Deserving the Nobel?

"What has President Obama actually accomplished?"

remarks Michael Steele, chairman of the rival Republican party, in response to news of President Obama winning the Nobel Peace prize. Valid comment by itself. But when placed alongside the drivel spewing from Republicans and their internet agents, one sees the irrationally combative, insular, and tribal nature of American politics, where one cannot congratulate a fellow American for winning a benign award if he belongs to a different political party. Although the comments are malicious and prejudiced, are they correct? Is President Obama undeserving of the Nobel Peace prize? Why did the Nobel committee chose him?

"There is no way Barack Obama earned it in the nominations period"

says conservative blogger Erick Erickson. I'm not on the Nobel board, neither is Erickson, but its safe to assume they were aware of his longevity in office. They're also undoubtedly aware of what President Obama has or hasn't accomplished. So why give him the prize? Faux News may use the reflex excuse of liberal bias, however I feel he received the award for two reasons.

The first being his presidential campaign. Millions of world citizens were energized by Barack throughout 2008. After 8 years of military extremism and burgeoning economic chaos, people were finally united in hope across the world, believing that change was possible. Even the most ardent Obama critics, such as myself, cannot ignore how he captivated the globe. Secondly, I believe, he received the award for who and what he is not. Obama is not the instigator of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. He is not George W. Bush. Was giving this award to his successor pejorative slap in the face of President Bush? I hope so.

Do I feel Obama deserves the Nobel Prize? Not yet. As energizing and inspiring he was in 2008, he fails to end Bush's adventures in the Muslim world. He fails to put pressure on oppressive apartheid Israel. And Obama hasn't the courage to confront his criminal financiers from Wall St. who caused our current financial crisis.

However, Obama symbolizes something larger than either his accomplishments or failures. He signifies our hope for change, peace, an end to the rising tide of oppressive oligarchical fascism. The Nobel committee recognized not just his ability to inspire but that you were willing to invest in him. Awarding Obama the award reflects this; the Nobel is indirectly award to you. Deserved for your passionate debates with colleagues, attendance at rallies, support of progressive groups. Cumulatively these actions demonstrated your yearning for different direction.

I hope Obama comes to deserve this award in the future. I also hope you to stay aware and force elected politicians to follow through on the spirit of change you demonstrated in 2008. Complacency is not an option.

Israeli Egg on Obama's Face

Other presidents have known that talk of "Middle East peace" is a charade. A magic show. A sleight of hand pacifier to bide time for Israel land grabbing. It's Zionist version of "Don't ask don't tell". Don't ask about their nuclear arsenal, Israel won't tell. Don't ask blah blah, you get the picture. In the upper echelons of US government, this must be common knowledge. That's why no US president engages Israel / Palestine conflict until they're heading out of the White House, and only then half-heartedly. That's until Barack Obama. He entered the White House promising to tackle Middle East peace early in his term. I applauded his enthusiasm, albeit naive. But for someone hailed as a pragmatist, he has no historical perspective on the Middle East conflict. His ineffective engagement to date has resulted only in Israeli egg on his face. As passively talks of peace, Israel remains defiant of his wishes and his credibility as world leader takes a hit every time Israel throws egg in his face.

A recent omlet landed in the Oval Office via Avigdor Lieberman. "Israel's Foreign Minister has ruled out any permanent peace deal for years to come, even as the US envoy to the region called for swift resumption of peace talks," says James Hider of TimesOnline. While castrating Obama's envoy but essentially nullifying any peace talks, Lieberman says "What is possible to reach is a long-term intermediate agreement ... that leaves the tough issues for a much later stage." Doublespeak. What is there besides contentious issues? The status of Jerusalem. National borders. Palestinian right of return. Settlers. These are all serious matter. But Lieberman is happy to ignore these issues, let hatred fester, meanwhile Palestine remains an illegally occupied bantustan. How long do we wait? Until Palestinians to have no land to call home. Or until the Palestinian people are no more.

Israel obviously has no respect for Obama. Since taking office, Obama's representatives have been completely ignored by Israel, usually leaving Tel Aviv utterly embarrassed. Obama inspired hope in the world with his "change we can believe in". Sadly, Israel neither believes in Obama's change nor wants change to the status quo. As a sovereign nation, that is Israel's prerogative. That does not allow the US, nor the world to watch as idle spectators.

Acutely, Israel is not to blame, Obama is. Israel has been defiant of any country or world body that doesn't agree with its zionist ambitions for decades. This is nothing new. The recent failures in Middle East peace belong to Obama. He has lacked the understanding, conviction, and fortitude to deal with his ally effectively. He lacks the courage to mete out reprimands, whether in economic, military, or diplomatic arenas. Since Israel will remain obstinate and Obama will likely remain impotent in Tel Aviv, he should at least tell them how he likes his eggs cooked.