The ghost of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize decision looms over Donald Trump’s current candidacy. The fierce criticism leveled at the committee for awarding the prize to a newly elected Barack Obama may have instilled a deep sense of caution, making the selection of another polarizing American president highly improbable.
Trump’s nomination, like Obama’s, is tied to specific diplomatic hopes. For Trump, it’s the 2020 Abraham Accords, a concrete achievement that his supporters, including nominator Rep. Claudia Tenney, believe is more substantial than what Obama had accomplished by 2009. Trump has repeatedly argued his case in public, asserting that he “deserves” the honor for his peacemaking efforts.
However, experts believe the committee learned a hard lesson from the Obama experience. The backlash taught them that even a popular, multilateralist president could be a controversial choice if the achievements were not yet proven to be durable. Awarding the prize to Trump—a figure who actively disdains multilateralism and is far more divisive globally—would risk an even greater controversy.
Nina Græger of the Peace Research Institute Oslo suggests Trump’s outspoken campaigning for the prize further complicates matters. The committee prides itself on its independence and will not want to appear to be swayed by public pressure. Trump’s self-promotion, combined with the memory of the 2009 backlash, creates a high barrier for his candidacy.
Beyond the political optics, there are fundamental issues with Trump’s record. His withdrawal from climate agreements and his transactional approach to foreign policy clash with the Nobel’s core values of international fraternity and long-term security. Given the past controversy and these substantive concerns, the committee is expected to steer clear of Trump and select a laureate who aligns more closely with its traditional ideals.