What exact criteria did the Nobel Committee cite in its 2009 press release for awarding Obama the Peace Prize?
Executive summary
The Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded President Barack H. Obama the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize “for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples,” highlighting his vision of a world without nuclear weapons, a restored emphasis on multilateral diplomacy and enhanced support for the United Nations, plus constructive engagement on climate and human-rights issues [1] [2]. The press release frames the award as recognition of a quickly created “new climate” in international politics and Obama’s role as a global spokesman for shared values [1] [2].
1. Why the Committee said “extraordinary efforts” — the wording and its three pillars
The Committee’s formal press release names a single, overarching phrase — “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples” — and then elaborates with three specific emphases: Obama’s stated vision of a world free from nuclear weapons, his restoration of multilateral diplomacy and enhanced prestige for the UN, and his advocacy on climate and human-rights issues [1] [2]. Those are the concrete criteria the Committee used in 2009 to justify the prize in text and tone [1].
2. Nuclear disarmament: a central stated rationale
The prize citation singles out Obama’s support “— in word and deed — for the vision of a world free from nuclear weapons,” saying that vision “powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations.” The Committee explicitly tied that ambition to the decision to award the prize [2] [1].
3. “New climate” in international relations: what the Committee meant
The release repeatedly praises the fact that Obama “created a new climate in international politics” by placing multilateral diplomacy at the center of U.S. foreign policy and by reaching out to the Muslim world and international institutions — language used to justify the award even though his presidency had only begun months earlier [1] [2].
4. Multilateralism and the UN: the Committee’s institutional criterion
The press release credits Obama with restoring multilateral diplomacy and enhancing the United Nations’ prestige, presenting these institutional shifts as part of the “extraordinary efforts” that merited the prize [1] [2].
5. Climate and human rights: additional policy rationales
Beyond disarmament and diplomacy, the Committee noted Obama’s support for combating the climate crisis and his standing as a spokesman for human rights and democracy — factors the Committee listed among the reasons that supported the award [2] [1].
6. Timing and tone: award for promise, not long-term record
The press release and factual pages acknowledge the timing: Obama had been in office less than eight months when the Committee made its decision, and the language emphasizes aspirations and the international response to his rhetoric as much as concrete, long-standing achievements [2] [1].
7. How the Committee framed global reaction and symbolic effect
The Committee argued that only rarely has “a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future,” framing the prize as support for an international policy direction and the symbolic power of his leadership [1].
8. Critics and subsequent reflection — what the provided sources note
Available sources in this set report widespread mixed reactions and skepticism in the press and public polls after the award, and they record that commentators questioned giving the prize so early in a presidency [3]. Some retrospective commentary (summarized in non-official pages included here) describes the decision as controversial and later judged by some insiders to have been a miscalculation — but the Nobel Committee’s 2009 press release itself sticks to the aspirational, diplomatic criteria cited above [4] [3] [1].
9. Limitations and what the press release does not claim
The Committee’s press release does not claim the prize rewarded a long record of implemented policies or completed disarmament results; it explicitly rewards “efforts” and the creation of a new diplomatic climate rather than measurable, long-term outcomes [1] [2]. Available sources do not mention any additional formal criteria beyond the rationales and language contained in the press release and the Committee’s exposition [1] [2].
10. Bottom line — the exact criteria as stated
In plain terms, the Nobel Committee’s 2009 press release states that the prize was awarded for: extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation, promotion of a world free from nuclear weapons that stimulated disarmament talks, restoration of multilateral diplomacy and increased UN prestige, and constructive support for climate action and human-rights advocacy — all framed as an overall creation of a new international climate [1] [2].