What were the reasons behind Donald Trump's Nobel Peace Prize nominations?
Executive summary
Donald Trump received multiple public nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2025 and 2026 from a mix of U.S. lawmakers and foreign leaders who pointed to his diplomacy and ceasefire efforts—most prominently his Gaza peace initiative and a string of brokered deals—while critics and Nobel experts argued those moves were either ineligible for the 2025 window or outweighed by concerns about his rhetoric and policy reversals [1] [2] [3]. The Nobel Committee awarded the 2025 prize to Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado, a decision that drew sharp reactions from the Trump White House and widespread commentary about timing, nominations submitted after the deadline, and political motivations behind some nominations [4] [5] [2].
1. Why people nominated Trump: diplomacy, ceasefires and the “big” deals
Supporters who nominated or publicly pushed for Trump argued his administration’s diplomacy—cited examples include the Gaza ceasefire/peace plan and earlier deals such as the Abraham Accords and other regional agreements—qualified as major peace work deserving Nobel recognition [1] [6]. Foreign leaders and prominent politicians publicly urged the committee to consider Trump after he gained momentum with a Gaza initiative that many saw as a potential path to ending a major, ongoing conflict [1] [7].
2. Who nominated him and what they said
Nominators ranged from U.S. members of Congress (e.g., Rep. Darrell Issa) to foreign heads of state; Issa’s press release framed Trump as a peacemaker and cited long-standing initiatives such as the Abraham Accords as precedent for a nomination [8]. Media reports also documented endorsements from several world leaders and lawmakers who publicly stated Trump “deserved” the prize, creating a chorus of high-profile backers [7] [9].
3. Timing and eligibility problems critics highlighted
A key factual limitation: the Nobel Committee’s nomination window for the 2025 prize closed in late January—soon after Trump’s second inauguration—so many high-profile nominations and the peace initiatives that followed occurred after that deadline and were therefore ineligible for the 2025 award, according to multiple outlets [1] [2] [7]. Reporting noted that nominations from figures like Benjamin Netanyahu and Pakistan’s government were filed after the cutoff and could only apply to subsequent years [10] [7].
4. Why Nobel experts and commentators were skeptical
Nobel analysts and researchers warned Trump was a long shot: they argued his rhetoric, past withdrawals from international agreements, and actions critics say undermine multilateral norms make him a poor fit for the committee’s traditional criteria, even if he’d brokered tangible deals [3] [6]. Reuters quoted experts saying Trump was unlikely to win because the committee values the international order he is accused of dismantling [3].
5. The committee’s decision and immediate political fallout
The Norwegian Nobel Committee selected María Corina Machado for 2025, prompting strong White House criticism that the committee “placed politics over peace,” and sparking sharp commentary that the prize was both a rebuke of Trump and recognition of Venezuelan democracy defenders [4] [5]. Coverage emphasized that Machado’s nomination was backed by U.S. lawmakers including Senator Marco Rubio, complicating narratives that the award ignored U.S. influence [1] [5].
6. Competing narratives: merit, cronyism, and geopolitical signaling
Supporters framed nominations for Trump as merited recognition of peace craftsmanship; critics and some journalists framed many nominations as attempts to curry favor or as political theater—Time and other outlets noted that several endorsements appeared driven by political calculation rather than sober assessment [9] [6]. Opinion pieces went further: Al Jazeera argued the Machado award effectively served pro-Trump narratives by elevating an opposition figure aligned with U.S. interests, while other outlets defended the committee’s independence [11] [1].
7. What reporting does not (yet) establish
Available sources do not mention any official Nobel Committee statement that directly evaluated or rejected Trump’s specific peace claims point‑by‑point; they also do not confirm whether every public “nomination” met the formal submission rules for the relevant year's deadline [12] [2]. Some outlets report nominations after the deadline, but the committee’s confidential internal deliberations and weighing of competing criteria remain unpublished [2] [12].
8. Bottom line for readers
The reasons behind Trump’s Nobel nominations were a mix of concrete diplomatic episodes cited by supporters and high-profile political endorsements; however, eligibility timing, expert skepticism about his broader record, and the Nobel Committee’s final choice for 2025 all undercut the case that he was the clear frontrunner—facts and deadlines reported across outlets complicate claims that he was unfairly “snubbed” [2] [3] [9].