Kathmandu-Speculation is rising once again about whether U.S. President Donald Trump could win the Nobel Peace Prize. Supporters claim that his recent diplomatic moves, including a new Middle East peace plan and efforts to de-escalate tensions between nuclear powers, make him a deserving candidate. He himself has publicly claimed several times that he deserves the Nobel peace prize. However, many international observers and Nobel experts remain doubtful that the Norwegian Nobel Committee will select him for the prestigious honor this year.

The Nobel Peace Prize, one of the world’s most respected awards, is given to individuals or groups who have made outstanding contributions to promoting peace. The prize, established under the will of Alfred Nobel, is administered by a five member Norwegian committee. According to Nobel’s will, it is intended for “the person who shall have done the most or best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.” The nomination process is confidential, and the committee does not reveal nominees for fifty years. While heads of state, university professors, and former laureates can submit nominations, the final decision rests entirely with the Nobel Committee, which tends to favor long term, verifiable efforts over political gestures or temporary truces.

President Trump’s supporters argue that his foreign policy achievements demonstrate a genuine effort to reduce conflict and promote stability. They often highlight his involvement in the Abraham Accords, the 2020 normalization agreements between Israel and several Arab nations. Those accords were seen as a rare diplomatic breakthrough in a region long defined by hostility and mistrust. More recently, Trump unveiled a 20 point peace plan aimed at resolving the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict in Gaza. The proposal calls for the return of hostages, Israeli withdrawal from certain areas, disarmament of Hamas members who agree to peace, and expanded humanitarian assistance. Supporters claim that this plan could mark a major step toward ending decades of bloodshed, if successfully implemented.

In addition to the Middle East initiatives, reports from several international news agencies, including Turkey’s Anadolu Agency, confirm that Pakistan’s government has formally recommended Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. The nomination credits him for helping to de-escalate tensions between India and Pakistan earlier this year, during a period when both sides were on high alert following border clashes. However, India denies Trump involvement in the peace deal. Furthermore, a ceasefire between the United States and Yemen’s Houthi forces, brokered in 2025, is also being cited as evidence of Trump’s growing influence in promoting regional peace. These developments have led some of his supporters to say that Trump is not only a global peacemaker but also a candidate whose diplomatic initiatives have prevented larger wars.

Despite these claims, experts and Nobel observers remain highly skeptical. Analysts from major international outlets such as Reuters, Associated Press, and BBC have noted that while Trump’s proposals have drawn attention, few have led to lasting or verifiable peace. The Nobel Committee tends to favor figures who show long-term commitment, international cooperation, and humanitarian concern. Trump’s approach, by contrast, is often described as transactional and self promotional. Many also point out that the president has often used the idea of winning a Nobel Peace Prize as a political talking point, something that could work against him. Members of the Nobel Committee have previously made it clear that overt campaigning or lobbying for the prize is viewed negatively.

Public opinion also appears to be against Trump’s chances. A recent survey cited by Anadolu Agency reported that nearly three out of four Americans believe he does not deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, while only about one in five said he does. Critics argue that his domestic policies, public statements, and withdrawal from international agreements on climate and human rights during his previous term still overshadow his recent peace related efforts. Others note that his strong support for Israel and divisive rhetoric may make it difficult for the Nobel Committee to view his actions as impartial or humanitarian.

Even from a procedural standpoint, Trump faces hurdles. While multiple groups have reportedly nominated him, several nominations appear to have been submitted after the official deadline for the 2025 prize, meaning they will not be considered until the following year. Moreover, the Nobel Committee has not confirmed any nomination publicly, as it strictly follows its confidentiality policy. Betting markets have shown fluctuating odds in Trump’s favor, especially after his Gaza peace proposal and his involvement in the India-Pakistan mediation, but analysts stress that betting odds rarely predict actual Nobel outcomes.

Experts say that if Trump truly wants to strengthen his case for a future Nobel Peace Prize, he would need to demonstrate consistent engagement in peacebuilding efforts that produce tangible and lasting results. This would include follow through on peace agreements, broad international cooperation, and evidence that his initiatives have reduced suffering on the ground. The Nobel Committee typically looks for leaders who work beyond personal or political interests, focusing instead on humanitarian and diplomatic principles that benefit people across nations. Previous laureates such as Nelson Mandela, the Dalai Lama, and former U.S. President Jimmy Carter were honored not for one-time deals but for decades of sustained efforts toward reconciliation, human rights, and disarmament.

For now, the general consensus among analysts is that President Trump’s chances of winning the Nobel Peace Prize in 2025 remain low. While his supporters point to a list of recent diplomatic achievements, critics argue that his initiatives lack the broad, long term impact that the Nobel Committee values. His record of withdrawing from global institutions, making controversial foreign policy statements, and treating the Nobel Prize as a personal accolade rather than a recognition of collective peacebuilding also weakens his standing. Some experts believe that the committee will continue its recent trend of honoring humanitarian organizations, journalists, or peace activists working in war-torn regions rather than world leaders whose legacies remain disputed.

Still, history shows that Nobel decisions can sometimes surprise the world. If Trump’s peace plans in Gaza or South Asia manage to bring measurable, lasting change and are recognized by international partners, his future candidacy may become more credible. Until then, his Nobel ambitions remain largely symbolic, a reflection of both his global profile and his polarizing reputation. As of now, no verified information suggests that the Nobel Committee is seriously considering him for this year’s award, and official nominations will remain sealed for half a century.

Whether Trump ever wins the Nobel Peace Prize or not, his repeated pursuit of it has already influenced public discussion about what peace means in modern politics. To some, he represents an unconventional negotiator willing to challenge traditional diplomacy. To others, he remains a deeply divisive figure whose idea of peace is inseparable from political advantage. The Nobel Committee, which has guarded its independence since 1901, is unlikely to overlook these contradictions easily. The final decision will rest not on rhetoric or nominations, but on whether Trump’s actions create real and lasting peace that meets Alfred Nobel’s original vision. A vision based on humanity, cooperation, and the true end of war.