How Is Trump’s ‘Department of War’ Supposed To Win the Nobel Peace Prize?
“The purpose of war is not to die for your country. The purpose of war is to make the other dumb bastard die for his country.”*
—General George S. Patton
In the theater of the absurd, war is the set, and peace merely a prop.
Donald Trump signed an executive order on Sept. 5 instructing the Pentagon to restore the name “Department of War” for public use. Even though the National Security Act still formally designates the agency as the “Department of Defense,” the reality has changed. The website www.war.gov is live, official accounts have been renamed, and the sign on Secretary of Defense Peter Hegseth’s door now reads “Secretary of War.” This is no simple branding exercise; it is a linguistic coup. “War” raised its ugly head as soon as “defense” had been consigned to the trash can of history.
What is even more ironic is that this linguistic revolution coincides with Trump’s longstanding obsession: His insatiable craving for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Peace Is Not a Result, It Is Merely a Check
In truth, the logic behind how the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded has never been rigorous. Henry Kissinger, Yasser Arafat, Abiy Ahmed Ali. Who has not won the prize thanks to a ceasefire or a fleeting reconciliation? Peace needn’t be real; it need only resemble peace on the global stage. And as for whether that check can be cashed, we may have to wait until the Nobel archives are unsealed 50 years from now.
As luck would have it, Trump happens to be a master at this game. From the Abraham Accords and his love letters to Kim Jong Un, to August’s resolution-free summit in Alaska and various countries’ subsequent “peace pilgrimages” to the White House, even the most anemic of achievements have been packaged as “historic breakthroughs.” Now that the Department of War has made a full-blooded comeback, Trump’s narrative logic can play out to its fullest extent: The more blatant the war, the more precious the ceasefire; and that preciousness is Trump’s bargaining chip in securing his Nobel laurels.
Conditional Hillary, Theatrical Trump
In an Aug. 15 podcast, Hillary Clinton said that if Trump were to be the architect of a ceasefire that neither ceded Ukrainian territory nor yielded to Putin, she would personally nominate him for the Nobel Peace Prize. Trump instantly interpreted what Clinton intended as a near-impossible challenge as a potential nomination; he immediately quipped that it was “very nice” of her to say that, and that “I may have to start liking her again.”
Wearing the exacting standards of others as his own badge of honor is one of Trump’s oldest tricks. Earlier, he even bluntly told a senior Norwegian official that he “wanted the Nobel Peace Prize.”
The crux of the matter is that the Nobel nomination system is shrouded in secrecy. The rules dictate that nomination lists and documents for review remain confidential for 50 years. What the outside world learns comes not from official sources but from nominators who disclose their own nominations, or from media speculation. But this information vacuum plays directly into Trump’s hands. All it takes is for someone to so much as hint at a nomination, and he inflates that into “the world is recognizing me.” By the time the facts are revealed in 50 years, he will have long since exited the stage.
Nominations Abound, Peace Is Absent
The reality, however, is much bleaker. Neither the Alaska summit nor the White House talks resulted in a ceasefire agreement, leaving Europe able only to welcome the effort. The war continues and peace remains elusive, yet the calls for Trump’s nomination keep coming: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet, U.S. Rep. Buddy Carter, among others, all claim to have nominated or to be in the process of nominating Trump. The abundance of nominations and the absence of peace are the absurdity at the heart of this farce because, by this rationale, the Peace Prize is not a recognition of results, but applause for a performance.
The Department of War’s ‘Peace Résumé’
To make the Department of War’s existence appear a little bit less tenuous, Trump needs to bolster it with a few military accomplishments. Consequently, off the coast of Venezuela, the U.S. military has sunk a suspected drug smuggling speedboat, killing 11 people; on the streets of Washington, the National Guard has been deployed under orders from the Department of War to maintain public security; and at the Pentagon, a missile defense blueprint known as the “Golden Dome” has been rolled out to great fanfare, disguising offense as defense. When everything can be framed as “war,” any pause can be touted as “peace.”
In truth, this is merely a replay of Trump’s “prize politics”: He raged against the system after failing to win an Emmy for “The Apprentice”; he lambasted the Academy for snubbing him at the Oscars; and he boasted about his success in getting under the elite’s skin after his humiliation at the Golden Raspberry Awards.** To lose means the game was rigged; to not win a prize means he was ostracized; humiliation paradoxically becomes a victory. And now, he has simply transplanted that script from the world of showbiz to the arena of international politics.
