Washington: The persona and policies of U.S. President Donald Trump present a striking paradox for global politics. While he positions himself as a champion of peace and even seeks recognition through the Nobel Peace Prize, many of his actions and statements have produced instability, fear, and conflict worldwide. His attempts at diplomacy often coexist with threats, economic sanctions, and aggressive rhetoric, raising questions about the true nature of his “peace initiatives.”
Trump’s proposed plan for peace in Gaza exemplifies this contradiction. Marketed as a humanitarian effort, the plan has been criticized as a political and economic deal, prioritizing strategic interests over the rights, safety, and consent of the local population. International law, United Nations mechanisms, and local participation are sidelined, suggesting that Trump views peace less as a moral or human imperative and more as a tool for power projection and political gain.
Similarly, his vision for a new global peace institution highlights this tension. Attempting to establish an international framework outside recognized multilateral institutions like the UN emphasizes control and dominance rather than genuine conflict resolution. Without legitimacy, accountability, or broad consent, such efforts risk undermining global governance and fostering further instability.
Trump’s approach consistently ties peace to negotiation, coercion, and economic leverage. While praising certain nations, he simultaneously imposes trade restrictions or military pressures, reflecting a dual strategy that prioritizes influence over collaborative security. This duality has contributed to global insecurity, from the Middle East to Asia and beyond, and often complicates the role of neutral actors in diplomacy.
The world today faces multiple crises—Ukraine, Gaza, geopolitical tensions across Asia and Africa—where self-interested policies of major powers exacerbate conflicts. Leadership claiming to be a harbinger of peace must build bridges, foster dialogue, and prioritize multilateral cooperation rather than resorting to threats or strategic deals. Without these principles, peace remains a facade, and efforts risk becoming instruments of new conflicts.
Trump’s paradox serves as a cautionary tale: the pursuit of peace without accountability, consent, and ethical grounding can deepen instability, rather than resolve it. The global community requires leaders who advance peace through justice, compassion, and cooperation—not through power alone.
