The Nobel Peace Prize has a history of honoring remarkable individuals and groups dedicated to advancing peace and human rights worldwide. This year, while former US President Donald Trump has loudly campaigned for the prize, claiming credit for ending seven wars in seven months, the reality of his contributions to global peace is far more debatable—and this is the part most people miss. Despite his claims, Trump’s actions, such as threatening territorial annexations, cutting international aid, and deporting immigrants en masse, raise serious questions about his suitability for the prize. In fact, a study published in the Lancet warns that his decision to dismantle USAID could lead to up to 14 million deaths globally. But here’s where it gets controversial: should a leader’s assertive, often divisive policies, be considered peacebuilding?
In stark contrast, this year’s Nobel Peace Prize contenders include ten candidates — a mix of humanitarian organizations, political leaders, and civil society champions — whose efforts clearly reflect the spirit of the prize. These contenders are set to be reviewed before the award ceremony in Oslo on Friday.
Among the frontrunners are the Emergency Response Rooms (ERRs), a network of over 700 community-based groups in Sudan providing critical services usually managed by government bodies. In a country devastated by two years of brutal conflict between the army and paramilitary forces, ERR volunteers not only offer medical aid, run community kitchens, and arrange evacuations but also document the conflict and report it to the international media. Recognizing ERR with a Nobel would spotlight the remarkable bravery of civilians in Sudan’s underreported crisis, which has displaced some 13 million people, making it the largest humanitarian disaster in the world according to the UN.
Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky has emerged as a potent symbol of resistance since Russia's invasion, earning him Nobel Peace Prize consideration since 2022. With peace talks between Kyiv and Moscow—originally kicked off by Trump—stalled, awarding Zelensky could renew international backing for Ukraine’s struggle.
Another notable candidate is Reporters Without Borders (RSF), a global press freedom organization. Given the dangerous conditions journalists face today, especially in conflict zones like the Gaza Strip where over 210 journalists have been killed recently, honoring RSF would underscore the essential role and sacrifices of independent media in preserving truth and justice.
On the human rights front, Pakistani activist Mahrang Baloch stands out. Known for speaking out against the abductions and extrajudicial killings of the Baloch ethnic minority, she has been imprisoned since March under grave accusations by the authorities. If awarded, Baloch would become only the second Pakistani woman Nobel laureate after Malala Yousafzai.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) is also in the spotlight. Despite facing sanctions from the U.S. aimed at deterring its investigations into alleged war crimes involving Israeli officials and American forces in Afghanistan, the ICC remains a beacon for accountability. Several Sahel countries have withdrawn from the court, adding to the tension. A Nobel prize would offer symbolic support to this institution, which has prosecuted numerous high-profile cases of genocide and crimes against humanity.
Yulia Navalnaya, widow of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny who died suspiciously in a penal colony earlier this year, continues her late husband’s fight by launching a television channel aimed at combating Kremlin propaganda. An award for her would shine a light on the growing repression within Russian civil society since the invasion of Ukraine.
In Hong Kong, lawyer and activist Chow Hang-tung, a key figure opposing Beijing’s tightening grip, faces repeated arrests under harsh national security laws. Honoring her would highlight the global struggle for democratic freedoms and the risks faced by those who resist authoritarianism.
Standing Together, an Israeli-Palestinian peace organization with 5,300 members, campaigns fiercely against West Bank settlements and advocates for equality between Israelis and Palestinians. Since the Hamas-led violence in October 2023, they have been vocal opponents of war and obstacles to humanitarian aid in Gaza, underscoring the ongoing grassroots efforts to foster peace despite the chaos.
Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani of Qatar might be a controversial pick because of Qatar’s complex geopolitical stance and human rights concerns. Nevertheless, his key role in mediating ceasefires and facilitating talks between conflicting parties, from Hamas and Israel to the U.S. and the Taliban, as well as involvement in Sudan and Yemen peace efforts, showcases the vital role of regional actors in international diplomacy.
Finally, NATO’s potential nomination would likely spark debates. While some view the alliance as a guardian of global security, many criticize it for maintaining a Western-centric worldview and question if its members’ increased military spending truly fosters peace. Recognizing NATO could be seen as endorsing a certain geopolitical perspective, something the Nobel Committee has carefully tried to avoid by broadening its recognition to include voices from the Global South.
As the Nobel Peace Prize committee weighs these diverse candidates, one must ask: What really defines a champion of peace in today’s complex world? Is it grand political gestures, grassroots bravery, courageous journalism, or persistent activism against oppression? And crucially, how should the world reconcile these different paths toward peace? Share your thoughts—who do you believe truly deserves the Nobel Peace Prize, and why? This discussion is far from over.
