The Norwegian Nobel Committee, which is responsible for selecting the Peace Prize laureate, announced that a total of 338 candidates—including 244 individuals and 94 organizations—have been nominated this year, a notable increase from 286 nominees in 2024.

At the center of this year’s discussion is U.S. President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly claimed he is the most deserving candidate, asserting that not awarding him the prize would be “a great insult” to the United States.

Since returning to the White House on January 20, Trump has declared that he has ended numerous conflicts worldwide, most recently promoting an initiative to end the Gaza conflict and brokering a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. However, the Nobel Committee completed its voting on October 6, before that truce was reached.

Trump has also been publicly nominated by several world leaders over the past three months for mediating peace efforts between Pakistan and India, Iran and Israel, and Thailand and Cambodia. The problem, however, is that these statements came after the nomination deadline of January 31. Leaders from Israel, Cambodia, and Pakistan did not clarify whether they were nominating the U.S. president for the 2025 or 2026 award.

At least one U.S. lawmaker confirmed having nominated Trump before the deadline, citing his role in advancing Middle East reconciliation through the Abraham Accords. Yet, not all nominations are formally accepted by the Committee.

Beyond Trump, this year’s list includes several other prominent figures and organizations that experts believe have even stronger chances of winning the prize.

Among individual nominees, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky remains a leading contender. Having become a global symbol of resistance since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Zelensky’s recognition could reinvigorate international support for Kyiv—especially as peace talks with Moscow, initiated by Trump, remain stalled.

Another noteworthy figure is Mahrang Baloch, one of Pakistan’s most prominent human rights activists. A trained surgeon, Baloch has long spoken out against enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings targeting the Baloch minority in Balochistan Province. She was imprisoned in March on charges of terrorism, rebellion, and murder related to her activism in Quetta. The 30-year-old could become Pakistan’s second female Peace Prize laureate, following Malala Yousafzai, who received the award in 2014.

Among organizations, the Sudan Emergency Response Rooms (ERR) network has emerged as a major contender. Comprising more than 700 local community groups, the ERR has provided critical healthcare, food distribution, and civilian evacuation services amid Sudan’s brutal civil war. Beyond humanitarian aid, the network also documents the conflict and supplies vital information to international media. Awarding the Peace Prize to the ERR would honor the bravery of its volunteers working in what the United Nations has called “the world’s largest humanitarian crisis,” with over 13 million people displaced.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is also viewed as a symbolic candidate. Established in 2002, the ICC has prosecuted numerous political leaders, military commanders, and heads of state for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The U.S. recently imposed sanctions in response to the Court’s arrest warrants for two Israeli officials—including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—and its investigation into alleged war crimes by American forces in Afghanistan.

Some observers also speculate that the United Nations could receive the award as it marks its 80th anniversary, or that the Committee might honor press freedom organizations, amid a record-high number of journalists killed over the past year.

Trump’s supporters insist that “no one else deserves the Peace Prize this year.” Several national leaders and international organizations have reportedly launched a coordinated lobbying campaign urging the Committee to award him the honor.

However, analysts are cautious about his chances. Despite Trump’s peace-brokering efforts, many of his policies and remarks—both during his campaign and since taking office—have sparked controversy and run counter to the core principles outlined in Alfred Nobel’s will.

“While President Trump certainly deserves recognition for his attempts to end the Gaza conflict, it is too early to say whether his plan will lead to lasting peace,” said Nina Graeger, Director of the Oslo Peace Research Institute.

Graeger added that Trump’s record—such as withdrawing the U.S. from the World Health Organization and the Paris Climate Agreement, threatening to purchase Greenland despite Denmark’s objections, and engaging in trade disputes with allies—“does not align with the spirit of Alfred Nobel’s vision.”

Ylva Engstrom, Vice President of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, warned that Trump’s domestic policies could also raise concerns. His proposals to cut funding for the National Institutes of Health and dismantle the Department of Education, she said, “can hardly be viewed as contributions to peace. Academic freedom is one of the pillars of democracy.”

Meanwhile, Asle Toje, Deputy Chair of the Nobel Committee, suggested that Trump’s aggressive lobbying might backfire. “Such attempts to influence the Committee often do more harm than good. We are not fond of candidates who insist on receiving the prize,” Toje said. “Building internal consensus is already challenging enough—we don’t want outside pressure complicating it further.”

In the end, as the world awaits the Committee’s decision, the debate surrounding Trump’s nomination underscores the complex balance between diplomacy, global perception, and the pursuit of genuine peace. Whether the prize goes to a statesman, an activist, or a humanitarian organization, this year’s Nobel Peace Prize will once again test how the world defines leadership in times of crisis.