Is Donald Trump the president of peace?

0:00Right now, someone is asking AI a question about your industry. They're looking for the perfect recommendation or an accurate solution, and they're ready to act on it. When AI gives an answer, is your brand a part of it or not? Most companies have no idea which. GIST changes that. We show you where you're visible, where you're not, and give you the tools to do something about it. It's time to make AI work for your brand with GIST. Learn more at gist.ai.

0:33U.S. President Donald Trump wants to be known as a president of peace. We've settled seven wars. We're close to settling an eighth. And I think we'll end up settling the Russia situation, which is horrible. And on Wednesday, he got a step closer to making ending conflicts part of his legacy. President Trump has just announced that Israel and Hamas have agreed to the first phase of a peace plan that eventually could end the war in Gaza. him. This is a remarkable development, one that could help Trump eventually achieve the ultimate reward for any peacemaker. Everyone says that I should get the Nobel Peace Prize for each one of these achievements.

1:16This is Swamp Notes, the weekly podcast from the Financial Times, where we talk about all the things happening in U.S. politics, finance and the economy. I'm Mark Filippino, And this week we're asking, is Trump the president of peace after all? Here with me to discuss is Kristen Sandvik. She's a professor in humanitarian studies and a senior researcher at the Peace Research Institute, Oslo. Professor, welcome. Thank you. Great to be with you. And we've also got Abigail House Loner, the FT's U.S. Middle East foreign affairs correspondent. Hey, Abby. Hey. Okay, so let's start with the president's announcement about this peace deal between Israel and Hamas, his administration brokered.

1:51Abby, you've been covering this news all week. You're probably exhausted. what happened and how did we get here? Well, it has been a whirlwind week. This kind of kicked off a couple of weeks ago when the Trump administration unveiled this 20-point plan for a Gaza peace deal. What we're seeing now, as of two nights ago, President Trump announced Hamas and Israel had reached an agreement on phase one of the plan. And that is a ceasefire, partial withdrawal all of Israeli troops back to a certain line within Gaza, the release of all 48 remaining hostages, 20 of whom are believed to be alive, and the release of about 2 ,000 Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails.

2:36So what happened as of early this morning, the Israeli military said that the ceasefire is now in effect. That sets off a 72-hour clock for the hostage release. So we are far from out of the woods yet, even on phase one, but that's where we are now. We've seen ceasefire deals break down before. Is this something different, Abby? Well, the Trump administration says this is very different. It is different in the sense that there is really this kind of regional coalescing around this plan. So there has been very vocal and very concerted involvement in this deal by Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates.

3:20And that is different. And we're also seeing what has looked like quite a bit more pressure from the U.S. administration on the Israelis to get this done, which is rare. But as you said, it is hard to imagine the deal that ends it all for once and for all. Sure. Now, before we get into Trump's wider record on peace and, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, which Trump has sought after for quite a long time and the actual winner of the Peace Prize that was announced this morning. Professor Sandvik, what was your reaction to the ceasefire news from the perspective of someone who studies peace? Well, we've been waiting for this.

3:55And as Abby said, this is just the first stage of a plan. So I think from the European perspective, from Norway, it's very tentative. But this is, you know, we're more hopeful than we've been for two years. Just the other day, the White House posted an image on social media calling Trump the, quote, peace president. Professor Sandvik, when do you think this record the president has of disliking armed conflict really starts? When does he pride himself on wanting to become the president of peace? I think this has been probably a trademark for also for his first period. At that point, it was more of a non-war effort, you know, wanting to withdraw U.S.

4:36troops, not wanting to get involved. And what we see in this period is a much more forceful president, obviously interested in sort of branding himself, but also increasingly putting prestige and putting energy and sustained effort into this. Is it notable to you? Does his position maybe stand out compared to other world leaders? You know, from a European perspective, we certainly had an easier time with Biden, for example. But I do think that his positioning and his sort of unpredictability might also serve as a strength in his current efforts to bring peace. I'm just looking as I speak to you on the front page of the main Norwegian tabloid today.

5:16And it says Trump has a real good reason to be proud of himself. Let's talk about the big news of today, the Nobel Peace Prize. Donald Trump has made clear his desire to win the award. A lot of people who are hoping to curry favor what the president said they were nominating him for the Peace Prize in the last several months. Professor Sandvik, tell me how that nomination process works. How does this decision actually happen? Well, the decision happens through a very long process of assessment. But we have to remember that if you want to be in the running, you have to be formally nominated. And that window closed at the end of January.

