A Peace Prize for a War President

(AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

There'll be no effort by Barack Obama to disguise or obscure the fact that he's a war president when he accepts the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo on Thursday.

The ceremony takes place ten days after he announced plans to escalate the U.S. military engagement in Afghanistan by deploying another 30,000 American troops there.

Even the White House regards it as an odd "juxtaposition" and spokesman Robert Gibbs says the president will use his acceptance speech to address that irony.

It raises the question of whether the Nobel judges would have wanted to bestow one of the most highly-coveted awards on the planet on an American president newly-engaged in an expansion of military might in a conflict now in its eighth year.

The judges said they selected Mr. Obama to honor "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples."

But asked specifically if Mr. Obama will be accepting the Nobel Peace Prize as a war president, spokesman Gibbs was unambiguous. "Exactly," he stated bluntly. And he will mention Afghanistan in his acceptance speech.

It was easier for Mr. Obama's two predecessors who won the Peace Prize. They too, waged war, but were honored after-the-fact for their efforts to establish peace:

• In 1906, President Theodore Roosevelt was honored for what the Nobel Committee termed his "happy role in bringing to an end the bloody war recently waged between two of the world's great powers, Japan and Russia."

• And in 1919, President Woodrow Wilson was honored for helping to end World War I (before such wars had to be numbered) and his enumeration of "Fourteen Points," which the Nobel Committee said brought "a fundamental law of humanity into present-day international politics."

So there was no awkward juxtaposition for either of those two presidents to address in accepting their prizes.

An ailing Wilson could not appear in person to receive the honor, but in a telegram to the presentation ceremony, he spoke of the "vastness of the work still called for" in pursuit of the cause of peace.

He lamented that "mankind has not yet been rid of the unspeakable horror of war." But he said he is convinced "that our generation has, despite its wounds, made notable progress."

Ten years earlier, Roosevelt delivered the Nobel Lecture in person at the National Theater in Oslo, before an audience of more than 2,000.

"Peace is generally good in itself," said Roosevelt, "but it is never the highest good unless it comes as the handmaid of righteousness."

He said peace can even become "a very evil thing if it serves merely as a mask for cowardice and sloth, or and an instrument to further the ends of despotism or anarchy."

Those worlds might presage what Mr. Obama will say in accepting his Peace Prize even as he seeks to justify an escalation of the conflict in Afghanistan.

"No man," Roosevelt said, "is worth calling a man who will not fight rather than submit to infamy or see those that are dear to him suffer wrong."

His words 99 years ago could lend themselves to Mr. Obama's objectives in Afghanistan as he stated them last Tuesday evening at West Point.

"If I did not think that the security of the United States and the safety of the American people were at stake in Afghanistan," said Mr. Obama. "I would gladly order every single one of our troops home tomorrow."

He can be expected to argue that the U.S. is escalating in Afghanistan in the cause of peace.

---

(CBS)

Mark Knoller is a CBS News White House correspondent. You can read more of his posts in Hotsheet here. You can also follow him on Twitter here: http://twitter.com/markknoller.

[Rdt4]

Whatever else, abortion is an atrocity that terminates the life of innocent, helpless Human Beings. I appreciate that there are Men and Women in Congress who are doing what they can to help keep from being an accessory to murder by not allowing my paid taxes go towards paying for abortion. Life is a persons most fundamental right, and abortion ( the termination of a pregnancy by the removal or expulsion from the uterus of a Fetus/Embryo, resulting in or caused by its death) denies the fundamental right to life for innocent, helpless Human Beings. There have been 40+million abortions a year worldwide for years, that's more innocent lives terminated by abortion than any other atrocity (according to my resources, an encyclopedia.) I pray for change that will acknowledge a Prenatal Child as the helpless, innocent Human Being that it is, worthy of all the protections of the 14th Amendment, the Right to Life.

[Rdt4]

George Washington, the first President of the U.S. was a war President, and I'm grateful that he was or I'd probably be still taxed without representation. Yes, it's my understanding George Washington had slaves, and yes I believe that was one of his injustices, along with chopping down his fathers cherry tree. Which of the two are more important to Freedom from oppression. There have been 40+million abortions (the termination of a pregnancy by the removal or expulsion from the uterus of a Fetus/Embryo, resulting in or caused by its death) a year worldwide for years. Where is the compassion for the innocent, helpess Lives taken each year by the atrocity of abortion? And who's burden is it? And does it make any difference? Defending the innocent is the American way, or so they say, and I pray that it will make a difference, and yes I believe it's everyones burden, as every atrocity should be addressed. The right to life is each persons most fundamental right and must be defended vigorously and absolutely. I pray that President Obama will change his political stand from pro-choice to pro-life and do what he can to end the oppression of innocent, helpless Prenatal Children who need assistance being acknowedged as Human Beings in need of rights. That is what peace is about, Life, Freedom from Opression.

