Despite the media frenzy and favorable odds from bookmakers, a clear consensus has emerged among Nobel Prize experts: Donald Trump’s chances of winning this year are virtually non-existent. Academics and peace researchers who study the committee’s patterns describe his candidacy as a “long shot,” citing a profound misalignment between his record and the prize’s core principles.
The former U.S. president has been nominated for his role in the 2020 Abraham Accords, a diplomatic achievement that normalized relations between Israel and several Arab states. His supporters, including his nominator U.S. Rep. Claudia Tenney, argue this alone warrants the prize. Trump has echoed this sentiment, frequently claiming he is the most deserving candidate.
However, the analysis from seasoned Nobel watchers tells a different story. They emphasize the committee’s focus on multilateralism, international law, and sustained efforts toward peace. Trump’s presidency was marked by a withdrawal from international agreements and a vocal skepticism of global institutions. Nina Græger of the Peace Research Institute Oslo states plainly that “his rhetoric does not point in a peaceful perspective.”
Furthermore, his stance on climate change is seen as a major disqualifier. Historian Theo Zenou stated he couldn’t imagine the committee awarding the prize to a leader who denies the scientific consensus on an issue so central to long-term global stability. The committee often rewards those who tackle existential threats through cooperation, not those who dismiss them.
The combination of his anti-multilateralist policies, his controversial rhetoric, and his open campaigning for the award creates a formidable barrier. While his nomination ensures he is part of the conversation, the experts who have followed the Nobel committee for decades are unanimous in their assessment that his name will not be the one announced in Oslo.
8