Why Obama was given the Nobel Prize. Why Barack Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize - controversial issues

13:34 14.10.2009 Obama and the Nobel Committee. When war becomes peace, when lies become truth
4. Under the orders of President Obama, acting as Commander in Chief, Pakistan is now the subject of routine US aerial bombing in violation of its territorial sovereignty under the pretext of " Global War with terrorism\" as an excuse.

5. It is planned to build new military bases in Latin America, including Colombia on the immediate borders of Venezuela.

6. Military aid to Israel has increased. The Obama presidency has expressed its unwavering support for Israel and the Israeli military. Obama remains silent about Israeli atrocities in the Gaza Strip. There was not even a semblance of a resumption of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.

7. New regional commands were strengthened, including AFRICOM and SAUZCOM

8. A new round of threats was directed against Iran.

9. The US intends to contribute to a further rift in relations between Pakistan and India, which could lead to regional war, as well as the use nuclear arsenal India as an indirect threat to China.

The diabolical nature of this military project was outlined in 2000 by the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). PNAC announced the following goals:

Defend the American homeland;

Conduct combat operations and confidently win simultaneously in several theaters of war;

Perform "police" duties related to the creation of security conditions in critical regions;

Transform the US armed forces using a "revolution in military affairs". (Project for a New American Century, Rebuilding Americas Defenses.pdf, September 2000)

\"Revolution in military affairs\" refers to the development of new modern systems weapons. Militarization of space, new advanced chemical and biological weapons, sophisticated laser-guided missiles, bunker-busting bombs, not to mention the US Air Force Climate Warfare Program (HAARP) based in Hokona, Alaska, are part of Obama's "humanitarian arsenal."

War against truth

This is a war against truth. When war becomes peace, the world turns upside down. Forming ideas is no longer possible. An inquisitorial social system is born.

Understanding of major social and political events is replaced by a world of pure fantasy, where "evil people" hide. The purpose of the "Global War on Terrorism," which was fully endorsed by the Obama administration, is to mobilize public support for a worldwide campaign against heresy.

In eyes public opinion the possession of "just reasons" for waging war is central. A war is considered just if it is fought for moral, religious or ethical reasons. This is the consensus on the conduct of war. People can no longer think for themselves. They accept the authority and wisdom of the established social order.

The Nobel Committee says President Obama gave the world "hope for a better future." The award recognizes his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation among peoples. The committee places particular importance on Obama's vision and his work to create a world without nuclear weapons\"...His diplomacy is based on the concept that those who lead global community, must do so on the basis of values ​​and attitudes that are common to the majority of the world's population. (Nobel Press Release, October 9, 2009)

Granting the Nobel Peace Prize to US President Barack Obama has become an integral part of the Pentagon's propaganda machine. She provides human face invaders, it supports the demonization of those who oppose US military intervention.

The decision to award Obama the Nobel Peace Prize was, of course, carefully agreed upon by the Norwegian Committee at the most high levels in the US government. It has far-reaching consequences.

It unconditionally supports US-led wars as a “just cause.” It glosses over war crimes committed by both the Bush and Obama administrations.

Propaganda of war: legitimate reasons for a state’s entry into war and criteria for its justice

The "just war" theory serves to cover up character foreign policy USA, while providing the invaders with a human face.

In both its classical and modern versions, just war theory supports war as a "humanitarian operation." It calls for military intervention on ethical and moral grounds against "rebels", "terrorists", "failed" or "rogue states".

Just war was declared by the Nobel Committee as an instrument of peace. Obama personifies "a just war."

Taught in American military academies, the modern version of "just war" theory is embodied in the American military doctrine. The "War on Terrorism" and the concept of "prevention" are based on the right of "self-defense." They determine "when it is permissible to wage war": the legitimate reasons for a state to enter into a war and the criteria for its justice or Jus ad bellum.

Jus ad bellum served to achieve consensus within the command structure of the Armed Forces. It also served to convince military personnel that they were fighting for a "just cause." In general, just war theory in its modern version is an integral part of war propaganda and disinformation in the media. mass media, used to gain public support for the military agenda. Under Nobel Peace Prize laureate Obama, just war is becoming generally accepted, supported by the so-called international community.

