Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Does Donald Trump Deserve the Nobel Peace Prize?

News

Does Donald Trump Deserve the Nobel Peace Prize?

Oleksandra Matviichuk, head of the Center for Civil Liberties, holds the Nobel medal at the Kyiv railway station on December 18, 2022 in Kyiv, Ukraine.

(Photo by Yevhenii Zavhorodnii/Global Images Ukraine via Getty Images)

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt sparked widespread debate Thursday by calling for President Donald Trump to receive a Nobel Peace Prize.

Leavitt asserted that Trump merits the prestigious recognition, citing his role in negotiating peace deals and ceasefire agreements across six major international conflicts. However, the wars in Ukraine and the Gaza Strip are still ongoing.


Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Trump last month that he recommended him for the award, handing the American leader the letter he said he sent to the Nobel committee.

Stopping Iran’s Nuclear Program

U.S. officials have long labeled Iran as the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism. In June 2025, intelligence reports suggested Iran was accelerating efforts to develop nuclear weapons. In response, Trump authorized targeted U.S. airstrikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities, which were described as “totally obliterated”. The strikes were followed by stern warnings against retaliation, and while Iran did launch a limited strike on a U.S. base in Qatar, no casualties were reported.

Supporters argue that Trump’s decisive action:

  • Prevented Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
  • Averted a potential regional arms race.
  • Reinforced U.S. deterrence without triggering full-scale war.

Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) cited these actions in his formal nomination letter to the Norwegian Nobel Committee, praising Trump’s “bold, decisive actions to halt Iran’s nuclear ambitions”.

Brokering Peace Between Iran and Israel

Just days after the strikes, Trump announced a ceasefire agreement between Iran and Israel, ending weeks of open conflict that had threatened to engulf the Middle East. The ceasefire, brokered with U.S. involvement, was hailed as “extraordinary” by commentators and foreign leaders alike.

Netanyahu called Trump “a peacemaker in one country and one region after the other”. The ceasefire remains intact, despite early skepticism about its durability.

A Broader Peace Agenda

Trump’s recent efforts build on his earlier diplomatic initiatives:

  • The Abraham Accords (2020), which normalized relations between Israel and several Arab nations.
  • De-escalation of tensions between India and Pakistan.
  • Attempts to mediate ceasefires in Ukraine and Gaza.

While critics question the sustainability and motives behind these deals, proponents argue that Trump’s “peace through strength” doctrine has yielded tangible results in some of the world’s most volatile regions.

A Divisive but Impactful Nomination

Trump has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize multiple times, but has never won. This year, however, his candidacy has gained traction, with endorsements from lawmakers, tribal nations, and foreign governments, including Pakistan.

Critics across the political and academic spectrum are voicing strong opposition, questioning both the merit and motivations behind the endorsements.

"Nominating Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize is like entering a hyena in a dog show,” said Emma Shortis, a senior fellow at RMIT University, in a panel of experts convened by The Independent. “There is no peace in Gaza, and Trump’s approach to diplomacy is transactional, not transformative.”

Even some who initially nominated him—like Ukrainian MP Oleksandr Merezhko—have withdrawn support, citing inconsistency and a lack of genuine commitment to peace.

Betting markets reflect the controversy. While Trump remains a top contender with odds as high as 32% according to some sportsbooks, critics argue that the surge in support is politically driven rather than based on substantive peacebuilding.

Nobel Peace Prize Criteria

According to Alfred Nobel’s will and the Nobel Committee’s interpretation, the Peace Prize is awarded to individuals or organizations that have made:

  • Fraternity between nations
  • Abolition or reduction of standing armies
  • Promotion of peace congresses

Over time, these have expanded to include:

  • Human rights advocacy
  • Diplomatic negotiation
  • Humanitarian work
  • Efforts toward nuclear disarmament

So while Trump’s name is in the mix, whether he “deserves” the prize is a deeply polarizing question.

Whether or not the Nobel Committee awards him the prize, Trump’s actions have reignited debate over what constitutes peace in the modern era. Is it diplomacy alone, or can military deterrence and strategic pressure also qualify?

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum, and the publisher of the Latino News Network.


