Bold claim: a global flare-up over a Nobel Prize drama reveals how personal vanity and national diplomacy collide on the world stage. Now, here’s the full, clearer picture of what happened and why it matters.
Norway’s Prime Minister, Jonas Gahr Støre, spoke publicly for the first time about a tense exchange with former President Donald Trump in January. The flare was ignited after Støre sent a text suggesting they work together to defuse Trump’s frequent threats to seize Greenland by force. He proposed de-escalation and stressed that important events around the world require united action.
Trump reportedly rejected that call and fired back with a provocative message. In his reply, he claimed that Norway’s decision not to award him the Nobel Peace Prize after he claimed to have halted several wars somehow removed his obligation to pursue peace. He also insisted that the United States should have complete and total control of Greenland.
At the Munich Security Conference, Støre described his reaction to the episode when speaking with The Atlantic. He said the exchange brought the debate to a level that wouldn’t solve problems and that he wouldn’t engage in a shouting match. He paraphrased his own reply to Trump as, “I take your message; I still think it’s useful to talk.”
The Daily Beast reached out to the White House for comment. A White House spokesperson, Anna Kelly, responded via email, asserting that President Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize multiple times over.
Støre emphasized to The Atlantic that Trump’s fixation on the Nobel Prize didn’t surprise him. The Norwegian prize is awarded by an independent committee, not by the government, which Trump repeatedly challenged. Trump’s ongoing preoccupation—fueled by calls to Norwegian diplomats and public rants about not receiving the prize—led to a controversial turn that even saw the Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado hand the prize to Trump, a move Machado later described as an emotional moment.
Machado explained to Fox News that she presented the Nobel Peace Prize medal on behalf of the people of Venezuela, despite the Nobel Institute’s insistence that the prize is non-transferable. She later said she believed Trump deserved the award.
Trump has previously claimed that Norway wields influence over the prize, remarking that Norway controls the Nobel Prize and expressing disappointment in Norway’s role. Støre stressed that the decision rests with the independent Nobel Committee, not the Norwegian government, and noted that meddling would be unacceptable to diplomats and would require a prime minister to resign if attempted.
Even as he maintained the explanation, Støre told The Atlantic that Trump doesn’t seem to listen on that particular frequency, gesturing toward his ear in a light, almost rueful acknowledgment of the gap in communication.
Yet Støre finished on a constructive note. He praised Trump for engaging with messages and contrasted that with his predecessor, Joe Biden, who, in his view, did not engage in the same way. Støre also stressed that Norway’s relationship with the United States—built on strong cultural and political ties—remains a foundation for finding constructive solutions.
In a January interview with CNN’s Erin Burnett, Støre described how he approached the situation: as prime minister, you must be diplomatic and direct, capable of handling difficult personalities, while recognizing the U.S. remains an essential ally for Norway. This mindset—clear communication paired with pragmatic diplomacy—defines his approach to seeking workable outcomes in a complex geopolitical landscape.
