The will of Alfred Nobel specified the peace prize should go to those “who shall 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.”

By that logic, this year’s Nobel Peace Prize prize should have gone to the man or woman who has accomplished the most for world peace: President Donald Trump.

Instead, the Norwegian Nobel Committee announced Oct. 10 the 2025 Nobel Peace prize would go to Maria Corina Machado.

Machado is a Venezuelan politician who has opposed the authoritarian regime of President Nicolas Maduro. In 2023 she won in a primary election but was banned from holding public office. She founded both the Atenea Foundation, which supports children in Caracas, as well as Sumate, an institution which supports free elections and democracy.

According to the Norwegian Nobel Committee’s press release, Machado is “receiving the Nobel Peace Prize for her tireless work promoting democratic rights for the people of Venezuela and for her struggle to achieve a just and peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy.”

The question surrounding this award isn’t whether Machado has done important work in Venezuela, but whether what she has done is sufficient to justify passing over Trump’s accomplishments.

Not only has Trump helped negotiate a ceasefire between Israel and Gaza this October, he also has played a significant role in ending several other conflicts in the past seven months.

Trump announced a ceasefire between the governments of India and Pakistan May 10, saying it was through “a long night of talks mediated by the United States.” On June 24, he announced a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. Cambodia and Thailand reached a ceasefire largely thanks to the president’s intercession. Armenia and Azerbaijan have entered into serious peace talks.

Machado even recognized Trump’s importance in her attempts to achieve democracy in her own country.

“We are on the threshold of victory and today, more than ever, we count on President Trump, the people of the United States, the peoples of Latin America, and the democratic nations of the world as our principal allies to achieve Freedom and democracy,” Machado wrote on X. “I dedicate this prize to the suffering people of Venezuela and to President Trump for his decisive support of our cause!”

It is clear why Trump was nominated for the prize. It is less clear why he did not receive it. It also in no way disparages Machado’s accomplishments to believe that the award should have gone to him.

However, Jørgen Watne Frydnes, chair of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, said in the prize announcement that he hopes the prize “conveys a message for Venezuela’s president Nicolas Maduro and other authoritarian leaders,” and that it will “inspire people working for democracy all around the world.”

The committee did not choose to give the prize to the one who has “done the most.” They gave it in order to send a message, one they clearly state in their press release. “When authoritarians seize power, it is crucial to recognise courageous defenders of freedom who rise and resist.” The real motivation behind Machado’s win was not aligned with the will’s original stipulation, but rather with the committee’s new goal.

Frydnes also said, “We want to send a message to all authoritarian leaders: choose ballots, not bullets.”

The prize this year was not given to the person who accomplished the most, but in order to demonstrate support and try to push nations toward peace and democracy in the future.

Trump deserved the prize according to its original meaning, but Machado’s win simply means something different.

Ameera Wilson is a senior studying English.