Language Advances, Institutions Retreat
The real danger lies not in Trump himself, but in institutional retreat. Congress is silent, the courts are averting their gaze, and citizens are growing numb. When “defense” can be recast so casually as “war,” democracy becomes nothing more than a game of words.
So, it would not be that difficult for Trump’s Department of War to win the Nobel Peace Prize. In fact, it would only require three steps:
1. Rewrite the dictionary — call war the foundational work of peace;
2. Create a fait accompli — force society to adapt through executive orders, military action, and symbolic maneuvers; and
3. Outsource endorsements — gather scattered nominations and inflate them to international consensus-like proportions.
With these three steps, even if Trump didn’t win the prize, he would still have ensured that the whole world was debating the rules he had devised—and doing so within his linguistic frame of reference.
Absurdity: The truest laurel.
Fifty years from now, when the official Nobel archives are declassified, history may reveal whether Trump truly brought about peace or merely manipulated symbols. But today, we already see how, when you can speak about war as peace, the Nobel Peace Prize is reduced to the costliest satire.
On Aug. 18, Frank Bruni of The New York Times, wrote, “Give Trump a Nobel! And an Emmy. And an Oscar ...”, a masterclass in mockery and sarcasm. But realistically, thanks to the Department of War, it would not be that difficult for Trump to nab the Peace Prize. In today’s world, peace is not a state, but a performance — and besides, the crown that truly belongs to Trump has long since been awarded him: The Golden Raspberry. Absurdity is the one honor that cannot be taken away from him.
*Editor's note: Although accurately translated, the precise wording of this frequently cited remark could not be verified.
**Translator note: Trump’s Golden Raspberry record consists of winning Worst Supporting Actor in 1991 for “Ghosts Can’t Do It,” and in 2019 winning both Worst Actor and Worst Screen Combo for “Fahrenheit 11/9” and “Death of a Nation.”
The author is the dean of Shih Hsin University’s College of Management, Taiwan.
—General George S. Patton
In the theater of the absurd, war is the set, and peace merely a prop.
Donald Trump signed an executive order on Sept. 5 instructing the Pentagon to restore the name “Department of War” for public use. Even though the National Security Act still formally designates the agency as the “Department of Defense,” the reality has changed. The website www.war.gov is live, official accounts have been renamed, and the sign on Secretary of Defense Peter Hegseth’s door now reads “Secretary of War.” This is no simple branding exercise; it is a linguistic coup. “War” raised its ugly head as soon as “defense” had been consigned to the trash can of history.
What is even more ironic is that this linguistic revolution coincides with Trump’s longstanding obsession: His insatiable craving for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Peace Is Not a Result, It Is Merely a Check
In truth, the logic behind how the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded has never been rigorous. Henry Kissinger, Yasser Arafat, Abiy Ahmed Ali. Who has not won the prize thanks to a ceasefire or a fleeting reconciliation? Peace needn’t be real; it need only resemble peace on the global stage. And as for whether that check can be cashed, we may have to wait until the Nobel archives are unsealed 50 years from now.
As luck would have it, Trump happens to be a master at this game. From the Abraham Accords and his love letters to Kim Jong Un, to August’s resolution-free summit in Alaska and various countries’ subsequent “peace pilgrimages” to the White House, even the most anemic of achievements have been packaged as “historic breakthroughs.” Now that the Department of War has made a full-blooded comeback, Trump’s narrative logic can play out to its fullest extent: The more blatant the war, the more precious the ceasefire; and that preciousness is Trump’s bargaining chip in securing his Nobel laurels.
Conditional Hillary, Theatrical Trump
In an Aug. 15 podcast, Hillary Clinton said that if Trump were to be the architect of a ceasefire that neither ceded Ukrainian territory nor yielded to Putin, she would personally nominate him for the Nobel Peace Prize. Trump instantly interpreted what Clinton intended as a near-impossible challenge as a potential nomination; he immediately quipped that it was “very nice” of her to say that, and that “I may have to start liking her again.”
