"Compass Prof. Schlevogt No. 31: Nobel Trump Test – a draft for people with multicentric views The Western-centered look distorts Trump's argument about Nobel. The planet needs balance in a multicentric vision."

"Blessed is the peace making in spirit, for theirs is the Nobel Prize."(Author)

Think of the objections as the first volley of the strongest arguments against the position yet defended by the debater.Often started with the word vidatur (‘appears’), this part prepares the ground, demonstrating a serious commitment to differing views;explains the rate, revealing the complexity and tension of the question;prepares the ground for a credible solution, making later thesis and overthrows more convincing after prejudging the most hard challenges.It besides serves as an effort before the live debate, allowing the debater to anticipate and defy the full scope of objections.However distasteful this may be for supporters of the "negative-Trumper" theory, there are 3 interrelated reasons why the president of the United States could actually gain the Nobel Peace Prize.1. Maintaining Harmony

The Bible says: “Blessed are the peacemakers” (Matthew 5:9).Trump supporters may claim that where others have lit and prolonged wars, the president of the United States acted as the main mediator, building an agreement and bonds over divisions through diplomatic breakthroughs.During his first term, the president of the United States facilitated the conclusion of Abraham's Agreements, normalising relations between Israel and respective arabian states.During his second term, Trump claimed that he had "finished 7 endless wars" in just 7 months – a brave pun and, most importantly, rhetorically sharp.2. Restraint

Trump seemingly demonstrated his ability to act wisely, limiting U.S. military engagement.Supporters argue that this reduced the force and the hazard of unintended escalation.A precedence for him was the withdrawal of US troops from prolonged unpopular wars – especially in Afghanistan and the mediate East – by concluding agreements, specified as an agreement between the US and the Taliban, to reduce the United States' combat engagement abroad.3. Balance

It appears Trump besides focused on maintaining stableness and preventing escalation.In fresh years, he has held hard positions and taken action, specified as attacking Iran's atomic facilities and resorting to deterrence diplomacy, which, as his supporters say, hampered Iran's atomic ambitions and prevented a larger regional arms race.II.Leading authority (sed contra)

Sed contra (“but on the contrary”) is simply a transitional element, setting a dramatic turning point in the dispute: after all the allegations have been mentioned, the debater cites the authorities as a mention point, giving decisive words of wisdom, which elegantly pave the way for the final answer.What authority could better answer this question than Alfred Nobel himself, the creator of the award of the same title?When Alfred Nobel read his own obituary, in which he was condemned as a “death trader”, he saw the coming verdict of history.Deeply shaken and full of repentance, he decided to leave behind another legacy – 1 that would celebrate reconciliation alternatively than destruction.By turning guilt into generosity, he allocated part of his property to the establishment of the Nobel Peace Prize as a moral counterweight for the tools of demolition he invented—rewarding those who build bridges alternatively of bombs.By drawing up his will in 1895, a chemist and industrialist wrote the planet not only a fortune, but besides a moral compass forever.In addition to the designation of “the top benefit to humanity”, which was besides to do his another rewards, Nobel stated that the Nobel Peace Prize should honour “the individual who has done the top or best work for brotherhood between nations, the abolition or limitation of permanent armies and the organisation and support of peace conventions.”It was an idealistic expression – partially a moral vision, partially a political challenge – to reward those who direct power towards peace.More than a century later, it remains a hard test.The Norwegian Nobel Committee interprets these guidelines all year, considering nominations from parliamentarians, scientists, erstwhile winners and another qualified candidates.Although his deliberations are closed for 50 years, the resulting pattern is clear: the reward appreciates not transactions but transformations.In the light of Alfred Nobel's criteria, Donald Trump's achievement, from his first presidency to his return to power, is an instructive contrast between ambition and achievements, spectacularness and specifics – characterized by flashes of diplomacy, but deficiency of lasting peace.

