barack obama, who has been america's president for just nine months, has won the 2009 nobel peace prize. perhaps the nordic judges felt it was a suitable consolation after chicago lost out to rio de janeiro in its bid to host the 2016 olympic games. or the prizegivers might have felt moved by mr obama’s personal story: that a mixed-race man is president says much about the peaceful progress on race relations in america. instead they emphasised mr obama’s aspirations and his commitment to diplomacy, even if, so far, he has achieved little that is concrete.
most broadly, he has sought to engage with opponents, saying that america would “extend a hand, if you unclench your fist”, for example to those who were earlier dismissed as an “axis of evil”. somewhat to the discomfort of iran’s president, mahmoud ahmadinejad, who had bolstered his domestic support by vilifying america as an aggressor, mr obama has proposed holding talks about nuclear affairs, removing a precondition that iran first abandon enrichment of uranium. mr obama made withdrawal of american forces from iraq one of the main pledges of his election campaign and has since overseen a slightly quicker run down of troops than was envisaged by mr bush. towards north korea, too, mr obama has dangled the prospect of bilateral talks and closer engagement.
regarding russia mr obama has developed a policy of notably warmer ties, dubbed “hitting the reset button”. relations had become especially frosty towards the end of mr bush’s presidency when war broke out between georgia, an ally of america, and russia. since coming to office mr obama has also overseen talks aimed at reducing the nuclear arsenals of russia and america, while speaking of his ultimate wish to “get to zero”—somehow ridding the world of all nuclear weapons. most substantially (and to the dismay of the polish and czech governments), he has scrapped an earlier plan to deploy a missile-defence shield on land in eastern europe, which had been seen as a provocation by russia.
yet mr obama’s main achievement is a change of tone in foreign policy. a speech given in egypt in june was an eloquent call for a new understanding between america and islam. it was designed both to assure muslims, now thought to number 1.6 billion around the world, that america is not set on a crusade. similarly it was intended to convey to any americans (and others) who believe in the notion of a “clash of civilisations” that friendly ties between religions is eminently possible.
similarly, american policy towards small and repressive regimes, ranging from myanmar to cuba, has shifted in mood, if not yet substance, by offering the prospect of engagement if governments demonstrate progress towards democracy. some may also see mr obama’s push for more action to tackle climate change as a factor—he is urging congress to pass a cap-and-trade bill and has said that his administration would decree new environmental rules if congress fails to do so. (al gore, another democratic figure, also won the nobel prize, for his campaigns against climate change.)
yet critics will have plenty to complain about. the prize-giving committee was at pains to emphasise mr obama’s “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples”. in the citation, the committee argued that his “diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population.” but is the award premature? although the prize may be given in the spirit of encouraging mr obama’s government, it might have been better to wait for more solid achievements. with so many good intentions, and so many initiatives scattered around the world (and an immensely busy domestic agenda, including health-care reform and averting economic collapse), mr obama appears to be racing around trying everything without yet achieving much.
one might point to mr obama’s lauded decision to close the military prison for terrorist suspects in guantánamo bay, and his explicit rejection of the use of torture by american spies and interrogators. both are welcome, but for now guantánamo bay remains open. carrying through on promises is proving far harder than making them. similarly mr obama made progress in encouraging israeli and palestinian leaders to hold talks about peace earlier this year, but as he is distracted by other concerns both parties have since drifted away from negotiations. and so far north korea, iran, cuba and russia—among others—have offered nothing of substance to demonstrate that a policy of engagement will bring more results than mr bush’s tough line.
more troubling is afghanistan. although the nobel committee has now rewarded mr obama with a title of peacemaker (plus $1.4m or so), he remains a war president. he must shortly decide whether to deploy an additional 40,000 soldiers to fight against taliban and other insurgents in a conflict that has lasted for eight years. with no obvious means of ending that war, there is a serious possibility that mr obama's presidency will become dominated by worsening conditions there.
mr obama’s aspirations may be laudable, but he has several tough years ahead. the nobel committee evidently wants to encourage him but it might have been wiser to hold judgment until he has achieved more. in america itself, the decision has already infuriated conservative commentators, ensuring there will be no peace on the home front, at least.