5:56So you can recommend someone for a nomination and you can write glowing letters. But what you actually need is a formal nomination. So from next week on, you know, the game is on for nominating Trump for the 2026 prize. But he might or might not have been formally in the running this year. My understanding is that it's based off of the track record of the nominee from the year prior. So Trump would be judged based on what his track record was in 2024. Am I understanding that correctly? Well, if he had been formally considered this year, I mean, you know, it is current events, right? So if you have a candidate, you want to award the prize to this person, this organization, and there's an absolute scandal last minute.

6:39Committee will probably not award the prize to that person. Let's talk about who did win the Nobel Peace Prize that was announced today. The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2025 to Maria Corina Machado. She is receiving the Nobel Peace Prize for her tireless work promoting democratic rights for the people of Venezuela. Maria Corina Machado, the opposition leader in Venezuela. Did you expect her to win? I didn't expect her to win, but there were leaks starting around 8 a.m. European Central Time. So I think a couple of us started wondering and started looking around.

7:27It's certainly a candidate who has been fighting for democracy for a long time. It's someone who's been involved in civil society for 25 years. It's also someone with a very interesting relationship to the Republican Party. So last year, eight Florida Republicans, including Mr. Rubio, wrote a support letter to the Nobel Committee. You know, it is clear that the U.S. is very involved in Venezuelan politics. They've been sinking vessels offshore, claiming that this is about, you know, stopping narco traffic. It's sort of a new frontier in the war on drugs, if so to say. I've heard voices today being concerned that this is the prelude to sort of more forceful regime change activities on a part of the U.S.

8:13government. I have to say, you know, this woman isn't portrayed as certainly not as a saint, but, you know, it's certainly an extremely brave individual. And we're hoping to see her in Oslo. And it's unclear whether she's going to be able to come, given that she's currently in hiding. Thinking about the Nobel Peace Prize for a moment, Professor, you've been in the world surrounding the commission and its decisions for a while now. The commission has given other world leaders this prize before former President Barack Obama, perhaps most notably in the U.S. in 2009. Were these decisions well received?

8:48I think I can safely say that the 2009 prize is the most embarrassing moment of the Nobel Committee, at least in the eyes of the Norwegian population. Wow. So, I mean, you know, if you can say whatever you want to say about really wanting the price this year, but I think it sort of has restored some of the prestige of the price, that something is at stake, that this is a really important price. You know, Obama was, of course, obviously also quite unhappy and uncomfortable with getting the price. And then we have giving it to heads of state. So it's a little bit of a mixed bag. And then obviously we're quite proud that, you know, Nelson Mandela got the price, for example.

9:27So, you know, there are prizes that are really well remembered and treasured, and then there are others that are seen as not so successful. Abby, given that the ceasefire is still so up in the air, there's a lot of progress. If it goes through, how will this impact the president's peace legacy? Well, the president, I think, will certainly argue even more forcefully that he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. And we've heard, you know, some people, including foreign leaders who have been quite critical of him, who have said that, you know, he might well deserve it if he succeeds in getting this implemented.

10:06I think we'll see where things stand a year from now. As everyone involved in this process has noted, though, you know, phase one, we haven't seen the hostages released yet. That is still to come. Hopefully it happens. But phase two, which follows it, and that is trying to kind of rebuild, stabilize Gaza, bring in sort of an international stabilization force, assemble some sort of committee to govern Gaza and secure Israel's actual withdrawal from the territory. That phase is going to be much, much harder. And that is exactly where we've seen previous peace efforts break down in the past. Going back to the president's track record on peace, we've heard that Trump tout that he's ended eight wars.

10:55Can we just dive into that a little bit? Yes. So that that would be there. There's a bit of hyperbole going on there. So the president is referring to some major long running conflicts. Probably the I would say the largest amount of hyperbole, I think, has been afforded to the conflict between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda. And there, the administration has claimed significant victory. They managed to get the two sides to agree on sort of the principles for peace going forward. But we haven't actually seen any changes on the ground. We're not seeing militias pull back or disarm. We're not really seeing anything implemented that is ending the fighting and improving lives on the ground.

11:41I would defer to Professor Sandvik here as I'm curious to hear her thoughts on this. what counts as ending a war. Yeah, what's your thoughts on that? Well, it is starting to become a very long list, right? So I think what counts as ending a war, I think, you know, give us another five years, I think would be my short answer. So if any of this sticks in five years and, you know, the U.S. hasn't turned into a dictatorship, I do think that this is a clear candidate for getting the price. But, you know, making peace, ending long-running conflicts is more than signing a paper. And even if you end sort of a wholesale attack of a civilian population, or you disarm militias, or, you know, you get government armies to back off the borders, making sure that people living in these conflict areas have a say in their future, are safe, not only that people stop dying, but that they can go about their lives, is really important.

