In the world of politics, the tendency to craft a favorable narrative about oneself is an inseparable part of political leaders’ behavior. Donald Trump, the controversial US president, in his second term, has once again seized media attention with his grandiose claims. In recent speeches and interviews, he repeatedly asserted that he ended eight major global wars or conflicts and, relying on diplomacy and economic tools, saved millions of lives.
If these claims were true, they would deserve scrutiny, praise, and even consideration for a Nobel Peace Prize. But do on-the-ground realities confirm Trump’s narrative? This article examines Trump’s claims case by case, comparing them with objective data and independent reports.
Trump and the Structure of His Claims
Trump has long sought to cement an image of himself as a “peace president.” At the United Nations General Assembly in September 2025, he claimed to have ended seven endless wars and then, referring to the Gaza ceasefire agreement, raised the number to eight—a claim he repeated during a meeting with Israeli Knesset members. He proudly spoke of his tariff pressure approach and firm mediation, even accusing the United Nations of inaction.
However, fact-checks by reputable sources such as the Associated Press, CNN, and The Economist show that Trump’s claims are, in many cases, either exaggerated or lack any factual basis, and in some instances, no war existed that could be considered “ended.”
Case-by-Case Examination of Trump’s Eight Claims
1. Thailand and Cambodia
A short-term border clash between Thailand and Cambodia in July 2025, involving landmine explosions and dozens of deaths, ended after Trump threatened to halt trade negotiations with both countries, leading to an unconditional ceasefire agreement. While this action seemed effective, long-standing border disputes persist, and violations of the ceasefire began quickly. Experts consider Trump’s role in temporarily halting tensions effective but limited. Therefore, the claim of “ending a war” is far from reality.
2. Kosovo and Serbia
Trump claimed to have resolved the conflict between Kosovo and Serbia. However, political observers note that in 2025, no war was ongoing between the two sides. His claim mainly refers back to a 2020 economic agreement during his first term, which was neither implemented nor led to lasting peace. In reality, Trump’s role in “ending an imaginary war” is a clear example of his publicity-driven politics.
3. Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo
Eastern Congo’s conflicts, fueled by Rwanda’s support of rebels, have plagued the region for decades. In June 2025, Trump invited diplomats from both countries to the White House, resulting in the so-called Washington peace agreement. However, this deal was signed without the direct involvement of the main actor—the rebel representatives—and brought no change on the battlefield. Reports indicate continued violence and widespread human rights violations. Thus, the claim of ending the war lacks objective basis and is largely symbolic.
4. India and Pakistan
The May 2025 clash in Kashmir, triggered by the killing of Indian tourists, prompted Trump to claim that his threat of heavy tariffs forced the parties into a ceasefire. While Pakistan confirmed this narrative, India explicitly denied any foreign intervention, stating that the ceasefire resulted from direct military negotiations. In the absence of an official agreement and with ongoing border tensions, Trump’s claim again appears propagandistic.
5. The 12-Day War Imposed by Israel on Iran
The 12-day conflict in June 2025 began with Israeli bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities, with the US directly entering the war. Trump proudly claimed that by sending American bombers, he forced Iran into a ceasefire. But the key question arises: how can one end a war they were part of? Despite a temporary halt in operations, no supervisory agreement, crisis-resolution mechanism, or sustainable tension reduction was achieved. At best, Trump ended a war he had helped escalate.
6. Egypt and Ethiopia
The dispute over the Grand Renaissance Dam between Egypt and Ethiopia is a serious diplomatic tension, but no actual war has occurred between the two countries. Trump claimed to have prevented a water war, yet evidence shows there was no serious threat of military conflict, and negotiations had long been stalled. Therefore, the claim of resolving a military conflict is not only exaggerated but fundamentally incorrect.
7. Armenia and Azerbaijan
After decades of conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, Trump hosted the Armenian Prime Minister and Azerbaijani President in August 2025, resulting in an agreement to normalize relations. While this is an important step, fundamental issues such as borders, minority rights, and security guarantees remain unresolved. Analysts consider the agreement “the beginning of a peace process,” not the end of the war.
8. Israel and Hamas
The Gaza crisis entered a bloody phase in October 2023. In October 2025, Trump proposed a 20-point plan that established a ceasefire in Gaza, including a prisoner exchange, humanitarian aid deliveries, and partial Israeli withdrawal. Although this is seen as a positive step, lasting peace cannot be achieved without addressing key issues. Moreover, sporadic attacks and Israeli threats continued after the ceasefire, and the US was also part of the war in this case.
Conclusion
Donald Trump’s claim of ending eight wars, when compared with on-the-ground realities and independent reports, is more a media and publicity operation than a historical fact. In several cases, no war existed (such as Egypt–Ethiopia or Serbia–Kosovo), and in others, fragile ceasefires were established without final agreements or fundamental problem-solving. Trump attempts to portray a successful and peace-oriented image by exaggerating his role in foreign policy and peacemaking, while these claims are largely propagandistic. Therefore, the assertion of ending eight wars in eight months is not only exaggerated but misleading.
MNA/6625417
Your Comment