Gamal Nkrumah reflects on the repercussions of the awe surrounding Obama's unanticipated award The election of United States President Barack Obama and the unprecedented enlargement of the Democrats' contingence in Congress gave hope to liberals in Europe and the Western world. Obama is undoubtedly a president who provides the big wow. Battered by the belligerent policies of ex- president George W Bush, have spineless Western leaders found their nemesis in a man of colour -- a suave, sophisticated pragmatist? The consensus among the Western public, regardless of what the leaders mouth, is that NATO troops should start the tortuous process of pulling out of Afghanistan in the next three or four years -- to coincide with Obama's end of first term in office. This is a stark departure from the attitude of Western political establishments a decade ago. And, this is reflected by the disposition of the Nobel Committee that has assumed the role of the subliminal self of the West. The Afghan mission has never been popular in the West; neither has the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Obama is not the first sitting US president to receive the much-coveted award. Woodrow Wilson received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1919, mainly for setting into motion the League of Nations. Ironically, the prize proved to be the kiss of death, literally. The League was rejected by the US Senate, and the heart-broken Wilson told his doctors on his deathbed that "the Devil is a busy man." Obama has yet to fulfil his side of the promise to radically change American foreign policy. Washington is notorious for breaking its pledges and Obama must prove that America has changed beyond recognition. A black president in the White House was a symbolic cataclysmic shift in US politics. But, how far can a black figurehead whitewash America? Or, just as worrying, how far can he depart from white Washington's agenda? America's first black president receives the Nobel Peace Prize; Western Europe, America's principal ally, is becoming less bellicose; and the world is fast changing in favour of the emerging nations peopled by men and women of colour. The coincidences are almost freaky. The age of irrelevant embellishments is over. Many people around the world might consider Obama receiving the Nobel Peace Prize as gratuitously controversial and he all but publicly admitted that there is some truth in the accusation, but is persuasive in his justification of accepting the much-coveted prize. I doubt those of his predecessors who didn't receive the Nobel Peace Prize would have been so modest. Obama sets a precedent. He is a trendsetter, but he must not be cut short like Wilson. Another question is what benefit Obama's prize would have on the American people and their perception of their president. It reinforces the maxim "You campaign in poetry and govern in prose". Now the world waits patiently in anticipation of witnessing Obama's prose. With the prize, the poetry is passé. "He got the prize because he has been able to change the international climate," Nobel Committee Chairman Thorbjoem Jagland explained. "Obama has as president created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position," the Nobel Committee issued a statement justifying its choice of the victorious candidate. It is clear that it was the "idea of Obama" rather than the achievements of Obama that determined their decision. Policymakers in the West must own up to the fact that they cannot arbitrarily wage war. Who does what is not a question for Western leaders to determine. A leader such as Obama, with a peace medal, presumably cannot launch wars and will stop Israel from waging one in the near future. Whether or not the Nobel Committee's gamble is justified is a matter of conjecture. The next time a strongman of the developing countries of the South misbehaves -- in Western eyes -- there is no need to step in and save the situation. Western armies are no angels of mercy. The West must understand how awful it would prove to be if they intervene militarily. Other US presidents -- Theodore Roosevelt, Jimmy Carter -- received the Nobel Prize, but they did so after they left office for something they got right. In the past, the Nobel Peace Prize was conferred as a reward for executing exceptional deeds. Today, the Nobel Prize seems to be bestowed on promising personalities who have the potential to influence the course of history. A penchant for verve won Obama the Nobel Peace Prize. He is a charismatic figure, but the Nobel Peace Prize is not a popularity or beauty contest. Obama is obliged to fulfil his promise. But though an elected autocrat -- like Wilson with his Devil -- he is subject to the constraints of subsidiaries elected bodies. His lack of triumphalism is so far judged to be a virtue, but there are some in the West who see it as a weakness. The Nobel Committee clearly does not share such a perspective. American politicians must curb their ego, be pragmatic, and back Obama now. "I do not view it as recognition of my own accomplishments, rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations," Obama pontificated on hearing the news. While remaining respectful of the Nobel Committee and its ideals, many around the world remain suspicious of its true motives. Personal behaviour, personal demeanour and personal example have set Obama apart. His opponents are not as high-minded as he seems to be. A debate is sorely needed on the future direction of American defence spending, but the industrial tail in the US invariably wags the defence dog. There are still plenty of things that can go wrong. Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu can make life hell for Obama if Palestinian statehood is not achieved within his term of office. The apprehension in the Muslim world lingers on.
