It remains to be seen whether peace will take hold in the Middle East, but I think starting wars in the Caribbean and America may hurt his chances at the Peace Prize.
If they can get passed phase 1 and through all other phases, and if it leads to lasting peace then yes it is a good case for a Novel peace prize.
But let's see all that happen first. And if anything that would counter that work - either domestically or internationally - during the remainder of his term.
It depends: we've seen previous conflicts between Israel and Hamas/PLA end with hostage/prisoner swaps that then went nowhere towards an actual peaceful end.
If Hamas actually gives up their arms and proceeds through the rest of the phases, and Palestine ends up with some form of sovereignty and living peacefully next to Israel - great.
If Hamas instead just executes those that have spoken out against them and don't proceed through the rest of it...not so much.
Great article, Steve. I know you are not a fan of the President. That you can concede some kudos to him makes your other points to the contrary in your other posts much more credible.
So the guy who has pissed off half the world should get a peace award for a peace that hasn't even happened yet and won't in his life time? Yeah sorry no. If somehow in 10 years everyone in Palestine and Israel are happy and safe sure, but not a moment before that.
Oh just let the people of Canada and Greenland decide if he deserves it.
Trump deserves the peace prize even if Hamas doesn't heel to the agreement. What other world leader or ambassador has been as much on the frontlines in so many conflicts trying to achieve peace as Donald Trump?
If you’re saying that a person should be disqualified from something objectively worth the peace prize because of other things, then I suppose the whole concept of the Nobel prize is disqualified. Nobel made weapons. Lots of weapons. Let’s see how this works out.
"other things" being the needless belligerence with other nations and his own citizenry.
Nobel DID make weapons. Some speculate (including the Nobel committee) that Nobel included "peace" in his will to honor his friend, peace activist Bertha von Suttner[1].
Nobel's will specifies the requirement for the prize:
"... and one part to the person who has done the most or best to advance fellowship among nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and the establishment and promotion of peace congresses."[2]
If the figurehead of the "America First" movement - who renamed the Department of Defense to Department of War, who has ordered the US Navy to attack other nations' ships in the Caribbean Sea, and who is in the process of mobilizing the US military to occupy and agitate his political opponents - is the best person who meets the requirements in Nobel's will, then we're in worse shape (as a species) than I thought.
And before you break out the champagne and nominating paperwork, let's see how this peace deal plays out for the Palestinians who just want to go about their lives. There are plenty of episodes in history where conflict was paused, but not because peace and justice prevailed. There were periods where the countries behind the Iron Curtain were "peaceful", but that doesn't mean that we should lionize Stalin and his successors as peacemakers.
As others in this thread have suggested, let's just wait and see.
Not just "other nations' ships" but specifically "go-fast boats" that have nowhere near the range to enter US waters. There's been no evidence provided that these were drug runners, they were nowhere near US waters - so these are just murders.
I have an idea. Trump should move to the Middle East, permanently, to enforce his peace plan. He could build a big palace in Jerusalem and....wait a minute, I'm getting into Biblical territory so I'll stop.
Oh please: it's just factual that he has not personally gone to any conflict zone to broker a peace deal and that either it was ceasefires or very short-lived deals.
Basically, Cam's TDS is giving him too much praise - when other presidents have done similar/more when it comes to brokering ceasefires and peace deals too.
Thank you, Steve, for being willing to give Donald Trump his due, even though he is a less than average politician. Some on this thread wouldn't give him any credit if he brokered a 100 year peace with all nations of the earth.
Being responsible for 14 million deaths (by 2030) goes a LONG way towards generating a skepticism of Trump and his instincts for peace. There's nothing peaceful about children dying from hunger, preventable diseases, and the war and chaos that arises from both.
But let's keep pretending that Africa doesn't exist.
This is a masterfully-constructed bit of click- and argument-bait. :-)
Can't wait to see the discussion.
It remains to be seen whether peace will take hold in the Middle East, but I think starting wars in the Caribbean and America may hurt his chances at the Peace Prize.
A lasting peace in Gaza stands objectively on its own deserving of recognition.
We’re far from that at this point. I don’t expect Hamas to lay down their aend, although they will be happy to string people along.
It really needs to be more than just another ceasefire.
The "lasting" part being the important bit, and I think that will take more time to be seen as having been the case. So perhaps not this year?
A quote from your response to Chris a couple of days ago. "He did a service to his country not many others would want."
If they can get passed phase 1 and through all other phases, and if it leads to lasting peace then yes it is a good case for a Novel peace prize.
But let's see all that happen first. And if anything that would counter that work - either domestically or internationally - during the remainder of his term.
Little by little, day by day, my skepticism is draining. I never thought we’d get this far, tbh.
It depends: we've seen previous conflicts between Israel and Hamas/PLA end with hostage/prisoner swaps that then went nowhere towards an actual peaceful end.