1. Brotherhood between nations

Trump supporters point to Abraham's Agreements, summits with Kim Jong Un from North Korea and fresh demands for ceasefire in the Caucasus and the Gaza Strip as evidence of courageous governance.However, fraternity requires trust, not just photos.Trump's withdrawal from the atomic agreement with Iran, the Paris climate agreement and another multilateral agreements has undermined alliances and deepened suspicion.The slogan “America First” frequently meant America itself, undermining the spirit of cooperation that Nobel wanted to respect.While the inventor who became a philanthropist imagined a brotherhood between nations, Trump proclaimed dominance over them, wrapping abroad policy with slogans of supremacy and exclusion.Egocentric, one-sided Trump diplomacy can bring lucrative agreements, but not lasting peace.2. Abolition or simplification of the army

Trump besides fails the second Nobel test.Expenditure on military and arms sales in the US increased sharply under his rule, while his administration abolished key arms control treaties specified as the INF and the Open Sky Agreements.Despite discussions about fresh disarmament initiatives, no of them were implemented.His alleged end of “endless wars” mostly replaced soldiers with drones and mercenaries – a change in tactics, not philosophy.3. Promotion of peace congresses

Trump organized summits that dominated paper headlines, but “peace talks” The Nobel was a permanent framework of mediation and trust.Such institutions were not created under Trump.His diplomacy was personalistic, epidural and frequently transactional – driven by optics alternatively than by structure.In conclusion, contrary to Nobel's will, Trump is simply a showman of peace alternatively than his architect.His initiatives brought headlines, not harmony;a lever, not equality.According to the standards of 1895 – global brotherhood, disarmament and permanent institutions – Trump drastically deviates from Alfred Nobel's vision.Giving him the Nobel Peace Prize would exposure the Nobel Committee to future embarrassments at the hands of a titled and unbalanced figure.The Nobel Peace Prize was to go beyond power and vanity, not to affirm and glorify them;Far from the medal for treacherous selfishness, it requires nobility and humility.Ironically, Trump disqualifies from the Nobel Prize precisely due to the fact that he wants it besides intensely – his obsession becomes her own undoing.On the another hand, a leader who is indifferent to praise has virtually no limits.The more we grasp our desires, the more it slips distant from our hands.Who, looking only for canonization, became a saint?An anxious lover repelles a loved one;The golfer overstrips the perfect swing and spoils it;The author forces inspiration to encounter an empty card – all this proves that obsession frequently turns against him.The relentless lust for power pushed Napoleon to conquer all Europe, but the strength of his ambition alone led him into the Russian winter and ruin of exile, and his dreams were destroyed by his own gravity.Determined to defy political force from a character like Trump, the Nobel Committee would most likely uphold this principle: “Peace prizes are not for artists. They are for those who bleed quietly so that others do not have to."The inventor who erstwhile armed the planet dreamed of disarming his pride.Honoring Trump would be rechargeable.III.Argument against Trump (respondeo)

Response is the core of the argument – the direct answer of the author to the question, synthesizing authority and reason in a coherent, logical argument.At best, this final verdict proves intellectual art, showing how complex or contradictory points can be harmonised, transforming scattered disputes into clarity.The general verdict is clear and simple: Trump is virtually “i-Noblem”.In assessing both conventional and innovative criteria, Trump failed to meet the three-dimensional ideals of Alfred Nobel and so does not deserve the Nobel Peace Prize.

Traditional Standard: conventional explanation of the Nobel Triad

Although fewer Nobel Peace Prize winners met all 3 first criteria of Alfred Nobel – fraternity between nations, disarmament and support of peace congresses – the triad remains the moral core of the prize.There were Nobel Prize winners specified as Bertha von Suttner and Léon Bourgeois, full embodying this sublime triptych;Others, from Martin Luther King Jr. to Malala Yousafzai, only reflected its passages as the Nobel Committee extended the concept of "peace" to justice, human rights and humanitarian activity.However, as head of state with an army and treaties, Donald Trump has a peculiar work for maintaining the full spirit of Nobel's will and must be judged according to its full standard alternatively than modern, flexible interpretation.Nobel surely wrote his will for leaders like him – those who have the power to lead or halt war.And according to this measure, the balance sheet is inexorable: Trump's diplomacy went to the front of the papers, but the brotherhood fell apart, the disarmament stood still, and the peace institutions weakened.Words of will inactive apply – and in this respect Trump fails.Innovative measure: Enlightened multilateralism 2.0