Wearing the exacting standards of others as his own badge of honor is one of Trump’s oldest tricks. Earlier, he even bluntly told a senior Norwegian official that he “wanted the Nobel Peace Prize.”
The crux of the matter is that the Nobel nomination system is shrouded in secrecy. The rules dictate that nomination lists and documents for review remain confidential for 50 years. What the outside world learns comes not from official sources but from nominators who disclose their own nominations, or from media speculation. But this information vacuum plays directly into Trump’s hands. All it takes is for someone to so much as hint at a nomination, and he inflates that into “the world is recognizing me.” By the time the facts are revealed in 50 years, he will have long since exited the stage.
Nominations Abound, Peace Is Absent
The reality, however, is much bleaker. Neither the Alaska summit nor the White House talks resulted in a ceasefire agreement, leaving Europe able only to welcome the effort. The war continues and peace remains elusive, yet the calls for Trump’s nomination keep coming: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet, U.S. Rep. Buddy Carter, among others, all claim to have nominated or to be in the process of nominating Trump. The abundance of nominations and the absence of peace are the absurdity at the heart of this farce because, by this rationale, the Peace Prize is not a recognition of results, but applause for a performance.
The Department of War’s ‘Peace Résumé’
To make the Department of War’s existence appear a little bit less tenuous, Trump needs to bolster it with a few military accomplishments. Consequently, off the coast of Venezuela, the U.S. military has sunk a suspected drug smuggling speedboat, killing 11 people; on the streets of Washington, the National Guard has been deployed under orders from the Department of War to maintain public security; and at the Pentagon, a missile defense blueprint known as the “Golden Dome” has been rolled out to great fanfare, disguising offense as defense. When everything can be framed as “war,” any pause can be touted as “peace.”
In truth, this is merely a replay of Trump’s “prize politics”: He raged against the system after failing to win an Emmy for “The Apprentice”; he lambasted the Academy for snubbing him at the Oscars; and he boasted about his success in getting under the elite’s skin after his humiliation at the Golden Raspberry Awards.** To lose means the game was rigged; to not win a prize means he was ostracized; humiliation paradoxically becomes a victory. And now, he has simply transplanted that script from the world of showbiz to the arena of international politics.
Language Advances, Institutions Retreat
The real danger lies not in Trump himself, but in institutional retreat. Congress is silent, the courts are averting their gaze, and citizens are growing numb. When “defense” can be recast so casually as “war,” democracy becomes nothing more than a game of words.
So, it would not be that difficult for Trump’s Department of War to win the Nobel Peace Prize. In fact, it would only require three steps:
1. Rewrite the dictionary — call war the foundational work of peace;
2. Create a fait accompli — force society to adapt through executive orders, military action, and symbolic maneuvers; and
3. Outsource endorsements — gather scattered nominations and inflate them to international consensus-like proportions.
With these three steps, even if Trump didn’t win the prize, he would still have ensured that the whole world was debating the rules he had devised—and doing so within his linguistic frame of reference.
Absurdity: The truest laurel.
Fifty years from now, when the official Nobel archives are declassified, history may reveal whether Trump truly brought about peace or merely manipulated symbols. But today, we already see how, when you can speak about war as peace, the Nobel Peace Prize is reduced to the costliest satire.
On Aug. 18, Frank Bruni of The New York Times, wrote, “Give Trump a Nobel! And an Emmy. And an Oscar ...”, a masterclass in mockery and sarcasm. But realistically, thanks to the Department of War, it would not be that difficult for Trump to nab the Peace Prize. In today’s world, peace is not a state, but a performance — and besides, the crown that truly belongs to Trump has long since been awarded him: The Golden Raspberry. Absurdity is the one honor that cannot be taken away from him.
*Editor's note: Although accurately translated, the precise wording of this frequently cited remark could not be verified.
**Translator note: Trump’s Golden Raspberry record consists of winning Worst Supporting Actor in 1991 for “Ghosts Can’t Do It,” and in 2019 winning both Worst Actor and Worst Screen Combo for “Fahrenheit 11/9” and “Death of a Nation.”
The author is the dean of Shih Hsin University’s College of Management, Taiwan.
Previous article![]( "Antisemitism and Anti-Israel Bias: Congress Opens Investigation into Wikipedia")