If Hamas actually gives up their arms and proceeds through the rest of the phases, and Palestine ends up with some form of sovereignty and living peacefully next to Israel - great.
If Hamas instead just executes those that have spoken out against them and don't proceed through the rest of it...not so much.
Whelp, Hamas is executing their enemies in Gaza.
We probably should also note that the decision for the winner was likely made weeks ago, so Trump can go ahead and cross his fingers for 2026.
Great article, Steve. I know you are not a fan of the President. That you can concede some kudos to him makes your other points to the contrary in your other posts much more credible.
So the guy who has pissed off half the world should get a peace award for a peace that hasn't even happened yet and won't in his life time? Yeah sorry no. If somehow in 10 years everyone in Palestine and Israel are happy and safe sure, but not a moment before that.
Oh just let the people of Canada and Greenland decide if he deserves it.
It would be hilarious if he gives Hamas biggest supporter a freaking air base on US soil and still doesn't get his precious peace prize.
The winner is: https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2025/press-release/
And because a reporter asked "Why not Trump?" - https://x.com/AdamJSchwarz/status/1976610702078177531
https://open.substack.com/pub/morfmorford/p/the-nobel-prize-to-mr-trump-for?r=9hujo&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=post_stats
Trump deserves the peace prize even if Hamas doesn't heel to the agreement. What other world leader or ambassador has been as much on the frontlines in so many conflicts trying to achieve peace as Donald Trump?
Let's give the peace prize to the fellow who threatened to annex Greenland. Makes sense.
If you’re saying that a person should be disqualified from something objectively worth the peace prize because of other things, then I suppose the whole concept of the Nobel prize is disqualified. Nobel made weapons. Lots of weapons. Let’s see how this works out.
"other things" being the needless belligerence with other nations and his own citizenry.
Nobel DID make weapons. Some speculate (including the Nobel committee) that Nobel included "peace" in his will to honor his friend, peace activist Bertha von Suttner[1].
Nobel's will specifies the requirement for the prize:
"... and one part to the person who has done the most or best to advance fellowship among nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and the establishment and promotion of peace congresses."[2]
If the figurehead of the "America First" movement - who renamed the Department of Defense to Department of War, who has ordered the US Navy to attack other nations' ships in the Caribbean Sea, and who is in the process of mobilizing the US military to occupy and agitate his political opponents - is the best person who meets the requirements in Nobel's will, then we're in worse shape (as a species) than I thought.
And before you break out the champagne and nominating paperwork, let's see how this peace deal plays out for the Palestinians who just want to go about their lives. There are plenty of episodes in history where conflict was paused, but not because peace and justice prevailed. There were periods where the countries behind the Iron Curtain were "peaceful", but that doesn't mean that we should lionize Stalin and his successors as peacemakers.
As others in this thread have suggested, let's just wait and see.
[1] https://www.nobelpeacecenter.org/en/news/the-woman-behind-the-nobel-peace-prize
[2] https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred-nobel/full-text-of-alfred-nobels-will-2/
Not just "other nations' ships" but specifically "go-fast boats" that have nowhere near the range to enter US waters. There's been no evidence provided that these were drug runners, they were nowhere near US waters - so these are just murders.
Has he ever actually gone to the frontlines of any conflict?
More relevantly, he claims to have resolved 7 conflicts - but those "resolutions" either lasted only days or were just brokered ceasefires.
If this ends up actually being a lasting peace between Israel and Palestine, then there's a good case for a future peace prize - but probably not yet.
I have an idea. Trump should move to the Middle East, permanently, to enforce his peace plan. He could build a big palace in Jerusalem and....wait a minute, I'm getting into Biblical territory so I'll stop.
Oh please: it's just factual that he has not personally gone to any conflict zone to broker a peace deal and that either it was ceasefires or very short-lived deals.
Basically, Cam's TDS is giving him too much praise - when other presidents have done similar/more when it comes to brokering ceasefires and peace deals too.
Thank you, Steve, for being willing to give Donald Trump his due, even though he is a less than average politician. Some on this thread wouldn't give him any credit if he brokered a 100 year peace with all nations of the earth.
Being responsible for 14 million deaths (by 2030) goes a LONG way towards generating a skepticism of Trump and his instincts for peace. There's nothing peaceful about children dying from hunger, preventable diseases, and the war and chaos that arises from both.
But let's keep pretending that Africa doesn't exist.
https://ph.ucla.edu/news-events/news/research-finds-more-14-million-preventable-deaths-2030-if-usaid-defunding
Did you actually read what I wrote in other comments?
Ok, SGman, Chris K is beyond hope, but you seem to retain some semblance of credibility with regard to giving Trump his due in the future if not now.
Chris is going into more detail, and I imagine if you asked he'd say the best thing Trump ever did was Operation Warpspeed (as do I).
But so much of the future depends on all his actions - and Chris is pointing out very valid dangers that potentially harm his claim
On the contrary, operation warpspeed was among Trump's more dangerous and foolhardy undertakings.