The ultimate goal is to reassure citizens, complete depoliticization social life in America, keeping people from thinking and understanding, from analyzing the facts and challenging the legality of US and NATO-led wars.

War becomes peace, an expedient "humanitarian obligation", peaceful expression of disagreement becomes heresy.

The Nobel Committee gives \" green light\"military escalation with a human face

More importantly, the Nobel Peace Prize blesses the legitimacy of the unprecedented "escalation" of US-NATO military operations under the banner of peacekeeping.

It contributes to the falsification of the nature of the US-NATO military agenda.

Between 40,000 and 60,000 US and allied troops are to be sent to Afghanistan under the guise of peacekeeping. On October 8, the day before the Nobel Committee's decision, the US Congress provided Obama with $680 billion in a defense bill that is intended to finance the process of military escalation:

"Washington and its NATO allies are planning an unprecedented troop surge for the war in Afghanistan, even adding to the 17,000 new American and several thousand NATO troops who have been in that war this year." The number, based on as-yet unconfirmed reports from US and NATO commander Stanley McChrystal and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen, demanded from the White House ranges from 10,000 to 45,000. Fox News put the numbers higher at more than 45,000 American soldiers, and ABC News - more than 40,000. On September 15, the Christian Science Monitor wrote about "maybe more than 45,000."

The similarity of estimates shows that the numbers were consistent and obedient American media preparing domestic audiences for the possibility of the largest foreign military buildup in Afghan history. Just seven years ago, the United States had 5,000 troops in the country, but was already slated to have 68,000 by December even before reports of a new deployment surfaced. (Rick Rozoff, US, NATO Poised For Most Massive War In Afghanistan's History, Global Research, September 24, 2009)

A few hours after the Norwegian Nobel Committee's decision, Obama met with the War Council, or as we should call it, the "Peace Council." This meeting was carefully planned to coincide with the Norwegian Nobel Committee.

This is the key meeting for closed doors The White House Situation Room brought together Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, as well as key political and military advisers. General Stanley McChrystal participated in the meeting via video link from Kabul.

General Stanley McChrystal said he offered the commander in chief "several alternative options\", \"including a maximum injection of 60,000 additional troops.\" The figure of 60,000 surfaced from The Wall Street Journal:

\"The President had a tough conversation about the security and political issues in Afghanistan and options for building a strategic approach moving forward,\" according to the official message from the administration (quoted in AFP: After Nobel nod, Obama convenes Afghan war council October 9, 2009)

The Nobel Committee gave Obama the green light in this regard. The meeting in the Situation Room on October 9 was supposed to lay the groundwork for further escalation of the conflict under the banner of fighting insurgency and building democracy.

Simultaneously, over the past few months American forces have intensified their aerial bombing of village communities in the northern tribal areas of Pakistan under the banner of the fight against al-Qaeda.

Original article: Obama and the Nobel Prize: When War becomes Peace, When the Lie becomes the Truth

On the eve of the traditional Nobel week, during which the names of new laureates are announced annually in early October, the most famous prize in the world found itself at the center of a scandal.

The Nobel Peace Prize Committee accused its former secretary Geir Lundenstad in breach of trust and disclosure of confidential information.

Lundenstad was director of the Norwegian Nobel Institute from 1990 to 2015, which allowed him to attend meetings of the committee of authorized experts who decided on the award of the Nobel Peace Prize. At the same time, Lundenstad himself did not have the right to vote.

In 1897, the Norwegian Nobel Committee, which is responsible for awarding the Nobel Peace Prize, became the first of the organizations formed in accordance with the will Alfred Nobel. At the same time, the presentation of the Peace Prize, like other Nobel Prizes, began in 1901.

The Nobel Peace Prize has been the most controversial award throughout its history. According to critics, this award turned out to be too politicized, and its presentation to certain individuals was often completely inconsistent with their deeds.

Obama didn't want to receive his award

According to the rules of the Nobel Committee, short list applicants for the award, as well as all the circumstances surrounding the award, must remain secret for 50 years.

Lundenstad, however, considered that this principle was detrimental to the prize itself, and published the book “Secretary of Peace”, in which he outlined the details of the award known to him.

