The morning-after reaction to Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize continues to be a massive and collective “Huh?”
Millions of people around the world are scratching their heads, trying to figure out the awarding committee’s rationale, seeing politics as the motive.
The Washington Post: “In offering this latest Euro-celebration of the 2008 election, the Norwegian committee has … demonstrated a certain cluelessness about America. If anything animates Mr. Obama’s critics in this country, it is the impression that he is the focus of a global cult of personality. This prize, at this time, only feeds that impression, and thus does him no favors politically.”
The Los Angeles Times: “Obama managed to be both abashed and appreciative in his response, but no amount of self-effacing spin can obscure the oddity of this award.”
Like others, the LA Times noted that “It’s hard to escape the impression that Obama was honored because he isn’t George W. Bush.”
The Wall Street Journal: “Our own reaction is bemusement at the Norwegian decision to offer what amounts to the world’s first futures prize in diplomacy, with the Nobel Committee anticipating the heroic concessions that it believes Mr. Obama will make to secure treaties that will produce a new era of global serenity…. We all have at least three more years to learn if Mr. Obama will fulfill the audacity of hope that the Nobel Committee has put on him to bow to the values of the world’s ‘majority’. ” says
The Dallas Morning News: “Though not being George W. Bush may cause impressionable Norwegians to flush with ardor, it is not an actual Nobel-worthy accomplishment. By awarding this celebrated prize to a president who hasn’t had the time to achieve anything substantial on the world stage, the Nobel committee has demeaned the award’s value, and put Obama in a difficult position…. As even skeptical liberal commentators said yesterday, this prize goes a long way toward bolstering the case that the adulation the president receives is more hype than reality.”