By PAUL UWADIMA
The Nobel Peace Prize is meant to be the world’s most prestigious recognition of efforts to end conflict, promote reconciliation, and build peace. But in recent years, its credibility has come under scrutiny — not just for who has received it, but more importantly, for who hasn’t.
Few omissions are more glaring than that of former U.S. President Donald J. Trump.
Regardless of one’s political stance, facts remain facts: Donald Trump brokered peace deals and mediated historic accords that no other president — let alone global institution — managed to achieve in decades of failed diplomacy. And yet, he was passed over, while others have received the honor for hope, rhetoric, or symbolic gestures.
Let’s be clear: Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009, barely months into his first term, having accomplished little more than delivering a few well-phrased speeches about diplomacy and multilateralism. Even he admitted surprise at the award. Meanwhile, Trump — the supposed outsider, the controversial disruptor — delivered.
Consider the Abraham Accords. Under Trump’s leadership, Israel normalized relations with multiple Arab nations, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco. These weren’t symbolic handshakes — they were binding agreements fostering economic cooperation, opening airspace, increasing trade, and easing long-standing tensions. These breakthroughs redefined Middle East diplomacy and shattered the false belief that Israeli peace was only possible after resolving the Palestinian conflict. It was a diplomatic paradigm shift.
Furthermore, while the United Nations and global powers struggled for years to address the Rwanda-Congo regional conflict and bring any form of lasting peace or stability, Trump’s administration quietly facilitated peace talks between warring parties in the Great Lakes region. Though less covered in Western media, the impact was real on the ground, where countless lives were spared from further bloodshed.
Trump also took steps toward ending America’s longest war — in Afghanistan — by initiating direct talks with the Taliban, laying groundwork for eventual withdrawal. It may not have been perfect, but it was movement after years of stalemate. And had his administration remained, the exit may have looked far different from the chaotic debacle under his successor.
Even more remarkably, Trump was the first U.S. president to step foot in North Korea, opening direct dialogue with Kim Jong-un after decades of nuclear brinkmanship. While full denuclearization wasn’t achieved, diplomacy replaced saber-rattling — a first in modern history.
Contrast this with the repeated failures of the UN, a body created to preserve peace yet often paralyzed by bureaucracy, politics, or lack of resolve. Trump succeeded where the international community had only talked.
Yet despite these undeniable diplomatic wins, Trump was nominated — but never awarded — the Nobel Peace Prize. Why?
The answer, many suspect, lies not in his deeds, but in the discomfort his style and persona caused among global elites. Trump’s brashness, unapologetic America-first posture, and disdain for traditional diplomacy clashed with the Nobel Committee’s typical preference for polished statesmen and globalist idealists. It seems, at times, the prize is not awarded solely for outcomes, but for appearances.
That is both hypocritical and deeply disappointing.
The Nobel Peace Prize must rise above partisanship, personal bias, and ideological taste. It must recognize results — not just intentions. Peace brokered through unconventional means is still peace. History will remember Trump’s achievements in bringing bitter enemies to the table — not his tweets or his tone.
If the committee wants to preserve the Nobel’s integrity and purpose, it must honor leaders not for how well they conform to diplomatic norms, but for how effectively they make peace. By that measure, Donald Trump deserved more than a nomination. He deserved the prize.
