The Process of the Nobel Peace Prize

I woke up yesterday morning.  The TV was on, I was still in bed trying to catch a little more zzz's.  In the background,  I hear banter on morning news stating that a president had won the Nobel Peace Prize.  I was wondering who?  Perhaps one of the past presidents of the United States.  Bush 2, probably not.  Clinton, possibly.  Bush 1, hmm.  Carter, BTDT.  Perhaps one of the sitting presidents of another country.  Nope. The winner of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize was the current sitting president of the United States of America, Barack Obama.

I was astonished as to how he could win the award so quickly into his presidency.  Let's dissect the logical sequence of how a winning process works.

When you win a prize the sequence is typically as follows:
1) Do something prize worthy
2) Get nominated because of doing that something
3) ???
4) Win


President Obama obtained the nomination only 12 days into the Presidency.  Is 12 Days enough to warrant a nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize?  Some contend since voting took place in the summer, the prize is based on his work on days 13+.

Given this information, the process appears to follow this sequence:
1) Get nominated
2) Do something prize worthy
3) ???
4) Win

Assume for a moment that he was nominated for work prior to the presidency. Then anything after the inauguration+12 days is supposedly not in play. But then assume that he won because of his work after the Nobel nomination, essentially day 13 onward. Then anything prior to the nomination is moot.

Doesn't that throw your mind for a loop?

Some one on the internet named lutusp states:

"This is a classic ploy by the Nobel Committee to shame the recipient into changing his behavior. I've seen this drama played out many times in my long life -- someone who is obviously not a peacenik gets the Prize and feels tremendous pressure to live up to the honor.

In 1994 the Prize was given Morejointly to Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin -- not what you would call peace-loving doves. In 1978 the Prize was given jointly to Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin -- for the same reason: The Nobel Peace Prize is often more about shaping behavior than honoring behavior."

Even Obama admits that he is undeserving, and didn't really do much, but is using it as a call to action.

Perhaps a more accurate sequence:
1) Get nominated
2) Win
3) ???
4) Call to action

All in all, I am critiquing the process of how President Obama was selected as the Nobel Peace Prize 2009 winner, not whether he deserves or not (we can have a debate on that if you like;)).  My friend Wilson pointed out, "I think we can talk about whether he deserves it all day but i think we need to keep in mind that he didn't ask for this. It was given to him."  If anything, those who voice dissent to his winning need to be just as critical, if not more, to the Nobel Prize Committee for choosing him, not necessarily at Obama himself.



Thanks to EK, PT, JC, RA, and WW for helping to develop these idea.