The book, the official presentation of which took place on September 17, caused extreme dissatisfaction among members of the Nobel Peace Prize committee. According to them, Lundenstad's work improperly included “descriptions of people and processes in the committee,” contrary to a confidentiality agreement signed in 2014. At the same time, the statement does not indicate possible measures that could be taken against the ex-director of the Norwegian Nobel Institute.

Lundenstad's book, in particular, reveals the details of the sensational award of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 to a man just beginning his first presidential term. US President Barack Obama.

The award to Obama surprised not only the US president's opponents, but also his supporters. The Obama administration approached the Norwegian Nobel Committee about the possibility of avoiding travel to the award ceremony in Oslo. Previously, such failures to appear occurred mainly in cases where the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to one of the dissidents who were deprived of the right to leave their own countries.

The reward is not for pontiffs

Awarding the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize to the former US Vice President Al Gore and the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change led to the resignation of one of the committee members Inger-Marie Itterhorn. Ms. Itterhorn, a member of the Norwegian Progress Party, adhered to the party line denying the thesis that global warming is caused by human activity, and it was Gore and the UN experts who received the prize who stood for this position.

In his book, Lundenstad also writes that another committee member Gunnar Staalsett was extremely skeptical about the idea of ​​awarding the Peace Prize to pontiffs catholic church. To date, not a single pope has been awarded the award.

The former director of the Norwegian Nobel Committee also spoke about attempts by politicians to directly interfere in the process of awarding prizes. In 2010, the head of the Norwegian Foreign Ministry Jonas Gahr Støre urged committee members not to award the award to a Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo. As the minister stated, this could ruin Norwegian-Chinese relations. Nevertheless, the award to Liu Xiaobo was still awarded.

The head of the Nobel committee was afraid of political consequences

Lundenstad also criticized his activities as chairman of the Nobel committee Thorbjørn Jagland, who has also been the Secretary General of the Council of Europe since 2009. According to the author of the book, the Nobel committee should remain completely politically independent, while Jagland, as Secretary General of the Council of Europe, when awarding the prize was often guided by possible political consequences. For example, Lundenstad argues, it would be difficult for the head of the Nobel committee to agree to awarding the prize if such a decision were critical of Russia, a member of the Council of Europe.

Jagland in the spring of 2015 ceased to be the head of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, remaining its ordinary member. This may be due to the controversial decisions that the Nobel Peace Prize committee has announced in recent years. Among the laureates recent years, in addition to Barack Obama, were the Organization for the Prohibition chemical weapons(OPCW) and the European Union.

Geir Lundenstad believes that the Nobel Peace Prize must strive for greater openness in order to maintain its authority. But for now former colleagues The author of the new book is concerned with another question - how to make sure that no one else breaks the accepted regime of half a century of silence. The people who award the Nobel Prizes prefer to keep their “skeletons in the closet.”

A copy of a letter addressed to The White house, one of B.H. Obama's aides. The sender of the document is supposedly the Nobel Committee. The letter, dated November 21, 2016, reported that the committee was inundated with petitions demanding that B.H. Obama's Peace Prize be revoked. It is also indicated that the Nobel Committee has no reason to deprive a well-deserved laureate of the prize.

A copy of the document posted on a public resource. It is not possible to verify the authenticity of the document

The Nobel Committee is indicated as the sender, the sender's address is Oslo. Date: November 21, 2016. Addressed to: Denis R. McDonough (Assistant to the President of the United States).

In capital letters it is stated that this letter is a response to the letter dated November 16, 2016. (Obviously, we are talking about a letter supposedly previously sent from the White House to Oslo.)

The document was signed by the chairman of the committee, Kaci Kullmann Five, and the secretary.

Kasi Kullman-Five writes to the "respected" sender to "dispel" his concerns "about the growing number of letters and public petitions" addressed to the Norwegian Nobel Committee demanding that "President Obama's 2009 Nobel Peace Prize be rescinded."

“As chair of the committee, I can tell you with confidence that there is no legal basis for satisfying the demands,” Ms. Kullman-Five says succinctly. This is the “firm belief of the Norwegian Nobel Committee.” The committee is convinced that the decision to award President Obama the Nobel Peace Prize was correct. The award went to Mr. Obama for "his outstanding efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and international cooperation."

In the opinion of the Chairperson as given in this letter (if it is real), most of critics is based on “unconvincing” and even “somewhat speculative” interpretations of “the will and desire of Alfred Nobel.”

