Nobel Nod: Noble or Novelty?
The medal itself. I’ve only personally seen one; Marshall’s is on display at VMI
The 2025 Nobel Peace Prize announcement drew sharp criticism from president Trump and his loyal supporters, who described the award as egregiously wrong and politically motivated. Every form of media — from traditional outlets to nearly every social platform — was filled with widespread condemnation, with many challenging the selection committee’s judgment and even the very legitimacy of the prize.
To unpack all of this, let’s begin by reviewing the origins and guiding principles of the Nobel Peace Prize, exploring how Alfred Nobel envisioned it, the criteria for selection, and the process by which laureates are chosen. From there, we can move into the modern era, before turning specifically to the 2025 award.
The Nobel Peace Prize is one of the five original Nobel Prizes [1] established by the will of Alfred Nobel, the Swedish inventor of dynamite, in 1895. It is awarded annually to individuals, organizations, or movements that have made significant contributions to peace, such as: promoting diplomacy, resolving conflicts, advancing human rights, and fostering international cooperation.
Alfred Nobel, inventor of dynamite and benefactor of endowment that funds of Nobel Awards
At the time of Alfred Nobel’s will [2], Sweden and Norway were united under one monarch, though each had its own parliament. Nobel directed that the Peace Prize be awarded by Norway, likely reflecting its reputation for neutrality and its growing role in humanitarian affairs.
Today, the Nobel Peace Prize Committee consists of five members appointed by the Norwegian Parliament, generally selected in proportion to the political representation of the parties in office. Members are chosen for their public integrity, international perspective, and record of service in government, diplomacy, academia, or humanitarian work. Although active Norwegian government ministers are excluded, former legislators or diplomats are common appointees, ensuring both independence and continuity with Norwegian public life.
Recipients are chosen based on Nobel’s original wording: recognition of those who have done “the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.” While modern interpretation has broadened this to include human rights, conflict resolution [3], and international cooperation, the guiding principle remains the promotion of peace and reconciliation.
Over the decades, the selection process and criteria for interpretation of the Nobel Peace Prize have gradually broadened. Originally centered on formal diplomacy and the prevention of, and ending, war between nations, the Committee has expanded its scope to include: defense of human rights, environmental protection, democracy, and even global development — recognizing that lasting peace depends on social and economic stability. The nomination, and review process itself, has become more structured and confidential, with thousands of qualified nominators worldwide, including heads of state, university professors, and former laureates. Though the final decision remains in the hands of the five-member Norwegian Committee, the modern process now reflects a far more global and interdisciplinary understanding of what constitutes “peace.”
One consequence of this broadening is that some award announcements have not been generally well received. Or, have not aged well.
The 1994 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded jointly to Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres, and Yitzhak Rabin [4] for their efforts in the Oslo peace process between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). Historically, both Arafat and the PLO had been involved in armed struggle, classified by many countries at the time as terrorism, while Rabin had overseen bloody military operations against Palestinian groups. Peres promoted and led development of Israel’s nuclear weapons program. At the time of the award, the Oslo Accords had not yet been fully implemented and the peace process was fragile. The prize thus recognized aspirational progress and the hope for reconciliation, rather than completed or lasting peace, which contributed to debates about the appropriateness of the selection. Obviously the Accords did not age well.
The 2007 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded jointly to former U.S. Vice President Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for their work in raising awareness of climate change and its potential global impacts. While the award highlighted environmental advocacy as a component of peace, many observers noted that it overlooked longstanding humanitarian efforts by individuals who risked their lives to save others, such as Irena Sendler, the Polish social worker who rescued 2,500 Jewish children during World War II. [5] Critics argued that the choice reflected a forward-looking, aspirational vision of peace, emphasizing the prevention of future crises rather than honoring completed acts of direct human rescue or reconciliation.
The 2009 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to U.S. President Barack Obama early in his first term, largely in recognition of his stated goals of diplomacy and international cooperation. At the time, he had not completed any major peace initiatives, and the award was widely seen as aspirational — reflecting hope and the promise of change rather than concrete achievements. The deadline for nominations was February 1, 2009. In the most likely scenario, his nomination was submitted shortly after his inauguration; in a more speculative view, it could have been submitted even before he took office, during the heady days of “Yes We Can.”
