US President Donald Trump claimed he deserved a Nobel Peace Prize for ending “seven wars”, but humans aren’t the only skeptics. ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok, and Perplexity all unanimously said: nope.Trump has claimed several times that he ended wars between Israel and Iran; the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda; Cambodia and Thailand; India and Pakistan; Serbia and Kosovo; Egypt and Ethiopia; and Azerbaijan and Armenia.Nobel Peace Prize is set to be announced on October 10. Whether Trump was able to impress the Nobel Committee members or not would be revealed on Friday, but what’s certain is that AI has given its verdict. And it has its reasons:
Here’s what ChatGPT said
ChatGPT noted that Trump’s claim was “disputed, vague, or exaggerated.” The chatbot went on to analyse each claim:
| Conflict | Did Trump really “end” it? | Evidence / Counterpoints |
| India–Pakistan | Highly disputed | India has denied any US role |
| Thailand–Cambodia | Mixed / limited | Short conflict reports exist; unclear if Trump’s diplomacy was decisive. |
| Armenia–Azerbaijan | Debatable | Tensions eased with tentative ceasefires, but US role not clearly credited. |
| Serbia–Kosovo | Disputed | Some de-escalation, but no full war ended; leaders differ on US impact. |
| Israel–Iran | Very weak evidence | No verified war ended; incidents occurred but “war” claim is unsupported. |
| Egypt–Ethiopia | Weak / speculative | Mainly a Nile Dam dispute; not a full-blown war and unclear US effect. |
| Rwanda–DRC | Some involvement, not conclusive | Trump convened discussions, but “war” may only have been de-escalated. |
“Partially true but mostly overstated,” the chatbot’s assessment noted that “the claim that he “ended seven wars” is not fully supported by evidence.”“Also, ‘ending’ a war or conflict is a high bar — signing ceasefires, preventing escalation, diplomatic pressure, etc., can help, but unless there’s a visible, verifiable, stable ceasefire or peace deal, the claim is very fragile,” it said.
What Elon Musk’s Grok said
Musk owned platform X’s chatbot Grok outrightly said that “Trump doesn’t deserve a Nobel Peace Prize” based on his seven wars claim.Though the platform noted that his efforts had helped make “progress” in these conflict-ridden regions, it said wasn’t “Nobel worthy.”“The Nobel demands transformative, lasting peace, not temporary ceasefires or exaggerated rhetoric. If Trump delivers on bigger conflicts like Ukraine or Gaza, that could shift the case, but as of October 9, 2025, the evidence doesn’t stack up. Progress, yes; Nobel-worthy, no,” it said.
What Gemini said
Weighing both the yes and the no aspects, Gemini concluded that ‘no Nobel prize for Trump’ had a stronger weight.“Foreign policy experts and, in some cases, the involved nations themselves (like India) dispute the extent of Trump’s role in ‘ending’ the seven conflicts he lists, or even whether they were all ‘full-scale wars’ that were fully ‘settled.’ Many are described as temporary ceasefires or incremental agreements that have not resolved the root causes of the conflicts and remain fragile,” it noted.However, Gemini also had arguments in favour of Trump winning the prize.It noted Trump’s “constructive role in securing temporary ceasefires or normalizing relations in a few instances, such as the ceasefire between Israel and Iran, the agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and the Abraham Accords (though not explicitly part of the “seven wars” claim, it’s a major peace achievement of his first term).”
What Perplexity said
Noting the lack of “solid evidence” in the seven wars claim, it said, “As an AI analyzing the available information and expert opinions, Donald Trump’s claim to deserve a Nobel Peace Prize for ending seven wars is highly disputed and lacks solid evidence. While he has been nominated and has made extensive claims of brokering peace, many of the conflicts he cites remain unresolved or contested by involved parties.”Pinning it’s “no” to experts’ opinions, the chatbot said, “Experts consider the odds slim due to the ongoing nature of many conflicts, contested claims, and his broader record that does not fully align with the prize’s ideals.”
Will the Nobel Committee one day regret not awarding Trump, like it did with Gandhi?
AI had a laugh at the Trump-Gandhi comparison— like apples and oranges—or more like “hot sauce and chai.” With a chuckle, Musk’s Grok believes that if Trump doesn’t win, “he’ll probably tweet (or Truth?) that the Nobel’s rigged anyway—unlike Gandhi, who’d just keep marching.”
Meanwhile, ChatGPT did note Trump’s de-escalatory efforts in several war-torn regions, but it too found that the comparison was a little over the top.“While Donald Trump claims he ‘ended seven wars’ and argues he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize, comparing him to Mahatma Gandhi highlights the difference between headline-grabbing diplomacy and lasting moral leadership. Gandhi, who never received the prize, is remembered worldwide for principled, nonviolent action that inspired generations. Trump’s achievements—like the Abraham Accords and troop withdrawals—may reduce tensions, but they are debated and transactional, unlikely to earn the same enduring legacy of peace,” it noted.Ultimately, while Donald Trump has made headlines claiming to have ended “seven wars,” AI and experts alike remain unconvinced that his efforts meet the Nobel Peace Prize’s high bar. Chatbots recognize his role in de-escalating tensions and brokering temporary agreements, but lasting, transformative peace—the hallmark of the prize—remains elusive. As the Nobel committee prepares to announce its decision on October 10, one thing is clear: both humans and machines are raising eyebrows at Trump’s self-proclaimed claim to peace glory.