仅就职九个月的美国总统巴拉克奥巴马获得了2009年诺贝尔和平奖。也许北欧理事会的评委们觉得这个奖项可以作为芝加哥申办2016年奥运会败给巴西里约热内卢的一个适当的安慰奖(芝加哥是奥巴马的家乡，且奥巴马在申办城市揭晓时亲自到场助威)。或者评委们被这个具有非洲血统的总统在推动美国国内种族和睦相处方面的言论所感动。或者，他们看中的是奥巴马志向，与投身外交的决心。即使如此，到目前为之，奥巴马总统仍没有取得多大的实际的成绩。
在更大的层面而言，奥巴马寻求与对手进行接触，例如，对于那些早先被美国称为“邪恶轴心”的国家（如，伊朗，北朝鲜）奥巴马表示“如果你们（对手）若愿意松开拳头，美国也愿意伸出（友善的）手来”。为了提升国内的支持率，伊朗总统内贾德将美国斥为侵略者，面对于此，奥巴马却提出与伊朗就核问题进行谈判，并放弃了伊朗必须首先放弃铀浓缩项目的谈判前提条件。奥巴马在总统选举时承诺在伊拉克撤军，已经付诸行动，而且速度也比布什预想的要快。面对北朝鲜，奥巴马也提出了进行双边会谈，以及更进一步接触的可能。
对俄罗斯的政策，奥巴马采用了称之为“按下重启按键”的明显更为温和的策略。布什离任期间，由于俄罗斯与美国盟友格鲁吉亚的战争，美俄关系跌入冰点。就职以来，奥巴马致力于美俄核裁军，承诺最终目标是希望“减少到零”—一定程度上消灭世界的所有核武器。最具实质性的是，也是最令波兰和捷克失望的是：奥巴马取消了先前计划的在东欧布置反导基地的计划，而这一计划一直被俄罗斯视为挑衅。
而奥巴马主要的贡献在于在外交政策上的语调的改变。奥巴马6月在埃及所作的慷慨演讲呼吁美国与阿拉伯国家之间进行新的相互认识。这个演讲目的是为了使世界上16亿穆斯林相信，美国不会进行“十字军东征”。同样，这个演讲也向美国以及其他相信“文明冲突”的人们传递一个信息：不同宗教间的友好相处是十分可能的。
与之形似，美国对从缅甸到古巴，这样一些小的实行压制政策的国家，也改变了态度：如果这些政府愿意展现出向民主发展的倾向，美国也愿意与之接触。人们也可以看到，奥巴马之所以获奖，还在于他在推动对气候变化这个问题采取行动方面也卓有成绩。奥巴马敦促议会通过“上限控制与贸易”议案，并声称，如果国会无法通过，他的政府将会颁布新的法令。（艾尔 戈尔， 另一位美国民主党人物，也由于对气候变化问题做出的成就获得了诺贝尔和平奖）
但是，批评家们仍有充分的理由去质疑。评奖委员会不遗余力地强调“奥巴马卓越的成就在于加强了国际间的外交沟通以及不同民族间的合作”。获奖理由中，评委会还认为“ 外交要建立在这样一个观念之上，即：领导世界的领袖们的行动准则一定要以世界多数人口的价值观与态度为基础”。 但是，这个奖是不是颁得太早了？虽然这个奖在于激励奥巴马政府，但是等到奥巴马政府作出更多的实际成绩之后或许更合适。奥巴马在世界范围内有如此多的良好的计划与动议（他在国内也日程紧凑，包括医疗改革以及抑制经济下滑），奥巴马马不停蹄，为这一切进行着尝试，但却收获不多。
有人会提到奥巴马关闭关押恐怖嫌疑犯的关塔那摩基地这个受人欢迎的决定，以及奥巴马明确地反对美国间谍和审问人员使用酷刑。这两点，都受到人们的欢迎，但是至今关塔那摩监狱仍然没有关闭。实现承诺要比作出承诺难得多。同样，今年早些时候，奥巴马曾在促成巴以进行谈判方面取得一定进展，但是随着奥巴马注意力的转向，巴以也逐渐远离了谈判桌。目前为止，并没有来自北朝鲜，伊朗，古巴以及俄罗斯的实质的举动来证明，奥巴马的接触政策比布什的强硬路线更卓有成效。
阿富汗的麻烦更大。虽然，诺贝尔颁奖委员会授予奥巴马和平缔造者的头衔（外加大约一百四十万美元），但奥巴马仍是位战时总统。他必须在短期内决定，在这场持续了八年战争中，是否需要额外部署四万名美军以打击塔利班以及武装袭击。由于没有明显的结束战争的途径，奥巴马必须面对一个严肃的现实，即，他的总统任期将伴随着逐渐恶化的阿富汗局势、
奥巴马的抱负或许值得褒奖，但是他的未来几年任期仍然会很艰难。很明显，诺贝尔评奖委员会希望能鼓励奥巴马，但是当他取得的成绩再多一些时再颁这个奖给他，或许更明智。在美国国内，这个奖已经激怒了美国的保守派的评论家。至少在美国国内不会这么和平。