Washington/Oslo │ October 2025 — U.S. President Donald Trump has emerged as one of the most prominent contenders for the Nobel Peace Prize in today’s international arena. From the Abraham Accords in the Middle East to conflict mediation in South Asia, Africa, and Europe, many have hailed his efforts as “historic peace initiatives.” Yet, the Nobel Committee in Norway remains hesitant, raising accusations of political bias and strategic maneuvering.

Historic Peace Efforts

Trump himself has claimed that under his leadership at least seven protracted conflicts have come to an end, saving millions of lives. Analysts note that the Abraham Accords not only reshaped relations between Israel and several Arab nations but also altered the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East. His administration also played a role in calming tensions between Sudan and Ethiopia, advancing dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia, and encouraging renewed talks between India and Pakistan.

Global Leaders Rally Behind Trump

Support for Trump’s candidacy is not limited to rhetoric. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, senior officials in Pakistan, and multiple African heads of state have formally nominated him. Within the United States, members of his cabinet and diplomats have consistently echoed the sentiment that “Trump is the most deserving candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize.”

For many in the international community, if the Nobel Prize is to genuinely honor significant contributions to global peace, then Trump’s record makes him the obvious choice.

Norway’s Political Dilemma

But in Oslo, the picture is different. Members of the Nobel Committee and Norwegian political circles fear that awarding Trump could make the committee appear politically influenced. Nina Gregar, director of the Oslo Peace Research Institute, acknowledged that “the Nobel Prize is not just an honor; it often sends a moral message.”

Historically, the Nobel Committee has used the Peace Prize strategically — from taking a stand against Hitler to signaling opposition to Ronald Reagan’s Latin America policies and George W. Bush’s Iraq War. But critics argue that such “messaging” should not overshadow real contributions to peace.

Criticism and Controversy

Analysts contend that the Nobel Committee is prioritizing self-preservation over fairness. In their attempt to shield the prize from accusations of political bias, they risk undermining its credibility by ignoring Trump’s tangible accomplishments. Critics argue that if a leader who brokered multiple peace agreements and reduced active conflicts is denied recognition, the Nobel’s integrity itself will be called into question.

The reality is clear: Donald Trump remains one of the most deserving candidates for the Nobel Peace Prize in the present era. Yet the Committee appears paralyzed by fear of political controversy. This reluctance not only diminishes the stature of the prize but also exposes it to charges of hypocrisy and double standards.

Trump’s role in peace-building is already etched into history. The only question is whether the Nobel Committee will have the courage to honor him — or whether it will allow political fears to silence recognition of one of the most impactful peace efforts of our time.