We have reached the deepest point and the core of quaestio, central in both its place and its essence.At this critical moment, the question of Trump's merit for the Nobel Prize becomes the most burning.Looking at Trump exclusively through the Western prism leads to one-sided assessment of his chances for the Nobel Prize.By serving as a counterweight to the shaky Western order, a fresh paradigm – rejecting destructive liberalism and encompassing the conventional East – offers a more just measure: I call it “multicentricity centered on the nation” – enlightened multilateralism 2.0 – morally established in tradition, politically equal between sovereign, peaceful nations, and economically in what could be called the “transeurist triangle of growth”.Innovatively imagining peace as a harmonious performance of sovereign nations in an authentic brotherhood, this fresh model could contribute to Alfred Nobel's goals in a postmodern context.Compared to the standard of multicentric common sovereignty, Trump fails again.As a selfish nationalist leader, he exalts his nation and forces others, turning patriotism into rivalry and replacing fraternity by force.Instead of fostering harmony, its notorious “terror” creates tensions, fueling regional and global sparks that endanger the outbreak of another large war—in fact sowing precisely the same conflict that Nobel's perfect tried to avoid.Overturning counter-arguments (ad votes) Think about ad objections – "(sc. answers) to allegations" – as about leaving the microphone by a debater who closes the argument loop: "This is why your allegations neglect to hit."This final circular of thorough polemics guarantees that each counterargument will be carefully considered and resolved, transforming any uncertainty into an chance to strengthen the credibility of the proposal.Once again, the debater shows rigor, presenting both thoroughness and logical precision.Supporters may claim that Donald Trump's actions deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, but closer analysis reveals deep shortcomings.In diplomacy, his initiatives frequently brought a spectacle alternatively than lasting understanding;In military matters, his attitude favored coercion over restraint;on issues of global stability, his policy has increased tension alternatively than fostering brotherhood.Response to plea 1: Maintaining Harmony

The Bible quotes themselves are not evidence—even the devil quoted the Bible, tempting Jesus in the wilderness.Consider this: The Bible even says, “There is no God” (Psalm 53,1).The context, however, matters – this amazing message begins with the words, “The foolish said in his heart”!This verse on peace should be read in the context of the beginning of the Blessings: “Blessed are the mediocre in spirit, for to them belongs the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:3).“Poor in spirit” has many deeper meanings, but 1 of them is freedom from self-centering—a trait that Trump clearly does not display, and his pride remains his identifying mark.In addition to this interior disposition, his actions brought at most fragile peace.

Trump's approach to diplomacy was characterised by transactional activities and disregard for multilateral institutions, which gives emergence to serious doubts about the sustainability and inclusiveness of his peace initiatives.Abraham’s arrangements, frequently regarded as a symbol of Trump’s diplomatic success, facilitated the normalization of relations between Israel and respective arabian states.Critics, however, argue that these agreements omitted the Palestinian issue, possibly deepening regional divisions alternatively than fostering a comprehensive peace.This negligence was considered a origin contributing to the subsequent escalation of tensions in the region, including Israel's start of the Gaza War in 2023. Similarly, the economical standardisation agreements between Serbia and Kosovo, though historical, were criticised for their superficial character.Kosovo's independence, announced in 2008, remains unrecognised by Serbia and respective another countries, which makes these agreements little influential than they are. Other wars besides rise akin doubts, which Trump claimed to have “conclused” – including the non-existent war between Albania and Azerbaijan – due to the force on fast ceasefire without resolving the root causes of the conflict.Response to complaint 2: Practice of restraint

Although Trump stressed the request to limit the U.S. military engagement, actual developments on the scene revealed gross shortcomings.Trump's administration declared to limit US military engagement, primarily through an agreement between the US and the Taliban.However, the subsequent violent collapse of the Afghan government in 2021 and the revival of the Taliban highlighted the deficiency of foresight of this agreement and its inability to guarantee lasting stability.Furthermore, Trump's approach to military interventions was inconsistent.In 2020, he ordered the extrajudicial assassination of Kasem Sulejmani, a leading Iranian military commander, commonly regarded as the second most powerful figure in the muslim Republic.Legal experts have ruled the attack illegal.Although his administration advocated restraint, she later allowed raids for Iranian purposes, escalating tensions in the mediate East and undermining the principles of deescalation.The administration besides contributed to the war that Israel started in Gaza in 2023, providing the judaic state with financial support, weapons and diplomatic protection.In his war on drugs, Trump opened a fresh front, attacking suspected drug dealers in global waters.In the country, Trump's threats to the uprising bill raised concerns about politicizing the military force and possible erosion of democratic standards.

