President Obama "The Nobel Peace Prize"for 2009

http://www.asahi.com/international/update/1009/TKY200910090401.html

http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200912210100.html

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.

He is the third incumbent president in US , Theodore Roosevelt(1906) is first , Thomas Woodrow Wilson(1919) is second. It is a special case that the President is gotten the Nobel Prize within a year from his inaugural. On Dcember 10 2009, President Obama made a speech about necessity of arms for peace.

Some people in Islamic criticize Obama's policy because he sent about 30000 soldiers to Afghan. Actually, a parley in middle East has not gotten ahead, and nuclear matters of Iran have been unsolved yet. They think that the president agrees to war, why could he be honored? What is peace?

President Obama said that we need "just war". It is war for peace. Only in case of a country meets prerequisites, for example as the last means for self-defense, war can be justifyed. To keep world peaceful, the means of arms are able to play a good role. King(1929-1968) and Gandhi(1869-1948) advocated that nonviolent brings love and peace, then makes progress in humanbeings. But Obama thinks that nonviolent is not enough to protect the nation against any opponent. We can not have peace without arms. He said　”We should aware of human's imperfection and their limits of reason."

The most important point of Obama's concept is the union among countries. If a country needs arms, the other countries should think whether it is "just war" or not. All countries must collaborate with one another for peace. Not only for protection of nation but also conservation of the global environment, we must emphasize the union.


People of Japan should have second thought about Japanese policy of protection. If the "just war" is right really, I think Japanese protection has been taken matters easy to carry out its function effectively. Japanese often regard Pacifism in the Constitution of Japan as Renunciation of War. But they do not indicate same mean. If we renounce war, it does not necessarily bring peace.
I am also afraid that many Japanese agree to amendments to Constitution the part of Renunciation of War unconcernedly. It is not a easy problem. So we must consider in this opportunity what is peace, how can we have peace.