"President Barack Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday in a stunning decision designed to encourage his initiatives to reduce nuclear arms, ease tensions with the Muslim world and stress diplomacy and cooperation rather than unilateralism.
The Norwegian Nobel Committee countered that it was trying "to promote what he stands for and the positive processes that have started now.""
Not that it's not amazing, but it is justified? Is it too early in his career? Is it bang out of order? Consider Obama is the second sitting President to receive such a prize since Woodrow Wilson, who, it might be pointed out, brought WW1 to an end, wrote the 14 Points for peace and helped shape the Treaty of Versailles. Though Obama is a beacon of hope - and the importance of this globally should not be underestimated - and has begun many admirable and forward-thinking policies and initiatives (see Climate Change and International Relations) - he has achieved very little of note yet. Yet. But is the Nobel supposed to be in recognition of his potential or his past?
Should he accept it?