Donald Trump’s bid for the Nobel Peace Prize creates a fascinating dilemma for the committee by pitting his single greatest diplomatic achievement against his core political ideology. The Abraham Accords represent a form of international cooperation, yet they were brokered by a leader whose entire brand is built on a rejection of globalism. Experts believe the ideology will overshadow the achievement.
The Abraham Accords were a moment of classic diplomacy, bringing nations together to sign agreements that fostered new relationships. On paper, this aligns with the Nobel’s goal of promoting “fraternity between nations.” This is the achievement that got him nominated and keeps him in the conversation.
However, the man behind the deal is a staunch opponent of the very system that the Nobel Prize has historically championed. Trump’s “America First” ideology is predicated on the belief that multilateral institutions and global agreements are often a threat to national sovereignty. He has been a critic of the UN, NATO, and the EU—all past Nobel laureates or closely aligned with the prize’s vision.
This creates a fundamental contradiction. Can the committee honor an act of cooperation performed by a leader whose broader message is one of anti-cooperation? It would be like giving a health award to someone who invented a new medicine but spent their career campaigning against public health initiatives.
The consensus is that the committee cannot separate the act from the actor. The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded to individuals whose life and work embody a commitment to peace. Because Trump’s core ideology is seen as a challenge to the international cooperation necessary for lasting peace, his specific achievement with the Accords is unlikely to be enough to earn him the prize.