%20(1).png)
 |
| Norway Braces for Trump's Reaction if He Doesn't Win Nobel Peace Prize |
Looming Snub Sparks Fears of US Retaliation Against NATO Ally
US president may impose tariffs, demand higher NATO contributions, or even
Declare Norway an enemy, analyst says
Miranda Bryant, Nordic correspondent
Thu 9 Oct 2025 16:26 BST
Share
With hours to go until the announcement of this year's Nobel Peace Prize,
Norwegian politicians were steeling themselves for potential repercussions to US-
Norway relations if it is not awarded to Donald Trump. The anticipation is palpable,
laced with a unique Scandinavian anxiety: the fear that an independent decision in
Oslo could trigger a diplomatic and economic backlash from Washington.
The Norwegian Nobel Committee pointedly said on Thursday that it had reached
A decision about who would be named the 2025 peace prize laureate on Monday,
several days before Israel and Hamas agreed to a ceasefire under the US
president’s Gaza plan. This critical detail strongly suggests that Trump's eleventh-
hour diplomatic efforts in the Middle East, no matter how significant, came too late
to sway the five-person committee's choice.
Taking into account the timeframe and the composition of the independent five-
person committee—appointed by Norway's parliament but strictly autonomous—
most Nobel experts and Norwegian observers believe it is highly unlikely that
Trump will be awarded the prize. This consensus, however, does little to soothe the
country's fears over how the famously volatile US President will react to being
overlooked so publicly.
Kirsti Bergstø, the leader of Norway’s Socialist Left party and its foreign policy
spokesperson, articulated the national mood, stating bluntly that Oslo must be
“prepared for anything.”
“Donald Trump is taking the US in an extreme direction, attacking freedom of
speech, having masked secret police kidnapping people in broad daylight, and
cracking down on institutions and the courts. When the president is this volatile
and authoritarian, of course, we have to be prepared for anything,” Bergstø told
the Guardian.
The core diplomatic challenge for Norway lies in explaining the intricacies of the
Nobel Committee’s independence to a leader who frequently views international
institutions and decisions through a highly personalised, transactional lens. “The
Nobel Committee is an independent body, and the Norwegian government has no
involvement in determining the prizes. But I’m not sure Trump knows that. We have
to be prepared for anything from him,” Bergstø added.
The Spectre of Retaliation
The concern is not merely political posturing; it is rooted in concrete fears of
economic and security retaliation. Norway, a crucial NATO ally, is currently
engaged in delicate trade negotiations with the US, seeking relief from a 15% tariff
imposed on its exports. Compounding this, the nation's immense $2 trillion
sovereign wealth fund, the world's largest, has approximately 40% of its value
invested in the US market, making it a potentially vulnerable target for any
punitive action.
Newspaper columnist and long-time Nordic analyst Harald Stanghelle starkly
outlined the worst-case scenarios, speculating that retribution from Trump—if it
were to come—could take the form of the threatened tariffs, demands for higher
NATO contributions, or, in a truly alarming diplomatic escalation, even declaring
Norway an enemy.
“He [Trump] is so unpredictable. I don’t want to use the word 'fear' but there is a
feeling that it could be a challenging situation,” Stanghelle noted. “It's very, very
difficult to explain to Donald Trump or to many other countries in the world that it
is a totally independent committee because they do not respect this kind of
independence.”
The historical precedent for the Nobel Prize sparking a diplomatic crisis exists,
though with a different global power. The awarding of the 2010 prize to Chinese
dissident Liu Xiaobo led to a lengthy and severe diplomatic freeze between Oslo
and Beijing, an experience Norwegian officials are desperate to avoid repeating
with its most important military ally, the US.
Why is Donald Trump so obsessed with winning the peace prize?
Trump has long been outspoken about his belief that he should be awarded the
peace prize, an honour previously bestowed on one of his presidential
predecessors, Barack Obama, in 2009 for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen
international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” This comparison is
frequently cited by analysts as a key driver of Trump's desire. The award to Obama,
barely nine months into his first term, has been a source of visible annoyance and
rivalry for Trump, who has frequently suggested that if he had a name like Obama,
he would have been given the prize "in 10 seconds."
This pursuit appears driven by a complex mix of desire for unparalleled prestige, a
need to validate his unconventional, "America First" diplomatic style on the world
stage, and a deep-seated competitive urge to eclipse his Democratic predecessor.
The campaign for the prize has been intense and public. In July, Trump reportedly
called Jens Stoltenberg, Norway’s finance minister and the former NATO secretary
general, to inquire about the Nobel Prize while discussing trade and tariffs. At the
UN last month, Trump falsely claimed that he had halted seven “unendable wars,”
telling world leaders: “Everyone says I should get the Nobel peace prize.” His
administration has also been actively promoting his image as a "Peace President,"
with son Eric Trump and the White House amplifying the campaign on social
media, even as the nomination deadline has passed.
The President’s recent push for a peace agreement between Israel and Hamas,
complete with a highly publicized 20-point plan, was viewed by many as a last-
ditch effort to secure the prize. However, the committee's announcement that the
decision was finalized days before the ceasefire was brokered effectively
invalidated this effort for the 2025 prize.
The Nobel Committee's Dilemma and the Spirit of Alfred Nobel
The Nobel Committee finds itself in an unenviable position, pressured by a global
superpower while trying to uphold its mandate. Its decisions, according to Alfred
Nobel's will, must honor those who have done "the most or the best work for
fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and
for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”
Nobel experts widely argue that Trump’s overall record—characterized by a retreat
from multilateral agreements like the Paris Climate Accord and the Iran nuclear
deal, launching trade wars against allies, and domestic political instability—runs
contrary to the spirit of the Nobel mandate.
Nina Græger, director of the Peace Research Institute Oslo (Prio), summarized the
prevailing expert view. “While he [Trump] clearly deserves credit for his efforts to
end the war in Gaza, it is still too early to tell whether the peace proposal will be
implemented and lead to lasting peace,” said Græger. “Trump's retreat from
international institutions, and his wish to take over Greenland from the Kingdom
of Denmark, a Nato ally, as well as infringements on basic democratic rights within
his own country, do not align well with Nobel's will.”
Arild Hermstad, the leader of the Green Party of Norway, emphasized that the
prize's credibility rests on its autonomy. “Peace prizes are earned through
sustained commitment, not through social media tantrums and not from
intimidation,” he asserted.
Ultimately, the committee's decision, set to be announced on Friday, is a testament
to its independence. Should it choose a candidate like Sudan's Emergency
Response Rooms, the Committee to Protect Journalists, or Yulia Navalnaya, it will
be making a clear statement in favor of human rights, democracy, and
international cooperation—values often seen as antithetical to the Trump
administration's "America First" posture.
The coming hours will not only name a peace laureate but will also determine
whether a small NATO nation must weather a diplomatic storm for the sake of an
independent prize. For Norway, the announcement will be less a cause for
celebration and more a bracing for impact. The nation can only hope that its
powerful ally respects the distinction between an independent award and a
government decision, even if its leader has repeatedly demonstrated he views the
world differently.