Read More

New Year’s Resolutions for Congress – and the Country

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) (L) and Rep. August Pfluger (R-TX) lead a group of fellow Republicans through Statuary Hall on the way to a news conference on the 28th day of the federal government shutdown at the U.S. Capitol on October 28, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Chip Somodevilla

New Year’s Resolutions for Congress – and the Country

Every January 1st, many Americans face their failings and resolve to do better by making New Year’s Resolutions. Wouldn’t it be delightful if Congress would do the same? According to Gallup, half of all Americans currently have very little confidence in Congress. And while confidence in our government institutions is shrinking across the board, Congress is near rock bottom. With that in mind, here is a list of resolutions Congress could make and keep, which would help to rebuild public trust in Congress and our government institutions. Let’s start with:

1 – Working for the American people. We elect our senators and representatives to work on our behalf – not on their behalf or on behalf of the wealthiest donors, but on our behalf. There are many issues on which a large majority of Americans agree but Congress can’t. Congress should resolve to address those issues.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two groups of glass figures. One red, one blue.

Congressional paralysis is no longer accidental. Polarization has reshaped incentives, hollowed out Congress, and shifted power to the executive.

Getty Images, Andrii Yalanskyi

How Congress Lost Its Capacity to Act and How to Get It Back

In late 2025, Congress fumbled the Affordable Care Act, failing to move a modest stabilization bill through its own procedures and leaving insurers and families facing renewed uncertainty. As the Congressional Budget Office has warned in multiple analyses over the past decade, policy uncertainty increases premiums and reduces insurer participation (see, for example: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61734). I examined this episode in an earlier Fulcrum article, “Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis,” as a case study in congressional paralysis and leadership failure. The deeper problem, however, runs beyond any single deadline or decision and into the incentives and procedures that now structure congressional authority. Polarization has become so embedded in America’s governing institutions themselves that it shapes how power is exercised and why even routine governance now breaks down.

From Episode to System

The ACA episode wasn’t an anomaly but a symptom. Recent scholarship suggests it reflects a broader structural shift in how Congress operates. In a 2025 academic article available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN), political scientist Dmitrii Lebedev reaches a stark conclusion about the current Congress, noting that the 118th Congress enacted fewer major laws than any in the modern era despite facing multiple time-sensitive policy deadlines (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5346916). Drawing on legislative data, he finds that dysfunction is no longer best understood as partisan gridlock alone. Instead, Congress increasingly exhibits a breakdown of institutional capacity within the governing majority itself. Leadership avoidance, procedural delay, and the erosion of governing norms have become routine features of legislative life rather than temporary responses to crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump’s ‘America First’ is now just imperialism

Donald Trump Jr.' s plane landed in Nuuk, Greenland, where he made a short private visit, weeks after his father, U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, suggested Washington annex the autonomous Danish territory.

(Ritzau Scanpix/AFP via Getty Images)

Trump’s ‘America First’ is now just imperialism

In early 2025, before Donald Trump was even sworn into office, he sent a plane with his name in giant letters on it to Nuuk, Greenland, where his son, Don Jr., and other MAGA allies preened for cameras and stomped around the mineral-rich Danish territory that Trump had been casually threatening to invade or somehow acquire like stereotypical American tourists — like they owned it already.

“Don Jr. and my Reps landing in Greenland,” Trump wrote. “The reception has been great. They and the Free World need safety, security, strength, and PEACE! This is a deal that must happen. MAGA. MAKE GREENLAND GREAT AGAIN!”

Keep ReadingShow less
The Common Cause North Carolina, Not Trump, Triggered the Mid-Decade Redistricting Battle

Political Midterm Election Redistricting

Getty images

The Common Cause North Carolina, Not Trump, Triggered the Mid-Decade Redistricting Battle

“Gerrymander” was one of seven runners-up for Merriam-Webster’s 2025 word of the year, which was “slop,” although “gerrymandering” is often used. Both words are closely related and frequently used interchangeably, with the main difference being their function as nouns versus verbs or processes. Throughout 2025, as Republicans and Democrats used redistricting to boost their electoral advantages, “gerrymander” and “gerrymandering” surged in popularity as search terms, highlighting their ongoing relevance in current politics and public awareness. However, as an old Capitol Hill dog, I realized that 2025 made me less inclined to explain the definitions of these words to anyone who asked for more detail.

“Did the Democrats or Republicans Start the Gerrymandering Fight?” is the obvious question many people are asking: Who started it?

Keep ReadingShow less