Last week’s recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize was more worthy of the honor than Donald Trump to date. Whether President Trump will deserve a future Nobel Prize will depend on both the fate of the peace agreement he’s negotiated with Israel and Hamas, and on the criteria by which the Prize should be awarded to incumbent U. S. Presidents and other political leaders. But if Trump wishes to maximize his chances of winning a future Peace Prize, he should continue to his work in the Middle East, work harder to achieve a peace between Ukraine and Russia based on a Ukrainian victory, and at least try to promote more peace among the various segments of the fractionated American public. Until he wins his own prize, he must be satisfied with the fact that the 2025 recipient dedicated her prize to him.
Last week, the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to Maria Corina Machado, a Venezuelan politician and activist leading the democratic resistance to the corrupt and brutal socialistic regime of dictator Nicolas Maduro. Ms. Machado is an excellent choice. But much of the reaction in America seems to include more satisfaction that President Trump didn’t win the Peace Prize than that Ms. Machado did.
President Trump seems obsessed with winning the Nobel Peace Prize and has openly campaigned for it shamelessly, basing his claim on his attempts to negotiate peace agreements in general (example: the Abraham Accords in his first term) and especially his attempts to end the war started by Hamas against Israel. Of course, one can argue that the peace agreement that he’s negotiated and which he’s traveling to the Middle East to sign has not yet been implemented, and one should wait to see whether it holds—whether the remaining hostages are actually returned, whether there’s a partial withdrawal by Israeli and Hamas forces, whether the Palestinians can be given adequate relief supplies, and whether the “Board of Peace” can be formed and be effective in maintaining the peace. Under the circumstances, as of this writing, granting Mr. Trump the Nobel Peace Prize at this time could be considered premature.
But not necessarily outlandish, even if his efforts ultimately end in failure. Three previous U. S. presidents have received Nobel Prizes while in office: Theodore Roosevelt, for negotiating an end to the Russo-Japanese War of 1905; Woodrow Wilson, for helping negotiate the Paris Peace Treaty, which ended World War I and created the League of Nations in 1919; and Barack Obama in 2009 for promoting nuclear nonproliferation and closer relations with the Muslim world. (Jimmy Carter received the Peace Prize two decades after leaving the White House, and for his post-presidential activities promoting peace.) Of the three awards to incumbents, Mr. Obama’s is the most controversial. He was nominated no later than 11 days after his inauguration in 2009, and even many of his supporters expressed doubts that he had had enough time to do anything prize-worthy. Mr. Trump’s latest Middle East gambit may not approach in significance or results the efforts of Presidents Roosevelt and Wilson. But should it succeed, he can claim, credibly, to have done more for peace in the first ten months of his second term than Mr. Obama did in his first. 2026 may be Trump’s year.
Although it’s not certain that Mr. Trump will win the Nobel Peace Prize in 2026 or at any other time in the future, he will no doubt continue his campaign for it. But that would be a mistake on his part. So far, his efforts seem to have repelled large numbers of those who have a say in awarding the prize, including the members of the Nobel Committee itself. If Mr. Trump wants to improve his prize-winning chances in the future, he should:
First: Drop his campaign, or at least the public portion of the campaign, with all the threats and attendant crudities. He’s doing more harm than good to his cause.
Second: While continuing to work for peace in the Middle East, he should also work to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. Hillary Clinton has said that she will support Mr. Trump’s bid for a Nobel Peace Prize should he bring about an end to the war with Ukraine’s territory intact—the best possible outcome to the war, and the end most likely to establish a permanent peace for Ukraine. To that end, Mr. Trump should quickly ramp up American efforts to supply sufficient arms to Ukraine to allow it to carry the war to Russian territory and inflict enough damage to get Mr. Putin to abandon his mad efforts to dismember, dominate, and ultimately conquer Ukraine. As Mrs. Clinton knows as well as anyone and better than most, any result less than what she proposes will produce only a temporary lull in the fighting, to be resumed by Mr. Putin in the near future, with all the horrors he’s capable of unleashing.
Third, Mr. Trump must try to somehow diffuse the mutual hostilities among the various factions within the (dis)United States. In fairness to Mr. Trump, it must be admitted that he has not caused the ruptures from which we currently suffer. They existed and were growing well before he came down his escalator ten years ago. But he’s solidified his MAGA base largely by exploiting their resentments of more elitist politicians who call his supporters “deplorable” and “garbage.” In his magnificent Second Inaugural Address, Abraham Lincoln spoke of the need “with malice toward none [and] with charity to all…to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.” In saying so, Lincoln seemed to have posited a direct connection between peace at home and a greater ability to promote peace abroad. Whether Mr. Trump can either understand such a concept or make any progress to achieving it is doubtful, and this may hamper his future efforts to become a Nobel laureate. Yet in his second term, and being barred from seeking a third term, he has nothing to lose by trying.
But if Donald Trump never wins a Nobel Peace Prize, he can at least take—if he’ll let himself do so—consolation in Ms. Machado’s comments following notification of her award. She said she was dedicating her prize not only to her followers but to President Trump himself for his “decisive support” for her work. “He deserves it,” she said. Granted, having a Nobel Peace Prize dedicated to you is not the same as winning it outright. But for Mr. Trump, it’ll have to do for now. Besides, it’s not the worst fate to befall someone.
Malcolm L. Cross has lived in Stephenville since 1987 and taught politics and government at Tarleton for 36 years, retiring in 2023. His political and civic activities include service on the Stephenville City Council (2000-2014) and on the Erath County Republican Executive Committee (1990-2024). He was Mayor pro-tem of Stephenville from 2008 to 2014. He has served on the Board of Directors of the Stephenville
Economic Development Authority since 2018 and as chair of the Erath County Appraisal District’s Appraisal Review Board since 2015. He is also a member of the Stephenville Rotary Club, the Board of Vestry of St. Luke’s Episcopal Church, and the Executive Committee of the Boy Scouts’ Pecan Valley District. Views expressed in this column are his and do not reflect those of The Flash as a whole.
Be the first to comment