By: Naz pervin
By any measure, Donald Trump is one of the most polarizing figures of our age. Though twice elected to the presidency of the United States, even his own people frequently describe him as a divisive and controversial personality. Many Americans mockingly refer to him as “the orange guy.” Yet today, Trump has placed himself in the middle of global attention not for his business scandals or unorthodox politics, but for his claim that he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. Soon after beginning his second term, Trump unleashed a barrage of policies that shook the global economy. Sweeping tariffs and heavy taxes were imposed on allies and rivals alike, prompting alarm across Europe and China. Even within the U.S., citizens took to the streets, protesting as their purchasing power collapsed under the weight of his economic experiments.
And then came the audacious declaration: Trump announced that, for his contributions to world peace, he should be recognized with the Nobel Peace Prize.The first countries to put forward Trump’s name for the prize left many stunned: Pakistan and Israel. The irony is glaring. Pakistan, long seen as a fortress of Islam, has never even recognized Israel. Yet, according to Trump, Pakistan nominated him on the basis of his alleged mediation during the latest India–Pakistan confrontation. Trump repeatedly claimed—more than thirty times—that his diplomatic pressure forced the two nuclear-armed rivals to step back from the brink of war. On the other side, Israel too nominated Trump, praising him for his role in preventing a wider conflict with Iran. The narrative of Trump as a peacemaker extends to Ukraine. According to the U.S. State Department, since Russia’s full-scale invasion, Washington has provided Kyiv with $66.9 billion in military aid. Ukraine’s economy is shattered, and its population has paid a catastrophic price as a result of this war.
This war, in reality, is a proxy confrontation between the West and Russia, with Ukraine as the unfortunate pawn. It was armed, emboldened, and hurled into a devastating conflict that cost it dearly. Now, as the war drags on, Trump positions himself as the architect of ceasefire efforts, winning praise even from Vladimir Putin at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit. In short: ignite the blaze, then claim credit for dousing the flames. Perhaps the most grotesque irony comes from Israel’s nomination. Since October 2023, according to Gaza’s Ministry of Health, Israeli bombardments have killed more than 63,000 Palestinians and injured over 159,000, most of them women and children. Hospitals, refugee camps, and aid convoys have been mercilessly targeted. Thousands have been displaced. All of this is carried out with American weapons. The U.S. provides Israel $3.8 billion annually in military aid—$3.3 billion in Foreign Military Financing and another $500 million for missile defense programs like Iron Dome. A ten-year Memorandum of Understanding (2019–2028) pledges a staggering $38 billion in total military support. These resources, ostensibly for defense, have instead been turned into tools of mass destruction against the people of Gaza.
Yet Israel, drenched in Palestinian blood, champions Trump as a “man of peace.” Recently, the U.S. went so far as to deny visas to an 80-member Palestinian delegation invited to address the United Nations General Assembly. The justification? Washington labeled them “terrorists.” In effect, protesting occupation, mourning murdered children, and demanding justice have now been rebranded as acts of extremism. Awarding Trump the Nobel Peace Prize would not simply be absurd—it would be a travesty. It would set a dangerous precedent where global oppressors, war profiteers, and aggressors cloak themselves in the rhetoric of peace while standing atop the ruins of nations and the corpses of innocents. A prize meant to honor peacemakers would instead become a medal for manipulation, granted to those who manufacture wars only to declare themselves saviors in orchestrated ceasefires. If Trump, with his record of fueling conflicts, underwriting occupations, and enabling bloodshed, can be hailed as a “peacemaker,” then every tyrant of tomorrow will have a license to wage war today—knowing that tomorrow’s Nobel may await them.
Writer is director China Window
and a columnist from KP
