WHEN, in October 2009, United States (US) President Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, it was a surprising achievement for one with no significant accomplishment under his belt outside of winning the presidency and being the first African-American to do so. In his acceptance remarks, he said it “would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the considerable controversy that your generous decision has generated [and] my accomplishments are slight.”

Chairman of the Nobel Committee, Thorbjorn Jagland, admitted that “we have not given the prize for what may happen in the future. We are awarding Obama for what he has done in the past year. And we are hoping this may contribute a little bit for what he is trying to do.”

There is no denying Obama’s presence in the spotlight in 2007/2008, and the issues he campaigned on attracted global attention and admiration, inspired hope, and led persons to believe that, ‘Yes we can,’ which was his campaign slogan.

In apparent recognition of his impact on the global scene, and what guided the Committee’s decision, he said: “[this] is an award that speaks to our highest aspirations — that for all the cruelty and hardship of our world, we are not mere prisoners of fate. Our actions matter, and can bend history in the direction of justice.”

It should be said that a country’s foreign policy is influenced by its national interest, and sets the tone for its global relationship. When Obama was a U.S. Senator, he was a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee which has among its interests reducing the risk of nuclear terrorism. He evidently pursued this goal in his presidency through a number of measures. In January, the administration signed with Iran a deal that would prevent that country from acquiring nuclear weapons. Our January 18th editorial, “Lifting Iran sanctions and US$20 a barrel”, dealt with this matter in depth. Last month he paid a visit to Hiroshima, Japan, and offered respects to the victims of the world’s first deployed atomic bomb, in 1945, laying a wreath at the cenotaph and making the call for an end to nuclear weapons.
In 2011, the U.S. and Russia signed a New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which deals with nuclear arms’ reduction. This achievement is predated by the 2009 “reset button” between the two countries, symbolising his administration’s desire to improve relations with an adversary of the Cold War era.

Russia/U.S. relationship today is somewhat perplexing, more notably given the role Russia has played or is playing in Ukraine, Georgia and Syria. The Telegraph newspaper of 7th June, 2016 reported “NATO launches biggest war game in Eastern Europe since Cold War amid Russia tension.” Doug Bandow, Senior Fellow of the Libertarian leaning Cato Institute, writing in the Huffington Post (22nd May, 2016), saw this tension as a new Cold War and called for it to end. From his perspective, “Russia is in a mini-Cold War with the U.S. and Europe over Ukraine.”

Notable policies of Obama outside of nuclear containment are human rights, good governance, and climate protection. In his administration, the ambassador to the United Nations has been elevated to Cabinet level. Torture is no longer considered an acceptable interrogation technique, and efforts remain to shutter Guantanamo, which is reliant on congressional approval. On good governance, as early as July 2009, he made known his administration’s position, declaring: “Development depends upon good governance…that is the ingredient which has been missing in far too many places for far too long.”

Under his leadership, the U.S. Government has publicly acknowledged scientists’ warning on climate change, and has played a leading role on the international stage. This support aided the 2016 signing of the Paris Agreement, which came out of a 2015 United Nations Conference on Climate Change. In this year’s State of the Union Address to Congress, he made known: “Climate change is just one of many issues where our security is linked to the rest of the world. And that’s why the third big question we have to answer is how to keep America safe and strong without either isolating ourselves or trying to nation-build everywhere there’s a problem.”

Shrewdly, he has created a global economic realignment with an eye on China’s expansion and to ensure the U.S. dominance, though he refers to it as “a leading role”. Diplomatic relationship with Cuba has resumed after almost half-century, and he has called on Congress to end the trade embargo. This year, the U.S. signed the 12-member countries’ Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal that allows it entry into other markets, which he claims will create more and higher paying jobs for U.S. workers. India is being courted as a partner of substance in the Asia continent, with Prime Minister Narenda Modi being a guest of the White House four times within two years. Whereas the U.S. and China have their own trade relations and conflicts, inclusive of copyrights and trading of its currency, Obama is moving to forge new trade relations with India and Africa, to blunt China’s economic expansion and world dominance in that sphere.

In dealing with the international drug trade, his administration provides technical support to countries, of which Guyana is a beneficiary, seen with the establishment of a Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) office.

During the 2008 campaign, he made known that he was not opposed to war, only a dumb war, which he considered the 2002 Iraq invasion was, and voted against authorisation as a senator. Though he has wound that war down, the U.S. still retains a presence in Iraq, and has increasingly employed drone strikes, which some condemn given the consequential indiscriminate casualties. His vote in the Senate and promise to withdraw troops should he be elected president were major factors in securing the Democratic Party nomination against then arch rival Hillary Clinton.

Outside of Iraq, the U.S maintains military presence in Afghanistan, and had engaged in regime change in Libya, which has created some level of destabilisation in the region and has presented opportunities for extremists to rise. Presently, ISIS poses a clear and present threat to the region’s security. Syria is another hotspot, with ongoing civil war between the Bashar-al Assad regime and citizens, and the U.S. warning to Assad should the ‘red line’ be crossed should be remembered. The February Peace deal to end the hostilities brokered by the U.S. and Russia is being observed more in the breach, which is not helping the refugee crisis impacting Europe. Where some U.S. governors opposed Syrians settling in their states, the Obama administration countered with a pledge that the U.S. would take 10,000, which has not yet fully materialised.

Summarily, there are aspects of Obama’s Foreign Policy that would attract questioning. That notwithstanding, his policy has embraced a human relations component, reaching out to foes and allies in what has clearly been attempts at building relationship wherein America is seen as tolerant and respecting of others, even when there is disagreement. And if this was the aspirational goal of the Committee, inspite of criticisms and missteps, in a complex and dynamic world, his leadership has played a role in shifting global relations in a direction that can lead to peace and equality, good governance and preservation of the environment.