Ethiopian president Abie Achmed’s award (2019) was for resolving the border conflict with Eritrea. He has since become a strongman, consolidating power while overseeing a brutal civil war in Tigray, which is full of poignant allegations of government-sponsored genocide. His government has employed Chinese surveillance software to monitor and suppress dissent, controlling what Ethiopians can see and do online, and creating a climate of fear. And the peace with Etirea, always fragile, is now very strained: troops massed on borders, [6]
There are others, notably Aung San Suu Kyi (1991) and Henry Kissinger (1974).
2025 Nobel Peace Prize
The nomination deadline for the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize was January 31, 2025. By that date, the Norwegian Nobel Committee had received 338 nominations: 244 individuals and 94 organizations, including, even, Elon Musk. Technically, the names of nominees are sealed for 50 years, but most often the vast majority of names are “leaked” by the nominators themselves, usually to promote “their” candidate.
Eligible nominators include: members of national assemblies and governments; university professors in select fields [7]; past Nobel laureates; and directors of peace research institutes. Most nominations meet the high standards of the Prize’s selection criteria (exceptions noted above notwithstanding). Among the 2025 nominees:
- JA Worldwide: Nominated for its efforts in promoting youth entrepreneurship and financial literacy, empowering the next generation of leaders with moral principals [JA = Junior Achievement]
- Committee to Protect Journalists: Recognized for its advocacy in protecting journalists and promoting press freedom worldwide
- Sudan’s Emergency Response Rooms: Acknowledged for their grassroots efforts in providing humanitarian aid amidst the ongoing conflict in Sudan
- María Corina Machado: The 2025 awardee
Awardee Machado
María Corina Machado is a prominent Venezuelan opposition leader, probably the most prominent, operating in a repressive military dictatorship, where virtually every human right has either dissolved or exists only at great risk. She received the prize for her tireless work promoting democratic rights and human rights, and her struggle to achieve a just and peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy. At the time of the announcement, Machado was in hiding in Venezuela, fearing retribution from the Maduro regime. She exemplifies a worker for peace and human rights who has sacrificed and risked greatly.
Finally, we address the nomination of, and non-selection of, Donald Trump.
First, all of his valid nominations arrived on or before January 31, the 11th day of his presidency. Some may have come even later [8], reflecting his implicit expectation that others nominate him. Deadlines, of course, are strict – the Committee does not consider late submissions. Nor does it consider achievements not contained in the nominations.
Second, any evaluation would necessarily consider the full scope of his public life. During his presidential campaigns and beyond, he repeatedly emphasized personal loyalty and retribution, disparaged political opponents, and made sweeping, demeaning statements about immigrants, the LGBT community, and anyone who disagreed with him. At rallies, he has encouraged violence against hecklers and promised legal support for those who carried it out. He has stated he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and retain his popularity.
Third, he had no peace accomplishments at the submission deadline, like Obama in 2009. Zero. Early promises, such as ending military operations in Ukraine the first day of his Presidency, went unfulfilled. Later efforts — including temporary ceasefires and hostage releases in Gaza — occurred well after the nomination period, and could not have influenced the Committee. Even if they could, they were limited, fragile, and largely aspirational. BUT: Hyuge hat-tip to Mr. Trump getting the hostages released; he was essential to this.
Fourth, since his inauguration Trump has waged a relentless campaign against political opponents, including members of his own party and judges, mainly via insults and threats. He oversaw the detention of countless immigrants — documented and undocumented — in conditions widely condemned as inhumane. Families were often not informed of the location of loved ones, detainees were maced from head to toe, and protesters were attacked with pepper spray and other bodily force. These policies violated basic rights, including habeas corpus and due process, and remain unremedied.
Finally — and perhaps most fatally for his candidacy — Mr. Trump displayed a remarkable infatuation with the Prize itself. He repeatedly promoted his nomination in speeches, interviews, and statements, emphasizing perceived accomplishments while publicly disparaging the Committee if he was not selected. Many critics judged this behavior as a form of intimidation, illustrating a tension between his endless self-aggrandizement and the independent, confidential, and dignified selection process the Nobel Committee maintains.
