It has become an all-too-familiar spectacle: when the world teeters on the edge of conflict, Donald Trump, like a self-anointed prophet of peace, emerges with grand proclamations of diplomacy, dangerously close to his political vanity.

Backpacking the blitzkrieg of international anarchy, conflict, and wars with his relaxed but pompous, celebrated “ceasefire” rhetoric, the US president sounds more dominant than the GBU-57 Bunker Buster bombs!

“To subdue an enemy without fighting is the acme of skill,” stated Sun Tzu, the famous Chinese general around 500 BC, and this holds good ground even today. Currently, the world is caught up in a whirlpool of extreme violence inundated with flashpoints that is leading us to further violence. With the conflict in the Middle East threatening to engulf the entire region, the belligerents were hell-bent with a Machiavellian desire to obliterate the other.

Is it the US hegemony or simply Trump’s tectonics of peace, his shrewdness in being a deal maker, or simply his doctrine of MAGA (Making America Great Again) that is pulling the global peace and power strings?

Be it the India-Pakistan war, the Iran-Israel longstanding anarchy, or other global conflicts, they have undoubtedly pushed us across a vitriolic threshold. And critics with obvious ease are citing the situation as a super prospect for Trump to exploit this to assert a supremacist narrative. Whether a desired regime change in Iran or the supposed destruction of its nuclear capabilities, Trump roared for peace in the shrouds of war, asserted for arm-twisting, and blared the evils of destruction of Iran. Either way, the message he has always tried to convey is crystal clear: it’s the American indispensability and the invisible power to reboot peace and trade in the most fastidious way!

The old order of NATO, which held a stronghold in the 20th century, is believed to have been weakened by an increasingly nationalistic America. Donald Trump’s stupendous proactivity in the formulation and execution of foreign policies is hooking nations to a provisional and fragile peace playbook.

But back home, did Trump’s ceasefire strategies, his consistent interference with global warmongers, and his blind backing of Netanyahu take a toll on his MAGA base? Trump knew that his MAGA support base was opposed to the US getting involved in West Asia. Since taking up office as president on January 20, 2025, Trump has launched a super chaotic, remarkable, and unpredictable “peace show” that in no way follows the traditional diplomatic playbook. Perhaps it’s a string of maneuvers taming the unilateralism of today’s global geopolitics. Trump’s approach of holding the ubiquitous carrot and stick theory and his attempts to coerce war-farers like Iran, Israel, Ukraine, and Pakistan into negotiations while making almost circadian provocative statements about the war have been the butt of criticism. Trump’s attempt to play mediator may undermine the very foundation of his MAGA rhetoric, which thrives on skepticism of foreign wars and a focus on domestic priorities. The resulting division exposes the paradox at the heart of his strategy: seeking global influence while promising retreat from global entanglements. While some national security conservatives see his interventions as necessary, many core MAGA supporters—represented by figures like Marjorie Taylor Greene and Tucker Carlson—view it as a betrayal of his “America First” and non-interventionist promises. This has led to a visible schism within the movement, with prominent voices warning that foreign policy entanglements could fracture MAGA unity and disrupt its political momentum. This meddling not only undermines his narrative of isolationist strength but also has been permeating risks of dragging America into proxy conflicts—the very thing he claimed to oppose. For the American working-class voter in rust belt states like Ohio or Pennsylvania, Iran and Israel are distant realities. They are more concerned about inflation, border security, and fentanyl than missile strikes over the Golan Heights. Every moment Trump spends on foreign disputes distances him from his core voter base—the forgotten Americans who once saw him as their last political hope. Hence, the Iran-Israel episode is a microcosm of the larger MAGA dilemma.

Now, over a period later, a provocative question lingers in global discourse: Will Donald Trump be viewed as the apostle of global peace and awarded the much-coveted “Nobel Peace Prize”? In the pantheon of American presidents, the Nobel Peace Prize has adorned the reputations of only a selected few—Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Barack Obama. Trump’s supporters argue he ended the era of endless wars and recalibrated American diplomacy to serve national, not global, interests. The Nobel Peace Prize is as much a political statement as it is a reward for actual achievement. Awarding him the Nobel would be explosive, potentially seen as a validation of a president who many view as corrosive to democratic norms. Donald Trump is an unlikely candidate for peace in the traditional mold. But Nobel laureates have not always fit that mold either. From Henry Kissinger to Yasser Arafat, the prize has honored controversial figures when their actions advanced the cause—even marginally.

If the Nobel Committee dares to separate method from impact and personality from policy, Trump’s legacy may one day find its place in Oslo. Whether that would uplift or diminish the Nobel Peace Prize is a question as divisive as Trump himself.

 Email:----------------------------- tushidebsai@gmail.com