obama-and-bush.jpgThe lecture given by the US President Mr. Barack Obama on receiving his Nobel Peace Prize on December 10, 2009 comes as no surprise to students of international relations.  Mr. Obama speaks openly of the necessity of the wars that he has been waging and is likely to wage in the coming years. 


Hiding under the bogus pretext of `just war’ which is hardly applicable to a country which shares borders with two militarily insignificant neighbours and is not likely to see any conventional military attack in the foreseeable future, a clutch of laughable reasons is peace.jpgproduced for his justification of war, including the supposed existence of `evil’ in the world.  By alluding to the cold war, supposedly reflexive anti-Americanism, and so on, he brushes aside the reality of the criminal wars of conquest and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan (while actually intensifying the latter) of drone attacks on Pakistan and continual threats of action against Iran, and appeals to paranoia of imagined attacks on the USA.  Even if one were to be charitable to Mr. Obama, by what stretch of imagination can one expect the waging of his `just wars’ can prevent such future attacks? Stated differently, Mr. Obama’s policies are simply those of his predecessor Mr. Bush with a different window dressing.

Having said the above, one cannot accuse Mr. Obama of not keeping his word.  This commentator in a view entitled “The Obama Presidency and its Consequences to south Asia” posted on November 21, 2008 on this web-site had observed

"…As regards international affairs, during his campaign Sen. Obama repeatedly demonstrated his dexterity at sabre-rattling, by singling out Iran and Pakistan, that consist of fraternal peoples of India, as potential targets
of his future Presidency. Such being the case, the peoples of South Asia can only be profoundly concerned at the election of Sen. Obama."

and also that

"…Sen. Obama’s appearance is expected to lend a `human face’ to his administration, something that the previous administration could not muster."

It is not just the people of South Asia who need to fear an aggressive USA under the leadership of Mr. Obama.  Commenting on the activities of the USA in Honduras and in Colombia, Mr. Fidel Castro who is no stranger
to US brinkmanship, sabotage and machinations notes,

"…They are obviously the real intentions of the empire, this time under the friendly smile and African-American face of Barack Obama."   

and further goes on to say that if indeed Mr. Obama was committed to military action in Afghanistan as demonstrated by his recent deeds, he need not have accepted the Nobel Peace Prize.

It must also be noted here that the award of this coveted prize is also a declaration by so-called civil society and its institutions that it will look the other way when US aggression and concomitant atrocities take
place.  It is also a cynical snub to all the thousands and millions who have commited great acts of sacrifice in 2003 and later during the longest and most sustained anti-war movements in the USA, UK and in all the countries in their orbit.  It is a snub to well-known activitists such as Ms. Cindy Sheehan, Mr. Reg Keys and others who have been leading anti-war activities. 

The Obama Nobel Prize is also a wake up call that the present day institutions are no longer serving any democratic purpose at all.  The fact that millions can come and demonstrate and that there is no palpable impact on policy of Governments should be a telling lesson to one and all.  All the peoples of the world should recognize where the main threat to them is coming from. To this extent thanks must be accorded to the Nobel committee.

by  B. Ananthanarayan

By admin