- The Nobel Peace Prize, founded by Alfred Nobel, was established to promote peace over destruction, and it continues to honor global peacemaking efforts.
- The 2025 laureate, Venezuelan leader María Corina Machado, was recognized for defending democracy.
- Past controversies, like awards to U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger or U.S. President Barack Obama, still raise questions about whether the prize rewards true peace work.
Alfred Nobel woke up to his own obituary in 1888. A French newspaper had mistakenly reported the Swedish chemist’s death, branding him the “merchant of death” for inventing dynamite. Fearing how history would remember him, Nobel promised to rewrite his legacy. Seven years later, he signed a will establishing the Nobel Peace Prize to honor those who advance humanity. Today, that decision lives on in Oslo, where five committee members from the Norwegian Nobel Committee meet each October to select a peace laureate from hundreds of secret nominations, sticking to the same criteria Nobel wrote 130 years ago.
Nobel, whose invention of dynamite transformed warfare but also revolutionized construction, wanted to counterbalance his creation’s destructive military applications by promoting international cooperation and disarmament. The Peace Prize reflected his belief that scientific progress should advance, not endanger, humanity. In its first year, 1901, the Peace Prize was awarded to Henri Dunant, founder of the Red Cross, and Frédéric Passy, a French pacifist and economist. The inaugural ceremony established a precedent for honoring individuals and organizations working in humanitarian aid, conflict resolution and diplomacy.
Over a century later, the committee still adheres to Nobel’s original guidelines. Nobel specified that the Peace Prize should recognize “the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.” While the criteria for peace work are clear, the mechanisms of how candidates move from nomination to award stay hidden from the public eye. This feature continues to fuel debate about transparency.
The Norwegian Nobel Committee, composed of five members, holds the power to select each year’s laureate. These members are appointed by Norway’s national legislature and typically serve six-year terms. Their deliberations remain confidential for 50 years after each Peace Prize is awarded.
The nomination process follows strict rules and a precise timeline. An online form opens in mid-October annually, and all nominations must be submitted by Jan. 31. Only members of national assemblies and governments, heads of state, international court judges, university professors in specific fields, past laureates and current or former Norwegian Nobel Committee members can nominate candidates.
The numbers reflect growing global interest in peace work. In 2025, 338 candidates were nominated — 244 individuals and 94 organizations — a significant increase from 286 in 2024. On average, the committee receives several hundred different nominations annually. The highest number ever recorded was 376 candidates in 2016.
Despite its global prestige, the Peace Prize has drawn criticism for some of its more controversial selections. Over the years, critics have questioned some choices made by the Nobel committee and whether certain awards reflected political symbolism over merit-based achievements.
One such case is U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s nomination. The Vietnam War, spanning from 1955-1975, was a long and divisive conflict between communist North Vietnam and United States-backed South Vietnam. In 1973, Kissinger received the prize for helping negotiate the Paris Peace Accords, a ceasefire in the Vietnam War, despite authorizing continued U.S. bombing of neighboring Laos and Cambodia. His co-recipient, Le Duc Tho, chief negotiator for North Vietnam, declined the award, believing that the ceasefire had been violated. Upon hearing Kissinger’s selection, two Norwegian committee members resigned in protest, citing the war continued even after Kissinger had won, with North Vietnam invading South Vietnam in 1975.
In 2009, President Barack Obama received the prize less than a year into his presidency. At the time, he did not have many concrete accomplishments, prompting discussion over whether the prize recognized intention or completion. This sparked debate on whether world leaders should be awarded the prize because of their current actions or future impact.
“It has been somewhat opaque in how it makes its decisions about who should be awarded the prize,” Abrams said. “A number of people who were awarded it, we don’t consider them to be candidates for a peace prize.”
These disputes also persist in present day selections. Venezuelan politician and opposition leader María Corina Machado was awarded the 2025 Peace Prize for her resistance to authoritarian rule and her advocacy for representative government in Venezuela. In announcing the award, the Norwegian Nobel Committee chair Jørgen Watne Frydnes praised Machado as a champion of peace. Some argued that the prize reflected a geopolitical choice rather than peaceful work. The chair emphasized that defending the foundations of democracy, even amid disagreement, lies at the heart of democratic values and defines the core principles of the Peace Prize itself.
“I think there is a moderate impact of political factors, like the crisis in Venezuela, which closed embassies in Oslo,” junior Ian Chen said. “So there’s definitely some sort of political message it’s sending.”
These examples underscore the challenge of distinguishing between symbolic recognition and measurable accomplishment. Since its conception, the prize has evolved to reflect society’s changing idea of peace. As challenges change, so does the debate over what qualifies as peacebuilding.
