Editorial: Prize could be a burden for Obama

Opinion

With friends like the Nobel Committee, who needs enemies? President Barack Obama has plenty of enemies, most of them with microphones in rabid corners of the United States. When they are not questioning his birthright or spreading misinformation on his health reform, they accuse him of pandering to foreign sentiment. They do not care for the world's affection, they feel safer when America is feared.

The Peace Prize awarded to the President plays perfectly into their hands. It is of course ridiculously premature, an act of fond hope rather than the recognition of outstanding contribution that it is supposed to be. Not even the President's best friends would claim his first steps in foreign relations have been better than tentative. Indeed, some of his keenest supporters have been disappointed at his caution on Guantanamo Bay and his willingness to be drawn deeper into war in Afghanistan.

A dispassionate assessment of the President after not quite nine months in office can give him credit for caution. He will be aware that the fine oratory of his long election campaign has raised expectations that will be hard to satisfy. But he has largely resisted the temptation to stage big events in foreign policy simply for appearances.

It would have been easy for him to summon key figures to Washington, hold summits on every issue of importance, and make rhetorical resolutions that last no longer than the photo opportunity. He has preferred to proceed quietly, putting emissaries in troublespots, attending scheduled gatherings with government heads, treating them as equals, seeking consensus.

He is following the same strategy in domestic politics, letting Congress take much of the initiative on health reform. As a former senator, the first in 40 years to cross to the executive branch, he may have insider advantages unavailable to former state governors such as Reagan, Clinton and Bush.

In any event, he is wise to find out whether collegial capital counts for much.

But none of this is worth a round of applause yet; it might all turn out to be abject failure, a squandered moment of opportunity for a President who came to power with a phenomenal groundswell of excitement and goodwill. His election alone broke a racial barrier, proving it was more imagined than real, and his stirring slogan, "Yes we can", made anything seem possible.

It was in that period of elation that the Nobel Committee appears to have made its decision. Nominations closed for the Peace Prize just two weeks after his election.

Among the nominees was at least one person whose credentials look better than Mr Obama's so far. Zimbabwean Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai endured violence, torture, constant risk of death and finally the denial of an election he had undoubtedly won, before coming to terms with Robert Mugabe to give the ruined economy some hope of better management.

The Norwegian committee that makes the award says the prize is often given as an encouragement for the recipients' efforts rather than a recognition of success, and that the encouragement is awarded sometimes at critical moments. With Afghanistan in the balance and the Copenhagen climate change conference awaiting American decisions, this could be a critical moment.

But the prize has not helped Mr Obama. It has made his tasks harder. Anything he does now that accords with European sentiment will let his enemies at home suggest he has been captured by Nobel laurels. He has accepted the award with grace, declaring he does not deserve it. It is the givers who should be most embarrassed by this clumsy gesture. They have devalued Nobel's bequest.