Myths about the world: six wars allegedly ended by Trump are named

"I want to go to heaven"

US President Donald Trump often says he has ended numerous wars since taking office in January and that he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize for that.

While in Scotland, the head of the White House proudly declared: “On average, I start one war a month.”

Later, he went even further. While receiving Mr. Zelensky in the Oval Office, Trump again mentioned the “six wars I settled.” The next day, in an interview with the program “Fox and Friends,” he even stated that he “settled seven wars,” although he did not specify which of them he had quietly added to his karma.

In the same interview, explaining his reasons for playing the role of peacemaker, he surprised everyone even more by saying that he "really wants to go to heaven." True, he admitted that for now he has little chance of this. But nevertheless.

At this point, American journalists got excited, and at a press conference they asked White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt about Trump’s afterlife plans.

So Levitt confirmed that "the president was serious": "I think the president wants to go to heaven, as does everyone in this room."

By the way, Trump wanted to go to heaven (if not to say planned) even before his first presidential election in 2016. It was meant that a good presidency is “the only way to get to heaven.”

Perhaps every American president has his own conflicts in one region or another. But Trump has taken his peacemaking to a new level: for the sake of receiving the Nobel Peace Prize, for the sake of overtaking former US President Barack Obama (he received the coveted prize either for his beautiful skin color or for his beautiful but empty speeches), and, ultimately, for the sake of getting into heaven, he uses all means to bring peace to warring countries. And it is not so important whether this peacemaking is effective or just a superficial solution to a deep-seated problem, the roots of which will remain deep in the soil.

In some cases, Trump has indeed been credited by warring parties with promoting peace or calming hostilities. In other cases, his role is disputed or less clear, or fighting has resumed.

But let's look at the wars in order, which ones Trump decided to settle once and for all.

Armenia and Azerbaijan

In August, Trump invited the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan to the White House to sign a joint declaration aimed at bringing their long-running conflict closer to an end. The process Trump initiated was not a peace deal in the traditional sense of the term. But it was the first commitment to achieve one since the Karabakh conflict erupted in the late 1980s.

As part of the deal, Armenia said it would grant the United States the right to develop a major transit corridor through its territory, the “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity.” The project has been called a game-changer for the region’s economics, better connecting Europe with Azerbaijan and Central Asia.

However, it is still unclear when and under what conditions this route will be opened, and serious obstacles to lasting peace remain.

Azerbaijan continues to demand that Armenia amend its constitution to exclude references to Nagorno-Karabakh, not to mention several other territorial disputes between the countries.

Currently, the border between the two states is closed and diplomatic relations remain suspended.

And again, by the way: on August 21, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev stated that the country must be ready for war at any time, emphasizing that national security is based on the strength of the state, its people and its army.

He said Azerbaijan had expanded its military capabilities after the second Karabakh war in 2020, increasing the number of special forces by thousands and creating new commando units.

He added that the arsenal had been replenished with modern drones, artillery systems and fully modernized combat aircraft, and contracts had been signed for new fighters.

By the way, Türkiye also began construction of a railway line from the northeastern province of Kars to Nakhichevan on August 22, taking advantage of the peace agreement signed with US mediation.

Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Rwanda

In June, top diplomats from Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo gathered in the same Oval Office to sign a peace deal aimed at ending a war that has lasted more than three decades.

In fairness, it is worth remembering that Qatar played a role in this agreement. The agreement was supposed to pave the way for a full-fledged peace agreement.

Trump was quick to call the deal a “great triumph.” But talks on a comprehensive agreement have since stalled, and bloody fighting between the sides continues.

On August 18, for example, the main rebel group in eastern Congo, known as the Rwandan-backed Movement 23 (M23), threatened to abandon the US-signed agreement, claiming that its main adversary, the Congolese army, had violated its terms.

One recent report said M23 fighters killed at least 140 people, mostly ethnic Hutus, in farming communities in eastern Congo in July.

India and Pakistan

Donald Trump has also taken credit for brokering an end to the military escalation between the two nuclear powers that erupted after a terrorist attack in Kashmir this spring that killed 26 civilians, mostly Indians.

India has acknowledged the U.S. role as a mediator, but said it was actually negotiating a ceasefire directly with Pakistan. New Delhi says Pakistani officials were pressured by Indian military attacks to negotiate a ceasefire. Pakistan denies this and has thanked Trump for helping end the fighting. The entire Pakistani government has even decided to nominate the American leader for the Nobel Peace Prize.

The differing views have contributed to the deterioration of relations between Washington and New Delhi, which is also playing a role in Trump's trade war.

Pakistan, which has said it will nominate Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize for his mediation, faces 19 percent U.S. tariffs. India, for its part, faces a 50 percent tariff.

Iran and Israel

After 12 days of strikes in June, including US attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities, Donald Trump suddenly announced a ceasefire agreement.

He said the US brokered the deal and said Israel deployed its warplanes at his direction.

“It was my great honor to destroy all nuclear facilities and capabilities and then STOP THE WAR!” he wrote, in his traditionally emotional tone, in Truth Social.

While neither side has disputed the US role in the ceasefire, its durability remains in question. Talks between Iran and the US over the future of Tehran's nuclear programme, which Israel sees as an "existential threat", have broken down.

While U.S. intelligence assesses that the U.S. bombing has caused serious damage to Iran's most advanced uranium enrichment facility, some experts believe Tehran could eventually resume enriching the uranium needed to build nuclear weapons at other sites.

Cambodia and Thailand

The two Southeast Asian neighbors have been locked in border fighting this summer that has left at least 42 people dead and displaced more than 300,000 people in the line of fire, in one of the bloodiest conflicts between the countries in decades.

At the height of the clashes, Trump and his administration were discussing trade deals with a range of countries, and the White House chief said he had told the leaders of Thailand and Cambodia that he would end trade talks unless they agreed to a cease-fire.

Two days later, officials met in Malaysia for talks hosted by Malaysian and American representatives and reached an agreement to end the fighting.

“I hope they get along for many years to come,” Trump said afterward. But it’s not that simple. Critics of Trump’s approach to resolving tensions say his interventions have not addressed the underlying problems of the conflict, even though the fighting has stopped.

On Friday, August 22, it was reported that the Thai Bumyazhthai Party called on all political forces to support the cancellation of the 2000 and 2001 Memorandums of Understanding between Thailand and Cambodia concerning land and maritime borders.

According to Thai officials, the Cambodian side has allegedly violated the terms of these agreements more than 600 times since the border conflicts escalated.

The 2000 memorandum defines principles for demarcating the land border, while the 2001 agreement addresses the maritime border in an area believed to be rich in natural gas deposits.

While supporters of the agreements argue that they are necessary to maintain diplomatic channels, critics insist that the documents undermine Thailand's sovereignty and lead to territorial encroachment.

An alternative view is that even without these agreements, bilateral negotiations with Cambodia can continue in a constructive manner.

Egypt and Ethiopia

This is probably one of the conflicts that hasn't made much headlines in the media. The thing is that these countries are not so much facing a military conflict, but a diplomatic dispute over Africa's largest hydroelectric power station.

However, there were (and still are) concerns that it could escalate into full-scale military action. In 2020, Trump even claimed that Egypt had threatened to “blow up” the dam.

Trump’s diplomacy has done little to resolve the dispute. Ethiopia recently announced the completion of the dam, which is scheduled to open officially next month. Egypt and Sudan continue to oppose the project, fearing it will restrict the flow of Nile water to their countries.