While the public debates Donald Trump’s Nobel Peace Prize candidacy, the five members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee are deliberating behind closed doors. Though their process is secret, experts who study their history and values can make an educated guess about their conversation—and it’s unlikely to be favorable to the former U.S. president.
First, the committee will undoubtedly discuss the Abraham Accords, the basis of his most credible nomination. They will acknowledge the diplomatic shift it represented. However, their discussion will quickly turn to the question of sustainability. Has this deal created lasting peace, or is it a transactional agreement that ignores the root causes of regional conflict, particularly the Israeli-Palestinian issue? The committee favors long-term solutions.
Next, his broader record will come under intense scrutiny. His withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on climate change would be a major topic. The committee has previously awarded prizes for environmental work (Al Gore, Wangari Maathai), signaling that they see climate stability as essential for peace. Trump’s denialism on this front would be a serious, perhaps fatal, blow to his chances.
His open disdain for multilateral institutions, from the UN to the WHO, would also be a central point of discussion. The Nobel Prize was created to foster “fraternity between nations,” and the committee consistently rewards those who build and support international cooperation. Trump’s “America First” philosophy is the antithesis of this ideal.
Finally, they would have to consider the optics. After the controversy of the 2009 Obama prize, the committee is likely highly sensitive to accusations of political favoritism. Awarding the prize to a figure as polarizing and self-promoting as Trump would invite an unprecedented global backlash. Considering all these factors, the private consensus in that room in Oslo is almost certainly that Donald Trump is not a suitable laureate.