Kyle A. Porter Editor-in-chief

The Nobel Peace Prize. This crown of laurels may be a heavy burden to a new president.

Sixty-one percent of Americans believed that President Barack Obama did not deserve to win the Nobel Peace Prize according to a USA Today Gallup poll taken one week after the award was announced Oct. 9. When asked if they were personally glad he had won the Nobel, almost even numbers, 46 versus 47, said “yes” and “no” respectively.

When I heard the news of the prize that Friday morning on the radio, I was surprised but when the political commentary commenced, I was not surprised at the questioning reaction.

“Why?” is the valid question. 

“To Barack Obama for his efforts to strengthen cooperation between peoples to meet global challenges,” is the official statement of the Nobel committee in answer.

While there are no measurable foreign-policy achievements from Obama’s efforts in his first nine months in office, the ideals of global, peaceful coexistence are being served by the vision he is pursuing. The committee has been accused of representing a world view that is anti-American.  Obama’s international policy vision since his campaign for president is seen by his opponents as being flawed for his willingness to negotiate with some leaders and countries who are enemies of the U.S. 

The Gallup poll results, released Oct. 23, predictably show that political party affiliations were directly related to the reactions to the prize.  Only 10 percent of Republicans said it was deserved, 27 percent of independents and 59 percent of Democrats.  Notably, even those inclined favorably toward Obama and his policies were not completely in agreement that the peace prize was appropriate now.

The Nobel committee’s statements defend their selection; they maintain that they have followed the spirit and letter of Alfred Nobel’s directives.  His will dictates, “the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses” in the previous year shall be awarded the prize.

Since the first year of awards in 1901, 97 individuals and 20 organizations have won. Two previous U.S. presidents have won the Nobel Peace Prize while in office, Theodore Roosevelt in 1906 and Woodrow Wilson in 1919; Jimmy Carter won in 2002 after his term.

The Nobel Peace committee of five members, selected by the Norwegian Storting, or parliament, invites nominations and its deliberation process is kept secret for 50 years, so we’ll have to wait to find out who the other candidates were. By then, Obama’s legacy will be a chapter in history books.

From what I can see now, the vote of confidence from the Nobel committee is good reason to say thank you and accept the Nobel Prize graciously as a nation. Obama set the tone in his speech that Friday morning, humbled and acknowledging the legacy of former laureates and the encouragement for U.S. efforts to build consensus and rebuild multi-lateral approaches to world problems.

The Nobel committee expressed a hope for cooperation among world leaders, aided and guided by the leader of the free world, our president. 

My surprise has changed to gladness because the Nobel Peace Prize stands for ideals we can all hope to realize and support and there’s no downside in that.

If the Nobel Peace Prize can be turned into a liability by cynics and detractors what else should we hope for?