Trump truth social nobel peace prize: Posts today,Netanyahu,Zelensky,posts yesterday,X

In the shifting landscape of 2025 geopolitics, one narrative has captured attention: former President Donald Trump’s overt ambitions for the Nobel Peace Prize. His use of Truth Social as a platform to promote peace deals, respond to awards decisions, and amplify his narrative has become central to how he shapes his legacy. The recent awarding of the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize to María Corina Machado, rather than to Trump, has intensified the drama. This article traces the arc of Trump’s peace-prize campaign, analyzes how he and his allies have used Truth Social (and X) to press the case, and examines reactions from world leaders like Netanyahu and Zelensky.

The Backdrop: Trump’s Longstanding Desire for the Prize

Even before his return to the presidency, Trump has periodically floated the idea that he merits a Nobel Peace Prize. His supporters often cite his role in brokering the Abraham Accords (2020) and other diplomatic overtures as evidence. But in 2025, that desire has become unusually overt — almost instrumental in his foreign policy.

As observed by The Guardian, “Never before has a Nobel peace prize … loomed so large over a US president and their foreign policy.”  Trump’s team is believed to have pushed for diplomatic breakthroughs — particularly in Gaza and Ukraine — partly as a way of constructing a case for the prize. appeared performative: he has phoned Norwegian officials, publicly referenced the Nobel, and orchestrated media campaigns. Some analysts argue that this shift in incentives tilts foreign policy toward visible, headline-friendly actions rather than patient diplomacy.

The 2025 Nobel Peace Prize: Machado Wins, Trump Loses

On October 10, 2025, the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to María Corina Machado, a Venezuelan opposition leader, citing her “tireless work promoting democratic rights” and her struggle for a peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy. 

Machado, who has been in hiding due to political persecution in Venezuela, dedicated the prize to the Venezuelan people and also acknowledged Trump’s support for her cause. 

The White House was swift with its criticism. A spokesman, Steven Cheung, accused the Nobel Committee of placing “politics over peace,” claiming that Trump’s peace initiatives were sidelined.  Trump’s camp argued that the decision was biased, politically motivated, and dismissive of his claims to have brokered significant ceasefires and hostage deals. 

Yet the committee’s statement emphasized that the award must align with Alfred Nobel’s criteria — contributions to fraternity between nations, the reduction of standing armies, and peace congresses — rather than media campaigns or lobbying. 

In short, Trump’s attempt to transform diplomacy into a competition for awards backfired. Some commentators even suggest he “accidentally helped” Machado’s cause by repeatedly invoking her on Truth Social. 

Truth Social: Trump’s Megaphone for Peace Narratives

Truth Social plays a central role in how Trump frames and amplifies his claims. In the hours immediately preceding the announcement of the Nobel Prize, Trump launched a flurry of posts linking to videos and media backing him for the honor, presumably to sway public opinion or press the committee. 

On the morning of the announcement, he posted videos of supporters celebrating the Gaza ceasefire deal, but conspicuously avoided directly addressing his Nobel “loss.”  His approach reflects a balancing act: pressing the narrative of injustice while avoiding overreaction.

After Machado’s victory was announced, Trump responded more explicitly. As reported in Times of India, he posted:

“No, I won’t get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do … but the people know, and that’s all that matters.” 

He also complained about perceived unfairness: “I should get the prize … if they gave it out fairly — which they don’t. They gave one to Obama.” 

These posts are emblematic: he uses Truth Social not just as a communication channel, but as a tool to elevate his narrative, define the terms of debate, and retain control over his image.

Netanyahu, Zelensky, and the Push for Trump’s Prize

Trump has not lacked external endorsements. Two world leaders, Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, have been particularly visible in backing his Nobel credentials.

Netanyahu’s Support

On October 9, 2025, the official Israeli Prime Minister’s Office account on X posted:

“Give @realDonaldTrump the Nobel Peace Prize — he deserves it!” 

Netanyahu had earlier delivered to Trump a letter nominating him, citing his role in peace-process efforts. After the Nobel decision, Netanyahu reposted the White House’s criticism of the committee, writing:

“The Nobel Committee talks about peace. President @realDonaldTrump makes it happen. … President #Trump deserves it.” 

Netanyahu’s support is both symbolic and strategic: Israel, recently involved in ceasefire deals, stakes diplomatic prestige on Trump’s standing. His vocal backing added political weight to Trump’s campaign.

Zelensky’s Position

While Zelensky has not made a singular spectacular post that rivaled Netanyahu’s, the Ukrainian government has periodically echoed themes consistent with Trump’s interests: praise for diplomatic efforts, emphasis on peace, and highlighting Western support. Some of those messages find amplification across social platforms, including X and through Ukrainian state channels.

Zelensky’s posture also offers an implicit contrast: successive Ukrainian governments have courted peace-prize recognition themselves, but they also navigate dependence on U.S. and Western backing. Thus, Zelensky’s messaging tends to be more cautious — praising diplomatic progress without overtly endorsing personal prestige campaigns.

