The White House’s claim that Donald Trump is focused on “saving lives” reveals a deep philosophical divide with the Nobel Committee, which, by honoring María Corina Machado, has shown its focus is on “building rights.” This fundamental difference in perspective explains the 2025 prize decision.
The “saving lives” argument, often used to justify pragmatic deals like ceasefires, prioritizes immediate, quantifiable results. It is a crisis-management approach to peace, focused on stopping bloodshed in the short term.
The “building rights” approach, embodied by Machado’s work, is a long-term, structural view. It argues that true, lasting peace is impossible without the foundations of democratic rights, free elections, and the rule of law. It seeks to prevent the crises that lead to bloodshed in the first place.
The Norwegian Nobel Committee has historically favored the latter approach. While they appreciate the importance of ending wars, the prize is most often awarded to those who are constructing the framework for a more just and peaceful world.
This year’s decision is a classic affirmation of that preference. The committee chose the patient work of building a democratic foundation in Venezuela over the dramatic act of negotiating a ceasefire. They chose the long-term cure over the immediate treatment.
