Washington — In a bold statement that’s already stirring debate, U.S. President Donald Trump has asserted that he has helped end seven conflicts around the world, including the India-Pakistan flare-up, and insisted that each one of them merits its own Nobel Peace Prize.
Speaking at a recent event, Trump said he prevented clashes between India and Pakistan through trade pressures, and listed other pairings—like Thailand & Cambodia, Armenia & Azerbaijan, Egypt & Ethiopia, Israel & Iran, Rwanda & the Congo, and Serbia & Kosovo—as among the “wars” he has purportedly halted. He claimed that about 60 percent of these conflicts were stopped because of his trade diplomacy, threatening tariffs and economic consequences, he said, helped push the parties toward ceasefires and agreements.
Trump also said he was told that if he could end the war between Russia and Ukraine, he should win a Nobel. He responded that since he believes he has stopped—not just one—but multiple wars, he should get a Nobel Prize for each.
However, experts and critics are questioning the accuracy of these claims. Some of the conflicts referenced were never officially declared wars, many remain unresolved, and in several cases, other mediators or internal mechanisms—not just U.S. intervention—played central roles. India, for example, has disputed the claim of U.S. mediation in its border tensions with Pakistan, saying talks were handled directly between the two countries.
Even in international circles, receiving a Nobel Peace Prize isn’t automatic: nominations, committee scrutiny, past actions, and tangible outcomes all matter. Some observers warn that taking credit for peace without clear evidence could backfire politically.
Trump’s remarks come as part of a growing narrative from his administration about restoring U.S. global prestige and influence, especially through peace and trade. Whether these claims will gain enough weight—including in Nobel Committee assessments—to result in formal recognition remains far from certain.