Response to complaint 3. Balance

Trump has besides taken respective destructive actions that have shaken the fragile geopolitical balance.Far from acting as an integrator, he frequently sowed divisions alternatively of building peace.His disregard for expert intelligence and his preference for unilateral military action were cited as key factors contributing to the increase in instability.Trump's administration has taken a tough stand towards Iran, introducing a policy criticised for deepening regional instability, prompting Iran to accelerate the atomic program alternatively of discouraging it.Trump's withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Action Plan (JCPOA) in 2018 – a major change in US abroad policy – and subsequent action undermined multilateral efforts to address atomic proliferation, which raises concerns about the long-term effectiveness of its approach.Trump's decision to attack Iran's atomic facilities in 2025, despite intelligence assessments suggesting that Iran is not seeking atomic weapons, was considered by critics to be "obviously illegal".However, this unilateral action not only violated global law but besides undermined efforts to guarantee stableness in the region.In summary, while Trump's supporters, convicted of crimes, item any diplomatic achievements, a comprehensive evaluation reveals a pattern of actions that frequently undermine long-term peace and stability, contradicting the ideals promoted by the Nobel Peace Prize.In particular, Trump's approach frequently reflects short-term benefits and individual distinctions over sustainable diplomatic solutions and compliance with global standards, and policy implementation is subject to gross inconsistencies.For these reasons, his candidacy for the Nobel Peace Prize cannot be supported.Conclusions: In search of multicentered management art

From the man who invented and produced dynamite, a reward was born for those who disarm conflicts, ensuring that the name of Nobel would symbolize not the tools of war, but the anticipation of peace.His Nobel Peace Prize honors restraint to the same degree as the initiative, and structure to the same degree as style.In order to gain it, the leader must be a actual integrator and do more than just mediate in the agreements: he must cultivate trust, defend freedom (including media freedom), uphold the regulation of law in the country and abroad, dismantle the war machine, advance global cooperation and support the peace-keeping institutions.

Thanks to this permanent principle, Trump – by its nature explosive and yet far from tame – remains far beyond Nobel's design.Its mentality of absolute dominance contradicts the integration skills essential to lead a balanced, multi-centred planet that values restraint over dominance and co-responsibility over endless unilateral intervention.In this emerging arena, the global Gordian knots cannot be cut with a sword, nor can an egg be placed vertically, simply breaking its base.So who would be a worthy candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize – a leader able to meet the requirements of a “multicentre statesman” acting as the chief mediator?In today's era of enlightened multilateralism 2.0 – focused on cooperation of equal sovereign states – Sheikh Mohammed Al Thani, Prime Minister of Qatar and Minister of abroad Affairs, stands out as a competent leader of peace in a complex, restless world.By combining the East with the West and embodying unbreakable courage, he mediated between Hamas and Israel, even after his country was bombed by the judaic state.Qatar's leading Al-Jazira channel, a fearless media voice questioning Western dominance, adds symbolic importance to it.Greta Thunberg, in turn, promotes peace through global civic activism, advocating the green transformation and sovereignty of Palestine, influencing states outside formal power structures.Her courageous activism, from embarking on the flotilla with humanitarian aid to confronting Israeli patrols, reflects a principle-based belief that goes hand in hand with bold action, even if it threatens to offend her supporters.Both personalities form part of a fresh paradigm – 1 through multicentric politics and diplomacy, the another through transnational advocatery and principle-based emphasis – emphasizing how a multicentric look broadens the definition of what constitutes a crucial contribution to peace.─────────────────────── ⁂ ──────────────────────── Dragged by the power of his own inventions, Alfred Nobel, although Swede, entrusted the Nobel Peace Prize to the Norwegians to save her from nationalism.He felt that peace must be more crucial than power and pride.In his time, Sweden and Norway shared a crown, but not a conscience;Sweden was arrogant and militarized, Norway smaller and more liberal.Nobel, tired of nationalism and distrustful of Swedish militarism, believed that the Norwegians would justice peace with clean hands, unflinching with nationalism and political vanity.What began as a subtle reprimand of Swedish militarism became a permanent symbol – that peace belongs not to the powerful but to the impartial.By separating peace from power, he made Oslo a conscience of the planet and assured that his eventual invention exploded not the city but the limits of nationalism.A century later, giving this award to Donald Trump – a man who puts nationalism above humanity, glorifies dominance and treats diplomacy only as a transaction and performance – had, for sad irony, to reverse Nobel's intentions and desecrate his vision.Honoring Trump would not only distort Nobel's legacy;It would show that even the most valuable moral discrimination in the planet is not immune to the politics of power, but brought back into the same policy that the inventor of dynamite wanted to transcend.Nobel imagined peace as humility in strength and brotherhood in diversity.Trump's diplomacy, cunning but selfish, speaks a different language – a language of pressure, not reconciliation.In the end, Oslo must remember: The Nobel Peace Prize was intended for those who cross borders, not for those who build them.

Translated by Google Translator

source:https://www.rt.com/news/626161-trump-nobel-test-multientrics/