So, first off: as a matter of "taste", I really don't like the idea of giving the Peace prize specifically to anybody whose attitude is "where's my Nobel?" It should be going to somebody who believes in the cause they're fighting for and fights with no expectation of recognition, not to somebody looking to add a feather to their cap. This probably shouldn't be a criterion when choosing the winnner, but it does make me happy if the choice is consistent with this principle.

Second: If, by the end of 2026, the Israel/Palestine ceasefire is still holding, if there is real progress towards lasting peace, if Trump's administration carries on acting as a mediating force in the conflict, then, by all means, maybe he should win the 2026 prize. As of today, he just got them to sign a piece of paper. To be clear, that is still an important milestone, it makes the world better than it was a week ago, and he should get credit for getting it done. It's just not the achievement he wants us to believe it is (yet?).

Third: The man thrives on conflict, he sows divisivenes at every step. He's literally deploying the military domestically. Whatever merit there is to his peace deals doesn't nearly amount to enough to make him a net positive force for peace in the world. And that should be a factor in choosing the winner.

Ah yes, the man actively murdering civilians via illegal drone strikes in the Caribbean and invading US cities with the Department of War, who launched dozens of missiles from stealth bombers over Iran and who has greatly expanded the drone war that Biden has mostly ended.

Surely a prime candidate for a peace prize.

How many wars has President Trump really ended? https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5y3599gx4qo