January 20th is a symbolically interesting date. US President Donald Trump has been in office for a year now. It’s time to take stock. In this year, he has accomplished (and some might say “wrecked”) more than many American presidents have accomplished in their entire terms. He has radically changed the parameters of global politics, breaking traditional intra-Western alliances, writes Oleg Barabanov.
February will bring another symbolic date. According to the Nobel Committee’s rules, nominations for this year’s Nobel Prizes must be submitted by February. Trump, however, was already nominated last fall by a number of countries for his peacekeeping work. But it seems that Trump wanted to add a ninth to the “eight wars” he has already stopped—a kind of jewel in his peacemaking crown—achieving peace in the Ukrainian conflict. We believe this could explain all of Trump’s recent deadlines—ending the conflict by Christmas, ending it in January. Otherwise, he won’t have time to be nominated for Ukraine. But it looks like that won’t happen by February. And the Ukrainian nomination, at least, will be carried over to next year.
However, under normal circumstances, it’s hard to imagine the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarding Trump the Peace Prize. Trump’s biography, views, and statements are too far from the “ideal” liberal profile, which, one would think, could play a significant role in the Norwegian committee’s decision. Recently, neither the far left nor the far right, nor even those with illiberal episodes in their profiles, have received the Nobel Peace Prize, regardless of their actual actions. Echoes of this could be seen in the Russian context several years ago. Therefore, Trump, no matter what he did, would never have been awarded the Nobel Prize in an ordinary context. Although it must be acknowledged that he has done quite a lot for peacemaking in the Middle East conflict, for example. If a Democratic US president had done the same, it seems he would have been guaranteed a Nobel Prize.
The issue is that the current situation is extremely unusual, and this is another result of Trump’s first anniversary in office. First, he is perhaps the only candidate who has so openly hinted at, and even demanded, that the Nobel Peace Prize be awarded to him. The idea of a “Nobel Prize” for Trump has already become firmly entrenched in global public opinion. This serves as yet another dividing line between pro-Trumpists and anti-Trumpists worldwide. On the one hand, it is difficult to imagine that the Norwegian Nobel Committee would normally award the prize under such open pressure. But on the other hand, the situation, we repeat, is extremely unusual. Since it’s already clear to many that winning the Nobel Peace Prize has become something of an obsession for Trump, even in the West, one can sometimes hear voices calling for Trump to finally receive the prize, and perhaps then he’ll finally calm down. Although, it’s unlikely he will. But one of his possible “narcissistic” goals will be achieved.
Second, Trump is perhaps the only candidate in history whose psychological profile suggests he might seek “revenge” if he is not awarded the prize. In this case, imposing additional tariffs on trade with Norway is entirely possible. So is adding members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee to the list of individuals subject to US sanctions. The latter precedent has already been set, as seen with officials at the International Criminal Court. Thus, the balance could be weighed between Norway’s usual, unclouded prosperity and the personal comfort of the Nobel Committee members. They’re quite accustomed to this, and now, for the first time in their prosperous lives, they may find themselves directly and personally answering for their actions to an angry “hegemon.” And this, we must admit, is a completely different aspect of having to make their decisions under pressure. Will they be able to withstand it? We’ll see.
However, there will be pressure from another direction as well. This pressure will come from anti-Trump forces in Europe, and, no less importantly, it will also manifest itself in the American context. Nobel Week, the announcement of the prize laureates, traditionally takes place in October. And in early November, there will be congressional elections in the United States. Here it is quite clear that whether or not Trump receives the prize it will play a huge role in mobilizing public opinion in the US before the elections. If Trump does receive the prize, he will be a recognized global hero. Which, quite naturally, will add points to the Republican Party. But if he doesn’t, then this will become a major trump card for the Democratic Party in its election campaign. It seems Trump’s opponents will not fail to take full advantage of this. Their ridicule of Trump will then reach a qualitatively new level.
There is another aspect to this entire Nobel story. The Norwegian committee will have to answer the question of whether a peace prize can be awarded not only for peacekeeping but also for military operations. Can a Nobel Peace Prize be awarded for a military strike on Iran? In the liberal Western paradigm, Trump did a good deed by damaging Iran’s nuclear program with his strike. Iran, in the liberal paradigm, is traditionally portrayed as a key adversary, part of the notorious “axis of evil.” Nevertheless, this is a military operation. Can a peace prize be awarded for it?
Another similar question: can a peace prize be awarded for a military operation in Venezuela? In this case, Trump, in the liberal Western paradigm, also did a good deed by liberating the Venezuelan people from a “usurper” and a “tyrant.” But this is also a military operation. Can a Nobel Peace Prize be awarded for this?
But the most interesting question that may well arise is not about the traditional adversaries of the political West: Iran or Venezuela. Should a Nobel Peace Prize be awarded for Greenland? It doesn’t matter whether Trump succeeds in achieving his goal of Greenland’s annexation by the time the prize is awarded. European politicians will successfully apply here what they’ve been doing in the context of Ukrainian peacekeeping—they’ll talk the issue down, mislead Trump, and stall for time. Regardless this, should a Nobel Prize be awarded for the very attempt to raise the Greenland issue? Will Nordic solidarity between Denmark and Norway work here? Or will Trump’s pressure prevail?
However, one can always say that Trump has already received his Nobel Prize. Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Machado, as is well known, donated her Nobel medal to Trump. And she beautifully framed this by saying that General Gilbert de Lafayette had once presented Simón Bolívar with a medal depicting George Washington as a sign of American solidarity, and now Bolívar’s heirs are making a return gift. But will Trump be satisfied with just that? The second year of his presidency promises to be as extraordinary as the first. And the Nobel context could very well play a significant role here.
The Valdai Discussion Club was established in 2004. It is named after Lake Valdai, which is located close to Veliky Novgorod, where the Club’s first meeting took place.
Please visit the firm link to site
