• U.S. Foreign Policy
• Geopolitics
• United States

October 10, 2025, 10:36 AM View Comments ()

Another year, another failed attempt. U.S. President Donald Trump’s inability to secure this year’s Nobel Peace Prize was predictable. The odds that he will ever win the prize remain slim. Yet this latest knockback is only likely to redouble Trump’s desire to win in future years, putting renewed energy behind one of the most important yet underappreciated forces shaping U.S. foreign policy.

In advance of Trump’s second election victory, many observers talked about taking him “seriously but not literally.” This was always foolish guidance, but it is especially so regarding his transparent obsession with Nobel recognition. Beyond mere vanity, this desire will continue to reshape global geopolitics—a point this latest perceived snub is only likely to intensify.

Trump’s willingness to strong-arm Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu into accepting a Gaza peace deal is only the latest example of the steps he is willing to take for peacemaker credentials. A roughly similar deal had been on the table during former President Joe Biden’s closing period in power. But Biden was unwilling to pressure Israel into accepting. Trump gambled on possible Nobel glory—and a shaky peace deal is the result.

This month, Trump may stop briefly at the annual summit of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in Malaysia. Previous U.S. leaders routinely skipped these gatherings, to predictable local irritation. Trump sees an opportunity, however—namely, to take further credit for having mediated in border clashes between Cambodia and Thailand. A press event burnishing his credentials for brokering peace makes the trip suddenly worthwhile.

During his recent speech at the United Nations, Trump mentioned seven conflicts to which he has brought peace. No one is exactly sure which seven he meant, but they likely include mediation efforts between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, brokered talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and attempts to restart negotiations between Serbia and Kosovo. In each, Trump sees a notch toward Nobel consideration.

This peacemaking impulse has many upsides, as his role in the new Gaza deal suggests. Trump’s team knows the recognition he seeks, leading to new U.S. diplomatic engagement in places that rarely receive it. Across the global south, governments often lament Washington’s tendency to focus on great-power competition, not complex regional conflicts. Now Trump’s Nobel hunger, however self-serving, has paradoxically forced sustained attention on disputes from Central Asia to Central Africa.

There are a number of major problems, however, the most obvious being that foreign governments are quickly learning to exploit this impulse. Pakistan offers one clear example. “The Government of Pakistan has decided to formally recommend President Donald J. Trump for the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize, in recognition of his decisive diplomatic intervention and pivotal leadership during the recent India-Pakistan crisis,” Islamabad said in June.

This public support was in turn an important part of a broader process whereby Islamabad has cleverly boosted U.S.-Pakistan ties in recent months. At the same time, U.S.-India relations are enduring their worst period in a decade or more. The result is a significant rebalancing of U.S. policy, with potentially major implications for Washington’s role in South Asia and beyond.

Foreign leaders understand that Trump prizes photo opportunities above substantive outcomes, allowing them to extract concessions for cheap gestures. Not only does Washington risk giving away too much, but it likely means Trump will accept flawed agreements that create the illusion of peace without remedying underlying tensions.

At base, Trump appears to believe that the sheer volume of peacemaking initiatives will force the Nobel committee’s hand. There is no reason to believe this is correct, but it is worth thinking through the implications his belief will have for future U.S. diplomacy.

The most likely theater for Trump’s pursuit remains the Middle East. He and others in his administration remain keen to expand the Abraham Accords to include Saudi Arabia, brokering a deal with Israel with the potential to reshape the regional balance of power.

In Trump’s own mind, his decision to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites in June counts among his wider peacemaking efforts, given the cease-fire that followed. A Saudi breakthrough would not only cement his view of himself as a historic Middle East dealmaker but also provide another case study for the doubting prize committee in Oslo.

The Korean Peninsula is a second likely avenue. North Korea represents unfinished business following Trump’s fitful and unsuccessful attempts to make progress through talks with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un during Trump’s first term.

In August, Trump met with South Korea’s new president, Lee Jae-myung, in the White House for the first time. At the meeting, he announced that he hoped to see Kim “this year,” raising speculation of a possible meeting on the sidelines of this month’s Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in South Korea. The odds of Kim traveling south are slim, but a further U.S. push on Korean Peninsula peace seems more likely than not.

Ultimately, it is Trump’s chaotic policymaking style—his tendency to undercut negotiators, reverse positions, and prioritize personal ties over process—that will prevent him from winning the prize he desperately seeks. Nobel committees value sustained diplomacy and lasting change, not stage-managed press conferences.

Even so, other nations will keep using these impulses to their advantage. This year, I met with a senior Chinese diplomat in Beijing, who gently probed about Trump’s peacemaker ambitions and their implications for North Korea policy. Behind the seemingly casual conversation lay a clear calculation: China was assessing how its leverage over Pyongyang might be used—or weaponized—in broader negotiations with Washington.

If Beijing is gaming out Trump’s Nobel hunger, every sophisticated foreign ministry is doing the same. This singular drive for recognition is now a remarkably consistent guide to U.S. policy, indeed perhaps the most reliable predictor of where Washington’s diplomatic energy will flow. Put another way, Trump’s peacemaking ambition is now a primary variable in international relations—and one that should be taken both literally and seriously.