Paper
Thomas Carothers
{
"authors": [
"Thomas Carothers"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "democracy",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "DCG",
"programs": [
"Democracy, Conflict, and Governance"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Democracy",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
What Does a Nobel Do for U.S. Leaders?
The awarding of the Nobel peace prize to President Obama reflects just how strongly many Europeans felt that a rift opened up between the United States and the rest of the world during the Bush years. In their view, Obama’s global reengagement itself merits reward.
Published on Oct 9, 2009
Source: The New York Times
The prize reflects just how strongly many Europeans felt that a conflictive rift opened up between the United States and the rest of the world during the Bush years. In their view, Mr. Obama’s election and his determination to reengage globally already have done much to heal this rift and thus merit reward.
In several past cases the Nobel boost was short-lived.
This isn’t the first peace prize to look forward as much as backward. The prize to South Korean President Kim Dae Jung in 2000 came just after his historic summit with North Korea. It sought to bolster the chances that a promising but as yet only preliminary diplomatic step might pay off in terms of peace down the road.
Kofi Annan’s prize in 2001 came in the first half of his tenure as secretary general of the United Nations, possibly aiming to fortify him for what the Nobel committee expected would be hard times ahead for international peace in the aftermath of September 11.
The award to Iranian human rights lawyer Shirin Ebadi in 2003 was not simply a recognition of her past accomplishments defending human rights in Iran. It aimed to boost her future efforts at a time when Iran’s reform movement was losing steam and troubling political waters clearly lay ahead.
Iran may also been on the Nobel committee’s mind this time as well. Europeans are extremely anxious for Mr. Obama’s diplomatic overture to Iran to succeed. The committee may have calculated that it will be harder domestically and internationally for Iran’s Supreme Leader and president to bite an outstretched hand if it that hand comes not just from an American president but the holder of a Nobel Peace Prize.
Yet optimism must be qualified by the record. In those past cases the Nobel boost was short-lived. Peace with North Korea remained elusive. Kofi Annan locked horns unsuccessfully with the Bush administration over the invasion of Iraq. And despite Shirin Ebadi’s continued valiant work, human rights in Iran deteriorated steadily after 2003.
About the Author
Thomas Carothers
Harvey V. Fineberg Chair for Democracy Studies; Director, Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program
Thomas Carothers, director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program, is a leading expert on comparative democratization and international support for democracy.
- The Effects of U.S. Democratic Backsliding on U.S. Power
- Post-U.S. International Democracy Support: Aspiration in Search of SubstancePaper
Richard Youngs, Thomas Carothers
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Europe
- Why Europe Must Take Charge of its Russia Diplomacy NowCommentary
Trump is distracted and Ukraine wants Europe to step up. The continent’s leaders must find their voice and assert it in talks with Russia.
Alissa de Carbonnel
- Why Russia Could Escalate Hybrid Warfare Against EuropeCommentary
Mounting economic strain and battlefield losses will not necessarily make the Kremlin less dangerous. They could instead push Moscow toward a more aggressive hybrid campaign designed to test NATO’s Eastern flank, exploit allied hesitation, and fracture European resolve.
Maksym Beznosiuk
- Taking the Pulse: Enough with the Annual NATO Summits, Already?Commentary
Over the past ten years, NATO has held almost as many summits as it did during the entirety of the Cold War. Are they still useful, or is it time to stop holding annual meetings?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Europe from Scratch: Visions for a New European OrderReport
As the EU confronts profound challenges, several leaders have called for fundamental reform to the union’s model—but only modest, superficial changes have resulted. What if Europe really could be reimagined from zero today: What should such a redesigned European order look like?
Richard Youngs, ed.
- European Sycophancy Worked on TrumpCommentary
Nearly a year and a half after Europeans leaned into sucking up to Trump, the strategy has produced some benefits when it comes to Ukraine.
Rym Momtaz