While the Committee has made controversial choices in the past, awarding the 2025 Peace Prize to Donald Trump would have been beyond controversy — an act that risked irreparably demeaning the award and its legacy.
I am very satisfied that the committee made a most excellent selection. Especially in that they did not kowtow to effrontery.
Clearly not qualified, and clearly qualified
It’s a near certainty that Mr. Trump will be nominated for the 2026 Peace Prize. Nominations for 2025 will be resurrected, brushed off and updated. In that case, the committee will surely look at the events discussed herein since January 31, 2025, including the “eight wars ended”, as well as the digitally-generated video he posted, showing himself as King, flying a jet fighter labeled “King Trump”, dropping feces on protesters [9] … as well as others in the notes below … and immediately remove him from serious consideration.
Joe Girard © 2025
Thank you for reading. As always, you can add yourself to the notification list for newly published material by clicking here . Or emailing joe@girardmeister.com
[1] Physics, Chemistry, Physiology and Medicine, Literature, Peace
[2] Nobel completed his will in Nov 1895, passing in Dec 1896. The first awards were in 1901. The first award was shared between (1) Jean Henry Dunant (Swiss) for his humanitarian efforts, which led to the founding of the International Committee of the Red Cross; and (2) Frédéric Passy (French) for his lifelong work as a peace activist and for founding the first French peace society.
[3] The first US American to win the prize was President Theodore Roosevelt, for mediating the negotiations that led to the end of the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905).
[4] Arafat was a verifiable terrorist. Rabin, during the first Intifada (1987-90), instigated a program that included “force, might, and beatings” to suppress the uprising, which led to a high number of Palestinian casualties and detentions. He is also credibly accused of terrorist activity during the Israel War for Independence, AKA the Arab-Israeli War, 1948. Peres is credited with vastly expanding Israel’s arms programs and establishing Israel’s nuclear program. — I am not judging these men; merely providing evidence as to why the awards were criticized.
[5] Gore also won an Academy Award for the same PowerPoint presentation. Nobel awards can only be made to people who are alive. As Gore was relatively young (59), and Sendler 97 and infirm, many believed that this was a glaring oversight – an insult to someone who had risked everything for justice. Sendler, did in fact, pass away in 2008 – and hence indeed would have been ineligible in 2008. The rules state the award cannot be posthumous.
[6] Ethiopia, despite its size, is landlocked. The most logical path to the Red Sea for a port is through Eritrea. Negotiations are not going well or quickly, and Abie has stated that such access is “existential” to Ethiopa. This is widely regarded as a threat to violence. Troops are staging there now.
[7] In the fields of: History; Social Sciences (Political Science, Sociology, International Relations); Law; Philosophy; Theology; and Religion)
[8] Many did come after the deadline, including Netanyahu’s which was submitted, he says, in July.
[9] In the digitally-created video Truth posted with he, himself, dropping excrement on anti-Trump protesters; he used Kenny Loggins’ “Danger Zone” without permission.
Further notes that the Committee must consider.
“I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters, okay? It’s, like, incredible.” — Donald Trump at a campaign rally, Sioux Center, Iowa, Jan. 23 2016. Washington Post, January 26, 2016.
Snopes, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donald-trump-fifth-avenue-comment/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
On October 3, 2025, Trump shared a meme on Truth Social labeling the Democratic Party as the party of “Satan.” The post featured images of prominent Democratic members of Congress, including Senator Chuck Schumer and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and was widely criticized for its inflammatory and divisive rhetoric.
