In a surprising statement that underscores the gravity of the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton said she would personally nominate President Donald Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize—if he successfully negotiates peace between Russia and Ukraine without territorial concessions to Moscow.
The comment came during Clinton’s appearance on the Raging Moderates podcast, where she discussed Trump’s meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The summit, which took place in Anchorage, Alaska, marked a high-stakes moment in Trump’s second term, as he attempted to fulfill a central 2024 campaign promise: ending the war in Ukraine.
“If President Trump were the architect of [a peace deal], I’d nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize,” Clinton told host Jessica Tarlov. She made clear that any such recognition would be contingent upon a deal that maintains Ukraine’s territorial integrity and does not validate Russian aggression.
A Deal Without Concessions?
Clinton, long a critic of both Trump and Putin, acknowledged the difficulty of securing a deal under such terms. But she emphasized that if Trump could broker a ceasefire and ensure Russian withdrawal from occupied territory, it would mark a significant diplomatic achievement.
The war, which began with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, has caused tens of thousands of casualties and triggered a major geopolitical crisis in Europe. Trump has long argued the war never would have happened had he been in office, and has promised repeatedly to end it quickly if re-elected.
Trump’s Push for Peace — and Pressure on Putin
Trump announced in May that peace talks would be initiated following a two-hour phone call with Putin. Since then, the president has applied increasing pressure on the Kremlin, expressing frustration with Putin’s reluctance to come to the negotiating table. On July 14, Trump gave the Russian leader a 50-day deadline to engage in peace talks, threatening “severe” economic consequences if no progress was made. He later shortened that deadline to “10 or 12 days” in response to continued resistance from Moscow.
Trump imposed a 50% tariff on Indian imports on August 11 due to India’s continued purchases of Russian oil. The decision was part of a broader strategy to isolate Russia economically and force Putin to reconsider his position.
As part of this final diplomatic push, U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff met with Putin in Moscow on August 6. The three-hour conversation focused on outlining a framework for potential peace negotiations, according to White House sources.
A Nobel Nomination—And a Political Turnabout
Clinton’s remarks reflect a rare moment of potential political unity, at least in principle. Though a staunch opponent of Trump, she stated unequivocally that she would support global recognition of his efforts if they lead to a just and stable peace. “If he could bring about the end to this terrible war… that would be deserving of recognition,” Clinton said.
While critics remain skeptical about Trump’s ability to achieve such a deal, especially given Putin’s insistence on retaining some Ukrainian territory, the prospect of peace—backed by economic leverage and direct diplomacy—has begun to take on greater plausibility.
If Trump succeeds in securing peace, it would not only mark a dramatic turn in U.S.-Russia relations but also reshape Trump’s legacy on the world stage. For now, in the aftermath of Alaska, the world is still waiting with baited breath.
READ NEXT: Russia Gains Ground In Ukraine Ahead Of Trump-Putin Meeting
I doubt she believes there is the proverbial “snowball’s chance in H3ll” she will have the chance to renege on the promise.
Unless there is something in it for Mrs Clinton, I wouldn’t trust her support for President Trump to be genuine for one moment.
Her comment was not a compliment. Like all the slimy deep staters, she qualified her statement with “if Russia gives back all the land”. That will never happen and she knows it. Her goal was to frame the argument so that Trump will fail the qualificaiton of her statement. Establishment types have used that phrase since the war began. “We want peace IF Russia gives back all the land”, knowing full well that it will never happen. That way they can cliam to want peace but in reality they do not want peace in any terms that could possibly materialize.