PRESIDENT Donald Trump wants to be known and acknowledged as a `man of peace`.

But his imperious conduct and record so far are at sharp variance with this. True, his instincts are against war, and he vowed not to involve the US in foreign entanglements and what he called `endless stupid wars`. This is what he promised in his election campaign. He also claimed he would end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours.

During the presidential campaign, J.D. Vance described Trump as the `candidate of peace`. In his victory speech Trump declared, `I am not going to start wars. I am going to stop wars.

But in his opening days in power, his aggressive statements sent a message that no `man of peace` would be identified with. He threatened to take over Greenland and the Panama Canal, if necessary by military force, and turn Canada into the 51st state of the US by using `economic force`. He also said the US would `take over Gaza` and relocate Palestinians outside their homeland. He unleashed a trade war by imposing sweeping tariffs against almost all countries in the world. His bullying approach and coercive methods prompted The Economist to describe him as a modern-day Don Corleone. Others likened his leadership style to mafia tactics both at home and abroad.

Despite Trump`s boastful claims of bringing a quick end to the Ukraine war, he has been unable to do that. He claims to have promoted peace in the Middle East by forging a ceasefire between Israel and Iran following their 12-day war. But lighting a fire and then putting it out hardly makes him a peacemaker. Israel, the aggressor, would never have attacked Iran in the first place without a green light from Washington. Trump acknowledged he had advance knowledge of Israel`s June 13 military assault. But he did nothing to stop Benjamin Netanyahu. Instead, he used nuclear talks with Iran as a smokescreen while the Israeli military was preparing to attack Iran. Trump later described the attack as `excellent` and admitted he had coordinated closely with Netanyahu. Then, in flagrant violation of international law, he ordered US warplanes to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities, declar-ing triumphantly this had `completely obliterated` Iran`s nuclear sites and likening it to nuclear bombs dropped by the US on Japan in World War II. Is this what `men of peace` do? PersuadingIsraelandIran to agree to aceasefire, which remains fragile, hardly supports Trump`s assertion to have established peace.

Yes, the fighting has stopped for now, but peace is an altogether different matter. Peace is established when disputes or issues are resolved. A ceasefire is what it says it is a halt in active hostilities. Ceasefires can, of course, be a pathway to peace. But there is no chance of peace between Iran and Israel, who remain implacable enemies. Meanwhile, Trump declared he would bomb Iran again if the country was still able to enrich uranium to weapons-grade.

What contradicts Trump`s `peacemaker` claim in the most barefaced way is his role in and support for Israel`s genocidal war on Gaza. Despite his earlier statements that he wanted an expeditious end to the war, his actions prove the contrary. He has thus far shown no willingness to restrain or stop Netanyahu from raining death and destruction on Gaza. While Trump has been trumpeting his peacemaking `credentials`, Gaza has only seen more bloodshed, displacement, devastation, and now, starvation and famine.

Close to 60,000 Palestinians have been killed in Israel`s US-backed war, the majority of them women and children. In fact, since Trump`s assumption of power, Israel has expanded its military offensive in Gaza and threatened to occupy all of the territory. It has blocked humanitarian aid and used starvation as a weapon. Has Trump intervened to prevent any of this or, for that matter, Israel`s increasing military assaults on the occupied West Bank? Obviously not. Instead, the US has used its veto to block resolutions in the UN Security Council calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. The most recent veto was exercised earlier this month that opposed an `immediate and permanent ceasefire`; it was the sixth US veto since the war began.

This has given Israel carte blanche to continue its killing spree and create a catastrophichumanitarian crisis in Gaza. The Trump administration has remained unmoved by scenes of desperate, starving Palestinians, including children, being shot in cold blood by Israeli forces as they queue up for food at controversial militaryrun aid distribution sites set up with US backing.

In one month alone, over 500 aid-seekers have been killed. Washington has also not denied Israeli leaders` claims that they are implementing Trump`s plan of forcible displacement of Palestinians by pushing them out of Gaza.

Despite this grim record, Trump feels he should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Although he has cited several reasons for this, his claim rests principally on brokering a ceasefire between India and Pakistan after their fourday conflict. For that, the government of Pakistan recommended him for the Nobel Peace Prize. This ill-conceived move, aimed at ingratiating itself with Trump, was justified by the government on the grounds that he had intervened to de-escalate `a rapidly deteriorating situation` and secure a ceasefire that averted `a broader conflict between the two nuclear states`. It is disingenuous to argue Trump`s intervention was the decisive factor, when it was nuclear deterrence that prevented the outbreak of all-out war.

Defusing a crisis, which Washington did, is not the same thing as averting a full-blown conflict.

If it took Trump to avert a `broader conflict`, that would make Pakistan`s nuclear capability irrelevant. If that is what the government thinks, then it has no confidence in the country`s security guarantor. Moreover, a peace award should be in recognition of the establishment of peace, which happens when contentious issues are resolved between warring parties. Has that happened? What is touted as Trump`s doctrine of `peace through strength` is nothing other than the unilateral use of force and coercion in defiance of international law and global norms to impose US will. This is a recipe for chaos, not winning the peace. • The writer is a former ambassador to the US, UK and UN.