The weight of deciding whether former US President Donald Trump should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize rests on just five individuals—members of Norway's Nobel Committee. These five figures will determine if Trump secures the prestigious award that recognizes unparalleled efforts in promoting peace around the globe. But here’s where it gets controversial: Trump himself has persistently pushed for the prize, claiming credit for ending multiple wars, yet the committee’s inner deliberations remain a closely guarded secret.
Each year, the Nobel Committee, appointed by Norway's parliament, selects the Peace Prize laureate in accordance with Alfred Nobel's will. The award honors "the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." Although nominations closed on January 31st, and the final choice is wrapped in secrecy, anticipation grows as the winner will be unveiled this Friday at 11 am local time (9:00 GMT) at the Norwegian Nobel Institute in Oslo.
Trump has boldly stated since his inauguration that he ended eight wars worldwide, positioning himself as a deserving recipient. He has gone as far as calling not winning the prize a "big insult" to America. But what about the committee members tasked with this vital decision? Who are the five judges holding so much power over this year’s Nobel Peace Prize?
The Five Nobel Committee Judges
Formed in 1897 by Norway's parliament (the Storting), this committee consists of five members elected for six-year terms, with the possibility of re-election. By design, the members represent Norway’s political diversity without being sitting parliamentarians. They elect their own leader and deputy, while the director of the Norwegian Nobel Institute acts as their secretary. Here are the individuals shaping this year’s decision:
Jorgen Watne Frydnes: At 41, he is the youngest-ever chairman of the committee, appointed in 2021 for a term through 2026. Frydnes is a human rights advocate with a background at PEN Norway and Medecins Sans Frontieres, and has worked extensively with the Norwegian Helsinki Committee. Although officially nonpolitical, he supports the Labour Party and has been instrumental in memorializing the 2011 Utoeya massacre victims.
Asle Toje: Vice-chair and considered a conservative, Toje has served since 2018 and was reappointed through 2029. He once headed research at the Nobel Institute and authored a book analyzing the European Union’s influence as a small power. Toje’s views and presence bring an intellectual and conservative perspective.
Anne Enger: A 75-year-old long-serving member reappointed through 2026, Enger transitioned from nursing into politics with the Centre Party. She has held multiple high-profile roles, including acting prime minister and county governor. Notably, Enger has led anti-abortion movements, staunchly defending traditional cultural values.
Kristin Clemet: Serving since 2021 and a conservative politician by trade, Clemet is an economist who has advised prime ministers and served as minister of education. She’s openly critical of Trump, warning about his impact on democracy and global order.
Gry Larsen: Former Labour state secretary and leader of CARE Norway, Larsen advocates for global women's rights. Appointed for 2024-2029, she has publicly condemned Trump's reductions in foreign aid and his rhetoric concerning women and human rights.
The Committee’s Voting and History
The Nobel Peace Prize nomination process involves worldwide governments, university professors, and international legal bodies submitting candidates by late January. The shortlist is compiled by March, but the committee’s discussions and voting remain confidential, designed to protect the integrity of the process. Frydnes described the intense, sometimes heated debates culminating in consensus decisions, emphasizing the civility despite passionate differences.
Under Frydnes’ leadership, the committee has honored journalists fighting for free expression, human rights defenders, and survivors of nuclear bombings, showcasing a dedication to diverse definitions of peace.
Stirring Controversies and Political Overtones
Controversy is no stranger to the Nobel Committee’s choices. Both Toje and Enger supported the 2019 award to Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed for his peace deal with Eritrea—a decision later clouded by Ethiopia’s renewed conflict in Tigray. Toje views such backlash as an inherent risk of the prize, stating that if the Peace Prize didn’t provoke strong emotions, it would not fulfill its role.
Toje also sparked headlines with false reports he endorsed Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi for the prize, a claim debunked by fact-checkers. Enger has openly opposed Norway joining the EU and led unsuccessful anti-abortion campaigns, reflecting her conservative stances. Larsen faced accusations from a Norwegian anti-Semitism group regarding alleged anti-Israel advocacy, though no formal response is known.
What Do They Think of Trump?
Trump’s eagerness for the prize is well-documented, fueled by his comparison to Barack Obama, who won in 2009. He even reportedly contacted Norwegian diplomats, including former NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg, to lobby for support. Yet Frydnes insists the committee resists such external pressures, basing decisions solely on principled judgment.
While Enger has stayed silent on Trump, Larsen criticizes his cuts to foreign aid and his treatment of women’s rights. Clemet also warns against Trump’s threat to American democracy and the liberal world order. In contrast, Toje attended Trump’s inauguration and called it a "f****** great party," urging more nuanced views toward Trump and his political movement. Despite this, he dismisses lobbying attempts as counterproductive, asserting the committee works without outside influence.
Facing a Challenging Year
Amid global conflict and democratic challenges, Frydnes stresses that their work is more important than ever. They feel the world is watching and talking about peace, and they must remain firm and principled.
Domestically, concerns persist about how Trump might react if denied the prize, with tensions already manifesting as tariffs on Norwegian exports and criticism over Norway's investment decisions related to companies linked to the Israel-Gaza conflict. Norway’s foreign minister clarified that the government does not interfere with the Nobel Committee’s autonomy.
Other Noteworthy Candidates
This year, 338 nominations were received, with 244 individuals and 94 organizations in the running. Due to rules, the committee neither confirms nor denies nominee names, though media speculation abounds.
Top contenders include Sudan’s Emergency Response Rooms—a grassroots volunteer group providing vital aid amidst civil war—and Yulia Navalnaya, widow of imprisoned Russian opposition figure Alexey Navalny. Betting odds favor both Trump and the Sudanese group.
Experts like Nina Graeger of the Peace Research Institute Oslo highlight the value of honoring humanitarian efforts like those of Sudan’s volunteers, emphasizing the power of everyday citizens to deliver lifesaving aid during conflict. She also praises the Committee to Protect Journalists, noting how press freedom is critical to democracy and peace.
Final Thoughts
Here’s the part most people miss: the Nobel Peace Prize is not just a celebration but a complex, often contentious judgment on global politics, human rights, and the very definition of peace. Does Trump truly deserve it? Or should grassroots humanitarian efforts be the rightful recipients? These questions ignite passionate debate.
What do you think? Should the prize go to a world leader with polarizing policies, or honor those risking everything on the ground? Share your thoughts below and join the global conversation on what peace truly means today.
