Posted on 09/10/2020 9:10:25 AM PDT by LibWhacker
When Norwegian parliamentarian Christian Tybring-Gjedde nominated President Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize on Wednesday, the president's critics went into shock on social media.
The criticism, of course, did not respond to Tybring-Gjedde's specific citations of Trump's role in brokering a landmark normalization deal between Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the Kashmir border dispute between India and Pakistan, or the conflict between North and South Korea. Trump's critics instead attacked the credibility of Tybring-Gjedde, who serves as chairman of the Norwegian delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, and expressed disbelief that Trump could possibly share the same prize as his predecessor, whose greatest achievement was an agreement that destabilized the entire Middle East.
Trump clearly earned his nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize. But if his critics really want to discredit his chances of winning it, they should engage with his actual record. Consider:
Trump is the first president in almost four decades to not start a new war. In addition to avoiding armed conflict, he has made moves to reduce troop levels in conflict zones such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. This is not mere pacifism or conflict-avoidance. At the same time that Trump has sought to keep Americans out of harm's way and America out of problems it has no business meddling in, he has presided over an enormous buildup of America's military capabilities and reinvigoration of the U.S. armed forces. By ending the false dichotomy between military strength and nonaggression, Trump has demonstrated that countries can shore up their national defense and secure their strategic interests by means of military restraint and a commitment to reductions in violence.
As for specific regions of the world, Trump not only brokered the first normalization agreement between Israel and an Arab state in a quarter-century; he also presided over a vast improvement in relations and coordination between Israel and the other major Sunni Arab states. This is in large part because of his Day 1 commitment to opposing the spread of Iranian terror throughout the Middle East. The coordination of U.S.-Israeli-Sunni policy in the region - to stop both radical Sunni actors such as ISIS and revolutionary Shia actors such as Hezbollah and the government in Tehran - has become the region's best hope of stabilization in decades. The role Trump has sought for the U.S. in all this has been centered on economic sanctions, weapons sales and diplomatic initiatives - not military force.
Farther east, Trump has applied similar nonviolent principles. China is the biggest threat to American national and strategic interests since the Cold War, and it eventually may emerge as the most serious rival in American history. While Trump has countered nearly every act of Chinese competition and aggression, he has done so peacefully. Through the use of tariffs, trade agreements, the threat of sanctions, and nonviolent military exercises with Indo-Pacific partners such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Australia, Trump has done everything possible to resolve the most explosive elements of the U.S.-China rivalry without armed conflict. The same goes for Trump's effort to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula and his role in talks between the North and South Korean governments, which South Korean President Moon Jae-in declared in 2018 "should win [Trump] the Nobel Peace Prize."
When President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009, he had been in office less than 10 months. Two presidential terms later, Obama had backed a war of regime change in Libya, a normalization agreement with a terror regime in Iran, and the "red line" fiasco in Syria, which likely encouraged military takeovers by the Kremlin in Crimea and by Beijing in the South China Sea. In September 2015, the Nobel committee's former secretary expressed regret for granting the award to Obama, who not only had not earned it by 2009 but had squandered any claim to it after six years in office.
For Trump, the Nobel committee was right to wait until he had an actual record of governance and demonstrated a real commitment to peace before considering him for the prize. Now the committee has the opportunity to regain the credibility it lost in 2009.
And they know it!!!!
“Their credibility fell to zero when they awarded Obama the peace prize for accomplishing nothing.”
Just what I was going to say.
“To be nominated is good enough,...”
Exactly right and if the Trump folks are smart they will work this into many campaign spots.
I hope he gets it just so leftist heads explode.
“Keep your worthless pile of crap.”
Let’s think this through ...accept the award, give a speech they won’t forget (maybe include bashing obozo-the-fake) and donate the annual award fund anti-leftist causes. Leave a little on the side to take the Norwegian minister out dinner every year.
Actually, looking at the recent list of NPP Laureates, I find little to disapprove of since Obama's Award, one that the feedback probably sobered them. Of course, at that award in 2009, I was already soured by the 2007 award to Al Gore and the UN's IPCC for the "climate change crisis" work.
I concur. Their Peace Prize would actually regain some credibility IF they gave it to Trump.
Trump will give the money away to some charity and display the medallion in the lobby of one of his hotels or casinos.
Liberal heads will explode. It will be fun to watch.
However, many of the other Nobel prizes(not the peace prize) go to worthy recipients. The peace prize has unfortunately been too politicized over the last 40 years.
Sometimes I think Trump should turn down the nomination. “Thanks but no thanks. The Peace Prize has become a sad joke.”
Credibility?.....what credibility??? Bammy got it for being half black in an effort to assuage liberal white guilt...
I hope Trump gets the award.
More important, I hope this pact holds. Trump exploited the rift between Sunni and Shia sects of Islam to ally one against the other (with Israel). Sunnis seem to fear Shia Iran enough to make peace with JEWS. Amazing! And the financial benefit of trading with Israel doesn’t hurt either.
Kerry and Obama must be livid, they backed the wrong side...
The little twerp will win it if history is a predictor.
Excellent essay, but of course, liberals will never broadcast it any further, unless it’s to denigrate Trump, and declare Grenel’s piece full of lies, without explaining in what way they’re lies.
They are a LIBERAL organization, there is no way they will give this prize to a CONSERVATIVE. Just won’t happen.
The significance of this will be lost on the American public since the MSM has been ignoring all of President Trump’s accomplishments.
They can never get their credibility back. They awarded the prize to Obama just for existing. They are a joke.
However, Trump is not really a conservative. He is fiscally conservative. Pretty socially liberal. I would call him more of a liberaltarian.
I hadn’t considered that. The more I think about it, the better that idea seems.
Their credibility has been near zero for a long time.
Currently, they rank up there with the Oscars Committee.
Actually, less than nothing. He was nominated weeks before he even took office.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.