In May 2020, Trump tweeted, “When the looting starts, the shooting starts,” a statement that was widely criticized for inciting violence against protesters. The tweet was flagged by Twitter for violating its rules about glorifying violence. https://www.splcenter.org/resources/hatewatch/trump-tweets-when-looting-starts-shooting-starts-extremists-will-respond
January 6, 2021. Giving a speech to supporters, telling them to “fight like hell” to stop the certification of the election, and urging them to march on the Capitol. Speech at the “Stop the Steal” rally on January 6, 2021. (Source: Full speech transcript, House Impeachment Resolution)
At a 2016 rally, telling supporters about an anti-Trump protester: “I’d like to punch him in the face.” Remarks at a rally in Nevada, February 2016. (Source: Video recording of rally, multiple news reports)
Racist comments
Strongly implying that immigrants are genetically disposed to commit serious crime: “You know, now a murderer — I believe this: it’s in their genes. And we got a lot of bad genes in our country right now. Then you had 425,000 people come into our country that shouldn’t be here that are criminals.” — Donald Trump, quoted by Sky News. October 8, 2024 https://news.sky.com/story/donald-trump-suggests-migrants-murder-as-its-in-their-genes-while-citing-statistics-which-include-his-time-as-president-13230051
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.” Washington Post, June 26, 2018 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/06/26/trump-wants-to-limit-immigration-hes-scapegoating-immigrants-in-the-process/
“Poisoning the blood of our country”: Trump repeatedly used the phrase “poisoning the blood of our country” to describe undocumented immigrants. This language has been condemned by civil rights groups and historians for echoing Nazi-era rhetoric about racial purity. https://www.axios.com/2023/12/30/trump-poisoning-the-blood-racism
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-repeats-poisoning-blood-anti-immigrant-remark-2023-12-16
“Bad hombres” and rapists: During his 2015 campaign, Trump referred to Mexican immigrants as “bad hombres” and “rapists,” suggesting that Mexico was sending its worst people to the U.S. WashPo, July 5, 2020
Hateful lies
In January 2025, Trump suggested that diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) hiring practices were responsible for a deadly plane-helicopter crash in Washington, D.C., a comment swiftly condemned by the Congressional Black Caucus as racist and ignorant. This was blatantly wrong.
Stating that U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who was overseeing a case against Trump University, was unfit to preside because “He’s a Mexican.” Judge Curiel was born in Indiana. 2016 campaign rally, Wall Street Journal, PBS Newshour.
Referring to certain nations as “shithole countries” and asking why the U.S. would accept more immigrants from them. This actually justifies them trying to enter the USA. 2018 Oval Office Meeting, The Washington Post, The New York Times via Congressional aides present
Inciting violence and referring to violence:
“If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. Okay? Just knock the hell — I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees, I promise.” Rally in Ceder Rapids, IA, February 1, 2016. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/02/01/trump_to_iowa_crowd_if_someone_throws_a_tomato_at_me_beat_the_crap_out_of_them_ill_pay_your_legal_fees.html?
“He got over this railing … I don’t know if I would’ve done well, but I would’ve been out there fighting, folks… boom boom boom, I’ll beat the crap out of you.” Kansas City rally, March 12, 2016 https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donald-trump-incitement-violence/
Sexist:
From text of unaired video tape by Access Hollywood, recorded to promote his appearance on days of our lives. Taped in 2005. Released in 2016
“I moved on her actually. You know she was down on Palm Beach. I moved on her, and I failed. I’ll admit it. I did try and f*ck her, she was married.”
“I moved on her very heavily in fact I took her out furniture shopping. She wanted to get some furniture. I said I’ll show you where they have some nice furniture. I moved on her like a bitch. I couldn’t get there and she was married. Then all-of-a-sudden I see her, she’s now got the big phony tits and everything. She’s totally changed her look.”
“Yeah that’s her with the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful… I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star they let you do it. You can do anything.”
“Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.”
Bragging about going into beauty contestants dressing rooms so that he could “see them with no clothes on.” Interview with Howard Stern on his radio show (also around 2005).
For what it’s worth, I include this to show that the committee comes from political breadth, and nominations should be structured appropriately to appeal to the breadth of views on the committee. The current members of the selection committee are:
- Jørgen Watne Frydnes, Chair, Human rights advocate, former head of PEN Norway, worked with Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF). Center-left, Labor Party
- Asle Toje, Vice Chair, Foreign policy scholar and commentator, former Research Director at the Norwegian Nobel Institute. Conservative, Progress Party
- Anne Enger, Member, Veteran politician, former Minister of Culture, former Deputy Prime Minister, and former acting Prime Minister of Norway. Centre Party
- Kristin Clemet, Member, Economist and politician, former Minister of Education and Research. Conservative Party
- Gry Larsen, Member, Former State Secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, head of CARE Norway (a humanitarian organization). Labor Party
