From the Center

Donald Trump wants a Nobel Peace Prize. He sees it as the ultimate validation of his presidency, he believes that he deserves it, and he is fashioning his foreign policy agenda to make it happen.

Trump also understands that Americans are tired of war. Even though our own young men and women are not fighting either in Ukraine or Gaza, growing numbers of US voters are skeptical of the relevance of these two conflicts to this country’s safety and security and wary about the growing cost of supporting our allies given the brewing economic storms here. 

While Trump has been effective in stoking these concerns, he did not create them. But the combination of the short-term political gain and the enduring historical prestige has made Trump extremely motivated. He wants a peace deal—somewhere—and he wants it fast. The question is where he gets it.

During the campaign, he promised to end the war between Russia and Ukraine on his first day in office. While that ambitious goal has not been realized, he has spent considerable time talking with both country’s leaders in an effort to press them toward some type of settlement. 

But neither Volodymyr Zelensky nor Vladimir Putin have been nearly as cooperative as Trump might have hoped. After a particularly rancorous meeting with Zelensky a few weeks back, the prospects for progress looked extremely dim. Since that inauspicious beginning, the Ukrainian leader has been doing his best to make amends in order to keep Trump from completely withdrawing US support. But he’s not going to roll over for the American president, and allowing Russia to maintain possession over most or all of the territory they have secured during the war is not something that Zelensky will do without a fight.

Nor is Putin especially interested in compromise. His extended phone call with Trump last week was a master class in delay, misdirection, and obfuscation. Rather than the comprehensive ceasefire that Trump had sought, the Russian agreed only to a partial and nebulous understanding in which both countries would promise not to attack each other’s energy infrastructure. That arrangement did not survive for even a day, which does not bode well for a quick resolution of that war.

The additional challenge for Trump is that what seems to be his preferred path toward peace, largely capitulating to Putin and giving the Russians all or most of what they want, is unlikely to help him achieve either of his goals. Abandoning a democratic ally in Ukraine is not the pathway to a Nobel Prize, nor is essentially leaving Europe to fend for itself as Putin ponders further expansion. And while American voters are fatigued by the war and may not care all that much about Europe, they are equally unlikely to reward their president for siding with Russian authoritarianism against a smaller, freer country that was invaded and decimated.

That leaves Trump with the other war in which the US is involved. His preferred path to Middle East peace in is much clearer than in Eastern Europe, as evidenced by his repeated threats to the Hamas terrorists that there will be “hell to pay” if they do not release the remaining hostages. But his long-time support for Israel creates a challenge for Trump in this fight too, as Hamas has little incentive to trust him or his negotiators. Israel’s leaders do not march in lockstep with this American president much more than they did for his predecessor: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s domestic political challenges make him less enthusiastic about accepting American-endorsed and encouraged middle ground. 

But Trump has an ace in his pocket here that Netanyahu lacks: the overwhelming support of Israeli voters. The White House is very aware that Trump’s favorability ratings in Israel have skyrocketed to off-the-charts highs. If he chose to deploy some of his political capital to pressure Netanyahu or his successor toward uncomfortable concessions to end the war, they would find that type of strong-armed persuasion very difficult to resist.

Trump wants a Nobel Prize. He’s not going to get it in Ukraine. Hamas has little incentive to help him in Gaza. But Israel’s leaders might. All of which means that a peace deal that is not in the Jewish state’s interests might be very tempting for Trump—and difficult for Israel to avoid.

Want to talk about this topic more? Join Dan for his webinar, “The Dan Schnur Political Report." And read more of Dan’s writing at www.danschnurpolitics.com.

Dan Schnur is a Professor at the University of California – Berkeley, Pepperdine University, and the University of Southern California, where he teaches courses in politics, communications and leadership. Dan is a No Party Preference voter, but previously worked on four presidential and three gubernatorial campaigns, serving as the national Director of Communications for the 2000 presidential campaign of U.S. Senator John McCain and the chief media spokesman for California Governor Pete Wilson. He has a Center bias.

This piece was reviewed and edited by Clare Ashcraft, Bridging Coordinator & Media Analyst (Center bias).