In conclusion, the chairwoman assures the White House that the committee members “will continue to carry out their mission with competence and integrity,” and in full compliance “with the provisions of Alfred Nobel’s will.”

The authenticity of the letter cannot be verified.

Unknown commentator on public portal, where a copy of this letter was posted, claims that the Nobel Committee participated “in Obama’s crimes.”

In his opinion, the Nobel Committee, as well as B.H. Obama, does not want to bear the burden of responsibility for “peacekeeping missions” around the world. This is "absolutely obvious." After all, it is much easier to pretend that the “untouchable” laureate lived up to the expectations associated with him “and actually established peace in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Syria, etc.”

The only reasonable solution in the current situation is to deprive a person who does not deserve the award, the author of the commentary believes. The anonymous author considers Obama “responsible for millions of human deaths.”

However, to revoke the prize would mean for the committee to find itself in a “rather awkward position” - the Nobel laureates would actually become “accomplices of a murderer.”

The committee might not have rewarded the undeserving at the time, but it “allowed it to happen.” Quite to an ordinary person, judging in the context of humanitarian work, the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded out of the blue. Not for any real achievements, but “for the sake of future affairs.” Moreover, those who gave him the award chose the leader of the most powerful military power!

But now, as Barack Obama’s second presidential term ends, one can see that “new climate in international relations”, which the owner of the White House created during all eight years of his reign. Syria, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan - there are wars or military actions everywhere, one way or another initiated by the American administration “and Obama personally,” the author points out.

The appearance of “IS” (banned in the Russian Federation) is “also on their conscience,” as are numerous casualties and destruction. According to statistics, this Nobel Prize winner has already become the most militant president of the United States.

Petitions are periodically published on the websites of the White House and Congress, and on special Internet resources, the authors of which call on Barack Obama to return the Nobel Peace Prize, which he was awarded in 2009. In the latest of these petitions, criticizing aggressive foreign policy American President, it is said that military operations in Libya and Syria have brought nothing but a huge number of deaths.

Therefore, the Nobel Committee, perhaps, still needs to gain courage and reconsider its approaches to awards, and also admit mistakes. Having deprived "the most influential person on globe” Peace Prize, the Nobel Committee could implement a precedent that is “vitally important for the future,” the commentator is convinced.

As for admitting mistakes, here, we add, the commentator is based on a scandal from a year ago, in which the name of the historian Geir Lundestad, who previously served as director of the Nobel Institute, appears. His book "Secretary of Peace" went on sale last September.

As S. Lyushin points out on the website, this book tells about the people who decided the fate of the awards from 1990 to 2015. Lundestad in those years participated in meetings of a committee consisting of five experts (he himself did not have the right to vote).

Three years after the book went on sale, a statement from the Nobel Committee was made public, where Mr. Lundestad was accused of breach of trust, since, according to the statute, the details of the discussions must be kept secret for half a century: “Lundestad improperly included in the book descriptions of the people and procedures of the committee, despite confidentiality agreement signed in 2014.” At the same time, the chairman of the committee, Kasi Kullman-Five, said in a letter to Reuters that there would be no further comments.

Lundestad himself told the press that he wanted to “shed light on how the prize, which many consider the most prestigious award in the world, is awarded.” At the same time, Lundestad criticized the current committee member Thorbjørn Jagland: this man also holds the post of Secretary General of the Council of Europe. The historian believes that “It would not have been easy for Jagland to agree with the award of the prize if it were not critical of Russia.”

Here's how they treat Nobel laureate Obama in Washington.

On November 10, a group of activists hung a poster on the Arlington Memorial Bridge with an image of the US President and the words “Farewell, Murderer.” One of the activists, Leroy Barton (), wrote about this on Twitter.

The group notes that Barack Obama is involved in the murder of thousands of innocent people in Libya, Syria, Yemen, and Ukraine. The initiators of the protest write that Obama unleashed bloody wars during his reign.

Another photo from Twitter

Barton believes Obama does not deserve to win the Nobel Peace Prize. His real place is in the Hague court!