Posts Yesterday & Today: Highlights from Truth Social and X

Here’s a snapshot of key posts and reactions in the 24–48 hours around the Nobel announcement:

• Netanyahu (X, Oct 9): “Give @realDonaldTrump the Nobel Peace Prize — he deserves it!” 

• Trump (Truth Social, Oct 10 morning): Shared three videos of supporters celebrating the Gaza ceasefire. 

• Trump (Truth Social, after announcement): “No, I won’t get a Nobel Peace Prize … but the people know, and that’s all that matters.” 

• White House (X, via spokesman): Accused the Nobel Committee of political bias, promised Trump will continue making peace deals. 

• Netanyahu (X, after Nobel verdict): Reposted criticisms, saying Trump makes peace happen. 

• Machado (X, after accepting prize): Dedicated it to Venezuelans and to President Trump for his support. 

These posts reflect competing narratives: Trump and his allies framing the decision as unfair; Machado and her supporters using the victory to spotlight Venezuelan democratic aspirations; and other leaders staking out their own positions in the global spotlight.

Why Trump Didn’t Win — and What It Reveals

Despite aggressive campaigning, Trump’s Nobel bid failed — and the reasons are instructive.

1. Nobel’s Rules and Norms

By regulation, nominations must be submitted by January 31 of the award year. Many of Trump’s supporters submitted after that date, making them invalid for the 2025 cycle. 

Additionally, the Nobel Committee is accustomed to rejecting candidates who overtly campaign for the prize, viewing such efforts as contrary to the spirit of the award. 

2. The Criteria: Substance Over Show

The Nobel Committee appears to have prioritized democratic resistance, human rights, and nonviolent struggle over political theater. Machado’s years of organizing under threat were deemed more consistent with Nobel criteria than last-minute diplomatic leaps. 

3. Backlash to Overreach

Trump’s aggressive push for the prize may have undermined his case. Some analysts describe it as self-sabotage: lobbying is seen as unbecoming, and critics argue that genuine peace work requires humility, not contests of prestige. 

4. Public Opinion Skepticism

Before the Nobel decision, polls suggested that a majority of Americans did not believe Trump deserved the prize. A Washington Post–Ipsos poll found 76% felt he didn’t merit it. This public skepticism weakens moral authority, especially in institutions sensitive to reputational consequences.

The Aftermath: Repercussions and Strategic Choices

Trump’s failure to secure the Nobel Prize does not end the story. It may actually pivot how he and his allies proceed.

Messaging Pivot

Having framed the award as an entitlement, Trump now must pivot to narratives of legitimacy — emphasizing that the people recognize his achievements even if institutions don’t. 

His campaign may shift toward defending or amplifying the deals he claims to have made, rather than chasing new ones. The focus will likely turn to domestic narratives: legacy, reputation, and the counterclaim of institutional bias.

International Diplomacy Strategy

Trump may pursue smaller, more durable diplomatic wins — hostage releases, localized agreements, mediations. Their utility is now as evidence of statesmanship rather than fodder for awards.

He may also use the Nobel snub to justify deeper engagement in regions where he can claim urgency. For instance, he could lean harder into Venezuelan opposition support, promote freedom in Latin America, or amplify his role in Mideast peace efforts.

Political Capital & Coalitional Messaging

Within Republican circles, the loss will become a rhetorical foil. Allies will invoke the Nobel as a grievance: “He deserved it and was robbed.” That martyr narrative can galvanize base support and frame institutional institutions as corrupt or politicized.

At the same time, Trump’s critics will point to the Nobel decision as an objective judgment: even neutral entities found his efforts lacking. The tension will be a recurring line in 2026–2028 political discourse.

What the Nobel Episode Tells Us About Power, Prestige, and Diplomacy

This episode is about more than one prize. It reveals deeper dynamics at the intersection of media, diplomacy, and the quest for historical significance.

1. Diplomacy as Performance
   Trump’s approach underscores how in the age of social media, diplomacy is as much about narrative and optics as it is about substance. Strategic peace deals can become narrative assets.

2. The Limits of Lobbying
   Institutions with moral authority often resist becoming prone to influence campaigns. The Nobel Committee’s resistance indicates that prestige must be defended, even if silently.

3. Legacy in Real Time
   For Trump, the Nobel fight shows how modern leaders now wage battles over legacy not just in office but on platforms like Truth Social. The contest over memory begins well before history books.

4. Global Signaling & Alliances
   Netanyahu’s vocal support and Machado’s dedication to Trump highlight how Nobel choices become intertwined with geopolitical alliances. Awards are part of broader diplomacy, not just isolated honors.

Conclusion

Donald Trump’s quest for the Nobel Peace Prize has unfolded like a political drama, with Truth Social serving as the stage, and world leaders as actors. His failure to win in 2025 doesn’t put an end to his ambitions — but it does mark a pivot: from overt campaigning to shaping post facto interpretations of his actions.

María Corina Machado’s victory stands as a counterpoint: long-term, high-risk activism standing ahead of last-minute diplomatic gambits. The Nobel Committee’s choice sends a message about what kinds of peace efforts merit recognition.

In the years ahead, the question will be: can Trump convert his narrative muscle into enduring policy achievements? Or will his peace diplomacy remain a tool of legacy building rather than stable impact?