While personal ambition can be a useful driver, Donald Trump’s obsession with being granted a Nobel Peace Prize warrants examination.As far as I can discern, previous recipients have had as their goal, not personal aggrandisement, pride or legacy, but one more altruistic, the peaceful resolution or prevention of major hostilities.

I had to look up the list of conflicts that the President claims to have resolved. The BBC, who I trust, said of them ‘A number of these conflicts lasted just days, although they were the result of long-standing tensions – and one of them had no fighting to end. It is also unclear whether some of the peace agreements will last.’ Wise words

. Does anyone think that Israel and Iran are now bosom buddies, that Rwanda and the DRC are picnicking together, or that Pakistan and India have resolved their territorial or ecumenical issues?The two conflicts that continue to dominate our screens and headlines are the Ukraine war and the ultimate peaceful existence of Israel and Gaza-Palestine. The latter is a conflict with a history measured in millennia, but to call it a war was always an abuse of the English language. In a war, as in Ukraine, both sides have tanks, artillery, aircraft and uniformed infantry.

The attacks from Gaza into southern Israel have always been terrorism, with a harsh response desired as the spark for insurrection. Be careful what you wish for.In the former, Ukraine is facing another difficult winter without power, while the Russian economy continues to go up in smoke – literally, with the nightly destruction of its oil storage and facilities. One online wit describes this as the Kiev branch of Just Stop Oil, though I’m sure that it is the burning of oil that this principled organisation wishes to stop.By all accounts, Vlad the Invader has very little left of his military hardware, his financial war chest, or the support of his oligarchs, while Europe appears to have decided that it is very important that Putin does not win the war in Ukraine, not least due to fears of what he would do next. He is close to being the iconic mad leader directing fictional forces from his bunker.

In some eyes, both sides appear close to defeat, though neither shows signs of buckling.Putin’s unwavering demands and relentless sacrifice of his infantry, at the rate of 1,000 each day, leaves Ukraine no sensible way out, and his maniacal dedication to his cruel and senseless task leaves no room for a just peace. He also has no exit clause.As the President of a military and financial superpower (and notwithstanding signs of its decline), Trump has the wherewithal to coax, to threaten, to bribe others to his will, or at least persuade them to feign it. But is that enough to deserve plaudits and prizes?His pitch is complicated by the way he seems to view the leaders of Russia and Israel as kindred spirits, strongman leaders whom Trump seems to admire for their brutality, their ignoring of international rules and norms, and simple approach to attaining their goals.

Trump is not one of them, but he cannot be the archetypal Nobel bringer of peace and play favourites at the same time.It appears that Trump hates and fears the liberal West, one of whose representatives – judging by past actions – is the Nobel Peace Prize Committee. A Trump win would be extremely controversial in many eyes, and they would therefore need to consider whether an award to the current U S President would bring the Peace Prize into disrepute.