It is obvious that many journalists and social activists do not agree with the “Orwellian” activities of both Mr. Obama and the Nobel Committee. The thesis “War is peace” does not suit citizens who want peace on planet Earth. A person who, after being awarded the Peace Prize, bombed Libya as part of NATO cannot and should not be considered a peacemaker and receive Nobel money for his deeds.

The Nobel Committee, of course, is not going to revoke Obama's award. In this case, we can advise the committee members to rename the peace prize, calling it the war prize.

On October 9, the Nobel Committee named the 2009 Peace Prize laureate. It was US President Barack Obama. According to the committee members, his efforts in strengthening international diplomacy and cooperation between people deserve such a high award. Obama will receive about €1 million. The award winners will be awarded in Oslo on December 10.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee announced that the 2009 Peace Prize will go to US President Barack Obama for his outstanding efforts in international diplomacy to reduce nuclear weapons and strengthening cooperation between peoples. Obama managed to surpass, in the eyes of the Nobel Committee, a record number of applicants for the peace prize - 204.

In 2007, the Nobel Peace Prize was also awarded to one of the top US officials - the country's Vice President Al Gore and the UN intergovernmental group to combat climate change. In 2008, this prize was awarded to former Finnish President Martti Ahtisaari "for his efforts to resolve international conflicts on several continents over three decades." In total, since 1901, the Peace Prize has been awarded to 119 laureates - 23 organizations and 96 public figures. This year, the Nobel Committee to determine the Peace Prize laureate was headed by Thorbjörn Jagland, recently elected Secretary General of the Council of Europe. All other committee members are women.

In 2007, experts believed that there had been a strong logic in the decisions of the Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize Committee for at least the last ten years. Among the academicians who decide the fate of the prize, there are two groups. One of them believes that the Nobel Committee has no right to be led by public opinion, so the laureate should be a worthy but completely unknown person with a difficult fate, preferably from a third world country. Representatives of the second group, on the contrary, are convinced that the Nobel Committee should respond to political events in the world and send a clear signal to those forces that seem positive to them - that is, the Nobel Prize should be given to the most positive activist in the world today. By unspoken agreement, the winners of the first and second categories alternate. Thus, in 2003, 2004 and 2006, the winners were unknown to the public (and already almost forgotten) Shirin Ebadi from Iran, Wangari Maathai from Kenya and Muhammad Yunus from Bangladesh. Having learned about their victory, the world community was always perplexed because the Nobel Committee was so unpredictable. In 2001, 2002 and 2005, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, former US President Jimmy Carter and IAEA head Mohammed ElBaradei won. The world community was also perplexed about these victories, but only because the choice of the Nobel Committee turned out to be so politically biased.

— To what degree of displeasure and irritation did the policy of the Bush Jr. administration, the Trotskyism of the neoconservatives, who were the main ideologists of this policy, bring the whole world, that even the first reasonable steps of the new American president caused such wild joy in the world community, which resulted in the awarding of the highest peacekeeping award - Nobel Peace Prize. For Obama, this is an advance that he will have to work out for his entire presidential term, and if elected for a second term, then a second presidential term. Indeed, he began to move in a reasonable direction. He declared his refusal to forcefully change unwanted regimes, the practice of spreading democracy in the world through bombing and the thoughtless expansion of military-political blocs and support for unpredictable regimes. He refused to deploy missile defense in Eastern Europe, sat down at the negotiating table with Russia on issues of strategic stability. It was Obama who was the first to announce building pragmatic partnerships with our country, as it is, without trying to change it in accordance with Washington's decisions. But this is all just the beginning. The beginning must be followed by concrete practical steps. And Obama will have to pay off the loan he received from the Nobel committee. Americans are accustomed to living on credit. But in the context of the global crisis, credit has become a problem. Problems may arise after the award for Obama, especially at home. It will not be easy for him to withstand the pressure of his former fellow senators during debates on Capitol Hill and various hearings. They will not fail to go over such a rapid receipt of the Nobel Peace Prize, and will interrogate their president with particular persistence as to what he has done for world stability. Obama will have to answer. Therefore, now is the time of increased responsibility for him - he will have to prove his right to the Nobel Prize, which he received today, several times every day.

