Among the many reasons experts cite for Donald Trump’s unlikely Nobel Peace Prize win, one stands out as a potential deal-breaker: his staunch opposition to global climate change initiatives. As the Nobel committee increasingly views climate change as a threat to peace, Trump’s record on the issue may be an insurmountable obstacle.
The former president’s nomination, championed by figures like U.S. Rep. Claudia Tenney, focuses on the Abraham Accords. His supporters frame this as a historic peace deal that successfully bypassed traditional diplomatic channels. Trump has leaned into this, promoting himself as a master negotiator who has brought peace to the world and is therefore deserving of the prestigious award.
However, the Nobel committee’s understanding of “peace” has evolved. It now often encompasses threats to human security, including the displacement, resource scarcity, and instability caused by a warming planet. Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement on climate change is seen by many in the international community as a direct blow to global cooperation on the most pressing long-term challenge.
Historian Theo Zenou was unequivocal on this point. “I don’t think they would award the most prestigious prize in the world to someone who does not believe in climate change,” he said. This sentiment reflects a growing consensus that environmental stewardship is intrinsically linked to global stability and, therefore, to the pursuit of peace.
Ultimately, Trump’s candidacy forces the committee to weigh a diplomatic agreement against a record of undermining a critical area of international collaboration. His dismissal of what many, including the Nobel committee, see as the planet’s greatest long-term peace challenge makes him an outlier. In a world grappling with the consequences of a changing climate, honoring a climate change denier would be a deeply controversial move the committee is unlikely to make.