The Nobel peace prize is not a contest determined by fame. Yet the betting markets consistently gravitate towards the biggest names in global politics – among them this year, Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
That misses what the prize is for. The real work of building peace is often done far from the headlines: by courts that uphold international law, journalists who document atrocities, and humanitarian organisations that protect communities. With the 2026 prize due to be announced on 9 October, the Nobel committee has an opportunity to remind the world that peace is built through institutions and cooperation, not just diplomatic grandstanding.
Despite the favourable odds, Trump will not win. A sitting president waging a war against Iran is an impossible candidate for a prize intended to advance peace. Whatever Trump’s diplomatic efforts elsewhere, the Nobel committee will consider the totality of a candidate’s contribution – a record that now includes allegations of US war crimes.
The Ukrainian president is also unlikely to win. Awarding the Nobel peace prize to the serving commander-in-chief of a country fighting a major war would risk turning the prize into an endorsement of one side in the conflict, regardless of Ukraine’s right to defend itself. It would also sit uneasily with Alfred Nobel’s will, which called for efforts to promote “fraternity between nations”, reduce standing armies and advance peace.
Look past the headline-grabbing names, and Save the Children, Sudan’s Emergency Response Rooms and the international court of justice all feature near the top of Polymarket’s rankings, with a current combined 28% chance of winning. On these candidates, the markets may well be closer to calling the result. But they are also missing several of the world’s most deserving peace-builders.
As head of the Peace Research Institute Oslo, an independent body that conducts research on the conditions for peaceful relations between nations, groups and individuals, I am regularly asked whether the prize should be awarded at all, given the scale of conflict today. The wars in Ukraine and Sudan continue to exact a massive human toll, while the war involving Iran has added another dangerous front to an unstable international landscape. Our latest conflict trends report recorded 65 state-based armed conflicts in 2025 – the highest number since records began in 1946.
Such a backdrop only strengthens my belief that the more war there is, the more the Nobel peace prize matters.
There is no shortage of worthy people and organisations the prize should honour. Each year, I publish a list of candidates I believe deserve the prize. Several who have featured on past lists have subsequently become Nobel laureates.
This year, my list includes the international court of justice and the international criminal court (ICC). Rules matter only if they can be enforced, and these courts uphold a principle increasingly under pressure: that international law applies even to the powerful. At a time when the US administration is placing sanctions on ICC officials, awarding the courts the prize would affirm the importance of the international legal order.
International law also depends on knowing when it has been broken. Journalists provide the evidence, often at enormous personal risk. The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) recorded 132 journalists and media workers killed in 2025, the deadliest year in its records. It attributed two-thirds of those deaths to Israel. Protecting journalism protects our ability to establish what happens in war – essential for accountability and peace. The CPJ would be a fitting laureate.
after newsletter promotion
Protecting civilians, particularly children, is another fundamental task. Save the Children works globally to prevent and respond to grave violations against children in conflict. In Ukraine, Mykola Kuleba’s Save Ukraine has returned more than 1,700 children from Russia and occupied territories. In Sudan, the Emergency Response Rooms have built community-led networks providing food, medical care and other lifesaving services amid war.
International cooperation creates predictability and reduces the risk of conflict. The International Space Station (ISS) is an extraordinary example: for more than 25 years, geopolitical rivals have sustained a peaceful scientific partnership even as relations on Earth have deteriorated. As the ISS approaches decommissioning and space becomes more crowded, commercialised and weaponised, a Nobel peace prize for the partnership would celebrate what sustained cooperation can achieve – and underscore the continuing importance of keeping space governed by common rules and peaceful collaboration.
Peace is something we construct: it is achieved through cooperation that reduces uncertainty, humanitarian rules that restrain cruelty, courts that impose consequences and journalists who ensure violations cannot simply be erased.
The Nobel committee has an opportunity to turn the world’s attention towards some of the essential tools for securing international peace. In a world breaking records for conflict, it should look past the big names and bet on those doing the painstaking work of building peace.