The announcement of the Peace Prize laureate was one of the final stages of the so-called Nobel week - the time of announcement of the winners of the prizes, which have been awarded since 1901 according to the will of the Swedish philanthropist and inventor of dynamite Alfred Nobel. According to tradition, the first prize is awarded for discoveries in the field of physiology and medicine (then prizes are awarded for achievements in the field of physics, chemistry, literature and peace promotion). The ceremonial awarding of the winners of the most prestigious prize in the field of physics, chemistry, economics, medicine, literature and the fight for peace will traditionally take place on December 10, the anniversary of the death of the founder of the award, Alfred Nobel.

The decision made by the Norwegian Nobel Committee was a complete surprise: Obama has been president of the United States for less than nine months, and he was not even named among the most likely candidates.

More details

According to the official wording of the Nobel Committee, Obama was awarded for "tremendous efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation among peoples."

The German online publication Spiegel Online quotes the chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Thorbjørn Jagland: “Everything he began to do since the beginning of his presidency, and the way he changed the atmosphere around the world, is already enough reason to award him the Nobel Prize.” .

Jagland emphasized that the prize was awarded to Obama not for future achievements, but for achievements during his presidency. "His diplomacy is based on the principle that those who govern the world should do so on the basis of the values ​​and perceptions shared by the majority of the world's population."

The award is 10 million Swedish kronor ($1.4 million). The award will be presented in Oslo on December 10.

Obama is the third American Democratic politician to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in the last seven years. Before him, the prize was awarded to Jimmy Carter in 2002 and Al Gore in 2007 for their efforts to preserve the planet's climate.

In principle, the Nobel Peace Prize is one of the most problematic awards, because the criteria are not very defined, and the political component in it certainly plays a big role. I think Obama was able to win the Nobel Prize this year because he was the most promising politician. He proposed the most optimistic program for nuclear disarmament and improving the situation in the world. Now in the world there is a terrible hunger for some kind of positive. And Obama is now positive, probably the only leader on the world stage who is positive.

We live in a world of political losers: the latest initiatives of world leaders have failed, they have proposed some wild and unsuccessful things. Against their background, Obama proposed a model that could be successful. The world's nuclear weapons control system collapsed with the end cold war, Bush didn’t lift a finger, Russian leaders too - no one did anything. We are now on the verge of turning this world nuclear: many countries have nuclear bomb, plus many are technically able to create it. Nuclear weapons are becoming cheaper, the technology can be bought, and some experts even predict that this technology will soon fall into the hands of organized crime. That Obama tried to reverse this trend, his desire to create new system control over nuclear weapons and prevent the global nuclearization of the world, the very idea of ​​​​the possibility of getting out of this situation, apparently, inspired everyone so much that he was given a prize.

Of course, the fact that he was awarded the Nobel Prize is an advance. The advance is needed so that Obama cannot abandon this goal. Having launched an anti-nuclear initiative, he acquired many opponents in America.

In part, the Nobel Prize was awarded to him in order to support him in the fight against his own establishment and make him a hostage to his own proposals. In America, there are different attitudes towards Obama's initiatives. Many believe he is weakening America's security by proposing nuclear disarmament that this is contrary to American national interests. And there is fear in the world that pressure on Obama within America will lead to him being forced to abandon his proposals. Therefore, it seems to me that in fact the Nobel Prize may become a “point of no return” for him.

It seems to me that after the Nobel Prize it will be more difficult for Obama. He will have smaller field for maneuver. The effect of Obama receiving the award may vary. On the one hand, it is important for American public opinion international recognition. Because in America they don’t really understand how Obama is viewed abroad. On the other hand, many Americans do not like their political leaders to be so enthusiastically received abroad.

The Nobel Prize partly makes him a hostage to his own promises. Above all, promises to make it a priority to restore control over the spread of nuclear weapons, which was destroyed during the Cold War. In the end, he even supported the idea of ​​“global zero” - the gradual complete abandonment of nuclear weapons. Many in America believe that this would fundamentally undermine US security and make America much more vulnerable. Many people think Obama looks like a weakling international arena, by offering such things, weakens America's position in the world. America is now so strong militarily that no one can compare with it. It never occurs to anyone to step on national interests USA, because the advantage is colossal. The smaller this advantage is, the more there will be a desire to start putting pressure on America.

Obama is trying to change the model from dominance to leadership. And many Americans believe that dominance is a more effective model than global leadership.