12:42I mean, sustainable peace also means structural peace in a way, not only the absence of, you know, armed violence. So guys, this takes us back to our big question and perhaps our final question. Is Donald Trump the president of peace? Abby, I want to start with you. You know, I think it's very much TBD. He has been in office for less than a year this time around, which actually is part of his desire for the prize is because it is sort of rooted in Obama's acceptance of the prize at exactly this time in Obama's first term. And, you know, so like Obama, I would say it's probably too early. These wars are going on.

13:25He's in the midst of trying to get a settlement in the Middle East. Give him some more time and we will see. I think, you know, certainly by the end of Trump's term for a year in now, I think we'll have, you know, something to look at and assess how much of an impact he has had on these conflicts. Professor? Well, I mean, this is a very unpredictable world, right? So in a year, we can easily find ourselves in a context where the Middle East has become a sideshow to other conflicts. So I think it's unpredictable. I think we're going to have to speak in a year. Maybe we will. I want to thank our guests.

14:02Abigail Hausloener is the FT's U.S. foreign policy correspondent. Thanks, Abby. Thank you. And Kristen Senvik, she's a professor in humanitarian studies at the University of Oslo. Professor, thank you so much. Thank you. All right. We're going to take a quick break. And when we come back, we're going to do exit poll.

14:30Right now, someone is asking AI a question about your industry. They're looking for the perfect recommendation or an accurate solution, and they're ready to act on it. When AI gives an answer, is your brand a part of it or not? Most companies have no idea which. GIST changes that. We show you where you're visible, where you're not, and give you the tools to do something about it. It's time to make AI work for your brand with GIST. Learn more at gist.ai.

15:02We are back with Exit Poll, where we ask an FT journalist one of your questions. This week, we've got a familiar voice, the FT's James Bledy, our Washington bureau chief. Welcome back, James. Thanks. Good to be with you. Okay, James. So we've got a question from Ronald. He asks, when did the word compromise disappear from U.S. political discourse? I guess what he's asking here is, when did we get to such a state of partisanship that nobody could make deals or get along? Well, I mean, it's a very good question, and it's hard to pinpoint an exact moment. but there have been some trends that we can look at over the past 20 to 30 years.

15:39One is that the number of competitive seats in the House has been steadily decreasing. So the number of seats that are decided within a very small margin of victory. So we've got essentially about a tenth of the House is now competitive. And I think that's crucial. The other factor is that a lot of the lawmakers that have been taking centrist positions or that are known as centrist have either left or they've been defeated in primaries. There's really been a kind of a hollowing out of the center of the American political landscape since really maybe about the late 90s going into the beginning of the century.

16:23So just to summarize, less competition and fewer moderates. Fewer moderate politicians, less competition in the congressional races, and more fear of primary challenges from within your own party. That's the FT's James Politi. Thanks so much, James. Thanks for having me. And Ronald, I hope that answers your question. If you listening right now have a question about U.S. politics and the economy, send me a message at the email in the show notes. Make sure to include your name and where you're from. And if you're feeling up to it, send us a voice memo. We love those. We may even play it on the show.

17:08This was Swamp Notes, the U.S. politics show from the FT. If you want to sign up for the Swamp Notes newsletter, we've got a link to that in the show notes. Our show was produced by Henry Larson. It was mixed by Sam Giovinco. We had help this week from Lauren Fedor. Special thanks, as always, to Pierre Nicholson. I'm your host, Mark Filippino. Our acting co-head of audio is Topher Forres. Original music by Hannes Brown. Check back next week for more U.S. political analysis from the Financial Times.

17:43Right now, someone is asking AI a question about your industry. They're looking for the perfect recommendation or an accurate solution, and they're ready to act on it. When AI gives an answer, is your brand a part of it or not? Most companies have no idea which. GIST changes that. We show you where you're visible, where you're not, and give you the tools to do something about it. It's time to make AI work for your brand with GIST. Learn more at gist.ai. Capital raising is being redefined in real time, from macro disruptions and shifting investor expectations to AI-driven demand and the rise of private credit.

18:22When headlines can tilt markets overnight, how can companies stay on course? Strategic Alternatives, the RBC Capital Markets podcast, explores how corporates and investors are navigating new pathways to raise capital, create value, and drive growth. When conditions change, alternatives matter. Listen to Strategic Alternatives, available wherever you get your podcasts.