Donald Trump has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize this week, this time for organizing an epoch-making deal between Siberia and breakaway republic Kosovo. In a piece published on Friday, The Atlantic magazine called for the termination of the prestigious honor citing the president's nomination.

Trump's name was suggested for the 2021 prize by Norwegian politician Christian Tybring-Gjedde, who alluded to the president's role in organizing a peace agreement between Israel and the UAE (United Arab Emirates). Trump's second nomination comes from Swedish lawmaker Magnus Jacobsson who cited his role in supervising an economic deal between Kosovo and Siberia.

Trump's nomination didn't sit well with the magazine, which announced Friday, "peace had its chance, and blew it." The liberal magazine's staff writer Graeme Wood pointed out that if Trump won the prize, it will be the fourth Nobel allotted for peace between Israel and its neighbors.

Wood went on to explain that the nomination makes Arab-Israeli peace mediators more effective when it comes to impressing the Nobel Committee than the International Committee of the Red Cross, which has won three times in 120 years of the prize’s history, adding that it is still relatively unsuccessful than his favorite, which he wrote 'is no one at all."

He insisted that the Nobel Committee should consider revising its tradition of not handing out the peace prize to anyone at all, on a permanent basis if possible. Wood then pointed out that the record achievement of the peace laureates is fluctuating, while the rationales for their awards is so wide-ranging, that the committee should go on a hiatus and think about whether peace is a category logical enough to be worth recognizing.

Wood suggested that peace had its chance but ruined it, referencing Trump's nomination for the prestigious honor. Describing Tybring-Gjedde's nomination of the president, Wood said Trump's main diplomatic maneuver is to adopt an obsequiously demeanor towards those in power, assuring them decades in authority, in return for condo development and for a smile.

He said peace does not allude to a web of personal agreements between rich antisocial personalities. The contraction of the peace price, Wood said, should be evident by now. He went on to ask whether the prize is been given for peace, or for rumors of peace.

Wood raised questions such as whether someone deserves a prize for maintaining authoritarians, as long as they are part of a stable network. Furthermore, he asked whether it is been given for accidentally destroying a great military, or only if the wrecking is intentional.