Obama represents the America that seems to have been put to death by Bush II and the neoCons some 8 years ago.

The America the world favors.

If you look at the struggle we are having to get a decent healthcare system it gives us an idea of what Obama is really up against. He'll be deserving of this prize if he is able to undo even by half the mess Bush and a lot of years of a wayward congress have created.

I remain ambivalent about the Peace Prize award to Obama, but my concerns have been alleviated somewhat by his own rational and appealing response, which was to say it was an award he accepted not because of his accomplishments, but as a call to action to follow through on efforts he and America have begun. I believe that will resonate favorably with most people.

My reservations about the award relate to its timing. The Committee can award a prize every year, and if Obama's efforts are worthy, that will be clearer one or two or three years hence than it is now. There is no rush. On the other hand, the Nobel Committee has never made a secret of its desire to use the prize as a means of supporting causes it believes in, and would presumably argue that it's never too early to support nuclear disarmament or negotiations between conflicting parties.

Much has been made as to whether the Peace Prize should be awarded for aspiration or only for achievement. Here, my feelings are unambivalent. It should be given exclusively for achievement, because achievement is ultimately what matters when you want to stop people from killing each other. Where I would depart from some critics of the award, however, is in my belief that Obama has already achieved far more than they imagine.

One must define achievement. World peace will never be achieved with finality. It will always be a work in progress, with successes and failures here and there. Achievement must be judged by the criteria of progress, not the criteria of a final triumph. Here is some of the progress to date, within the short confines of less than a year in the presidency.

1. Climate change. The 2007 prize was awarded to the IPCC and Al Gore in recognition of the threat to peace from unmitigated global warming and its consequences, including "climate wars" exemplified by the Darfur bloodshed that has been driven in part by a conflict for scarce resources in a drought-stricken region. Beyond that one area, it is not only environmentalists, but also the Pentagon that has expressed alarm at the prospect of similar regional destabilizations elsewhere precipitated by further climate change. President Obama has prodded Congress to pass legislation that will begin to reverse the obstructionism of the Bush years and make it easier for other nations to pursue CO2 mitigation strategies. Congressional efforts, while commendable, are only a tiny beginning, but the Administration is acting on its own. The EPA has already revised tailpipe emission standards and has declared CO2 and other anthropogenic greenhouse gases to be a threat to health, and therefore something it has the authority to mitigate. However small, these are steps in the right direction.

2. An alternative to terrorism. When Obama reached out to the muslim world in his Cairo speech, the vituperative response by the Al Qaeda leadership (Zawahiri) was almost hysterical. The ability of Al Qaeda to recruit and to pursue its agenda depends on its ability to convince muslims that the West's battle is not directed against Al Qaeda but against all Islam. The favorable response of most muslims to Obama has been a damaging blow to that effort. We can't accurately estimate how many young men and women have concluded that blowing themselves up in order to kill Americans or other infidels is no longer the future they seek, but Al Qaeda probably believes it to number in the thousands, and the number of lost supporters in the millions, and many other objective analysts would likely agree.

3. Nuclear disarmament. The term is probably a misnomer, because an antecedent step must be to stop additional nations from arming. Our success or failure with Iran will take years to assess, but the Obama administration has already progressed beyond Bush in its ability to draw support from Europe through a steady, strong diplomatic approach, with a minimum of saber rattling. At this point, all we can say is that the process has improved since the previous administration.

4. Middle East peace. By demanding a halt to Israeli settlement expansion, Obama has added credibilitiy to our efforts to act as an honest broker. However, this modest step is part of a larger vision described in the Cairo speech, in which he acknowledged the legitimate sufferings of both sides in the conflict without attempting to demonize either. I believe he has recognized that it will be easier to maintain a current fragile cease fire and to promote a more durable long term solution by emphasizing what each side needs and deserves rather than the terrible things each has tried to do to the other. Definitive solutions can only originate from the parties themselves, but this modest change in atmospherics is a legitimate peacemaking effort that deserves recognition.

To summarize, President Obama has achieved a great deal in a remarkably short time. Compared with what needs to be achieved, it seems trivial. Compared with what others have had years to do but not done, it is almost monumental. He still hasn't completely earned the Peace Prize, but it would be wrong to claim that he hasn't started.