. While that is the case for some, it is not the case for all. Someone in as pressured, influential and powerful a position as the president of the U. S actively and fervently campaigning for an idealistic goal in and of itself is a significant step in more peaceful times. This is not to be distorted that all that is required to win is simply to have power, and say something about world peace, no, rather it is to have power and do something, whether it is physical action or simply relentless campaign and effort for greater strides in a more peaceful world and more peaceful relations among nations like in Roosevelt's case. Obama has proved to fall under this requirement, and has proved to deserve the Nobel peace Prize, whether or not even he himself thinks so. I'll rest my argument momentarily on that point. I eagerly await my opponent's response. Sources1. . http://www.bing.com...2. . http://www.nobelprize.org...3. . http://blog.foreignpolicy.com...4. . http://www.huffingtonpost.com...5. . http://bumpshack.com...6. . http://online.wsj.com...7. . http://wiki.answers.com...