Pakistan’s recent decision to nominate US President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize has become a source of acute embarrassment and controversy, highlighting the country’s precarious diplomatic balancing act in a volatile region.

Initially, the nomination was framed as a recognition of Trump’s “decisive diplomatic intervention” in the May 2025 India-Pakistan conflict, which saw the two nuclear-armed neighbours reach a US-facilitated truce after the most intense cross-border violence since 1971. Pakistani officials praised Trump for his “remarkable strategic insight and exemplary statesmanship,” crediting him with preventing a potentially catastrophic escalation and positioning him as a “genuine peacemaker”.

However, this narrative unravelled almost immediately after the US, under Trump’s leadership, joined Israel in launching strikes against Iran—a country with which Pakistan maintains close ties and whose actions Pakistan had previously defended on the world stage.

The abrupt shift forced Pakistan into an awkward position: having just lauded Trump’s peace making credentials, Islamabad was now compelled to publicly condemn the very same leader for authorizing military action that Pakistan described as a violation of international law and an affront to regional stability.

The backlash within Pakistan was swift and severe. Lawmakers, former diplomats, and political commentators openly criticised the government’s nomination, calling it “awkward” and “embarrassing” on social media and in public statements.

Former ambassador Maleeha Lodhi argued that ingratiation with Washington cannot substitute for a coherent foreign policy, while Mushahid Hussain, a prominent former Senate Defence Committee chair, reversed his initial support and demanded that the government “revise, revoke and rescind” Trump’s nomination, now labelling him a “warmonger”. JUI-F chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman echoed these sentiments, urging Islamabad to withdraw the nomination and denouncing Trump for his role in violence against Palestinians, Iraqis, and Afghans.

This episode has exposed the “incredibly thin” diplomatic tightrope Pakistan is walking—caught between the desire to cultivate favor with the US administration and the imperative to stand by regional allies and uphold its own principles. The rapid about-face has not only undermined the credibility of Pakistan’s foreign policy but also fuelled a perception of opportunism and inconsistency, leaving the government scrambling to contain the political fallout at home and abroad.

In sum, what began as a calculated gesture to curry favour with the Oval Office has, in the wake of US military action against Iran, devolved into a diplomatic blunder—one that starkly illustrates the risks of reactive, personality-driven foreign policy in an era of unpredictable global crises.

Agencies