[tom147147]

Ok so Obama won the Nobel, well that?s very Nobel of him. Look I don?t think we could expect Him to go around in Norway like he?s on show at a carnival, He is the President after all, but hey not respecting an invite from a King that is serious? I found this informative though?
<a href="http://ketiva.com/Politics_and_Government/obama_accepts_the_nobel_prize_and_spoils_the_peace_with_norway.html"> http://ketiva.com/Politics_and_Government/obama_accepts_the_nobel_prize_and_spoils_the_peace_with_norway.html</a>

[stormerF2]

Why are the Tax payer being screwed by paying for Obama's trip to Norway to get his 1.4 million dollar nobel peace prize? This week Norway next week Sweden,What kind of carbon foot print and hyprocrosy is Obama spreading?

[NowBeWithThat]

You can spin it till it twirls but truth is Pres. Obama does not deserve the Nobel Peace Prize for his achievements. He has done nothing notable at this juncture, except make a boatload of promises he can't keep.

He got the prize for not being George W. Bush.

[50BMS13]

Once you KILL ALL THE TALIBAN.....YOU HAVE PEACE!!! That is what Obama is up to and he deserves the award. You cannot have peace in a china shop with a bull running around....you kill the bull, have a barbecue, sweep up the glass, then you have some PEACE!. That is what Obama is doing! He deserves the Nobel Peace Prize.

[RedWings_ninety_one]

Don't forget about killing off Al Queda.

[50BMS13]

RedWings_ninety_one
Yes indeed...especially so.

[skeezix06]

Sorry but everything considered, if he had any ethics he would send the Nobel people his regrets and tell them that there are others more deserving of the award.

[endurorob_5]

Ehtics? This is the same guy that said there would be no lobbyists in his admin and then proceeded to appoint lobbyists to key positions. This is the same guy that said he would go through each bill line by line and eliminate any waste and the proceeded to sign a bill with 9,000 earmarks. This guy has no ethics.

[Rdt4]

It's not about innocence or guilt, I believe that Prenatal Children are the most innocent of all Human Beings and yet there have been 40+million abortions (the termination of a pregnancy by the removal or expulsion from the uterus of a fetus/embryo, resulting in or caused by its death) a year worldwide for years. If President Obama was truly concerned with tyranny he would address this issue with a pro-life stand instead of his pro-choice support. I continue to pray that Prenatal Children all over the world will soon be acknowledged as Children worthy of rights (right to life) as all innocent Human Beings should be. I don't believe our U.S. Constitution was written to give anyone absolute power over the life of an innocent Human Being and yet those who claim to have a Constitutional Right to have an abortion, and have an abortion, are terminating the life of an innocent Human Being. The way I understand it, and atrocity is an extremely wicked or cruel act, and that is what an abortion is; resulting in or causing death. I have asked President Obama to please help Prenatal Children in their plight by supporting legislation that would protect innocent Children of all ages, and he either doesn't hear me or is too pre-occupied to respond. I believe tyranny needs to be addressed here at home (U.S.) before elsewhere.

[John_Merritt]

Sometimes war is a necessary by product of life because 'evil never sleeps or takes a vacation'. Sometimes the only way to create peace is to take the war to the enemy who is trying to disrupt and destroy everyone's way of life. If it was just 'them' against the US than it is a different ball game.

But the tentacles of evil expand the entire globe and until the want and the will for peace prevails, there has to be a confrontation. Since 'they' are not willing to create dialogue for lasting peace, this is what you get.

To ignore is to allow 'them' to gain strength. When 'they' are willing to put down their weapons and 'fight for peace' everywhere, than and only than will we all have common grounds for something substantive for all.

[Sparhauoc]

Ironic is not the same as contradictory people. If your definition of peace is merely the absence of conflict, than yes trying to win the war is not peaceful, but by that argument slavery is peaceful as long as nobody was killed.

If, however, you view peace as an actual presence: the presence of basic rights, the ability to live without fear, etc., then sometimes you have to fight for it.

That's not to say I agree with what we are doing in Afghanistan, I don't like their gov't that we seem to be supporting, but if it means an end to the Taliban, I'll take it.

I am also not saying Obama should have received this award - he has not exactly done anything yet for it yet, but I do agree with his decision to help his generals with the surge.