.

President Donald Trump has made being a global dealmaker a central part of his presidential brand and is continuing that reputation by claiming that he has already ended six wars in his second term. The president made the claim Monday at a White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and other European leaders, after pledging to bring progress on the ongoing war in Ukraine.

“I’ve done six wars — I’ve ended six wars,” Trump said. “Look, India-Pakistan, we’re talking about big places. You just take a look at some of these wars. You go to Africa and take a look at them.”

The White House has been touting Trump’s record as the “President of Peace” this year, sending out a statement earlier this month that laid out a laundry list of claimed peacemaking achievements across different regions, including Armenia and Azerbaijan, Cambodia and Thailand, Israel and Iran, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt and Ethiopia and Serbia and Kosovo. Officials have also pointed to a set of normalization deals Trump brokered in the Middle East during his first term as the Abraham Accords, in which Israel and several Arab states agreed to resume or establish diplomatic ties.

Is He Offering Genuine Solutions or Branding Ceasefires as Peace Deals?

But some of Trump’s claims have been called into question about whether he is delivering genuine peace or repackaging temporary ceasefires as major peace agreements. In the case of Israel and Iran, the White House celebrated the end of a 12-day war, but tensions between Tehran and Jerusalem over Iran’s nuclear program and other issues remain.

His prior record on peacemaking has also exposed the limits of Trump’s go-it-alone approach. His efforts to stop violence between Israel and Hamas broke down completely, and his first-term summits with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un yielded no progress, leaving the Kim regime with a vastly more powerful nuclear arsenal at the end of Trump’s term.

Nonetheless, he has achieved some symbolic breakthroughs. Earlier this month, Armenia and Azerbaijan signed a declaration at the White House in which they agreed to recognize their shared borders and renounce violence. The agreement, which also includes a U.S.-backed transportation corridor that Trump dubbed the “Trump Route for Peace and Prosperity,” was seen as a major diplomatic win for Trump, with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev hailing the deal as “a miracle.” But analysts say the difficult question of the territorial dispute between the two countries remains.

In Southeast Asia, Trump’s strategy has involved using economic leverage to halt the violence. When clashes between Cambodia and Thailand over a disputed border killed 38 people in late 2019, he threatened to suspend trade agreements with both governments if they didn’t stop the conflict. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) helped to craft the final deal, but Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet still singled out Trump, praising him for showing “extraordinary statesmanship” and even nominating him for the Nobel Peace Prize.

A similar effort was made when Trump waded into a border flare-up between India and Pakistan in May. Pakistan welcomed Washington’s involvement, but India denied that the U.S. played a central role. The ceasefire has remained fragile, with the long-running dispute over Kashmir still on the boil and the two sides vulnerable to further conflict.

Trump has also claimed credit for a deal between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo to end a long-running conflict. The two countries agreed to recognize borders and disarm militias. But the M23 rebel group quickly rejected the agreement, raising questions about its durability. Observers also see U.S. strategic interests at play, with the agreement giving Washington an advantage over China in a contest for Africa’s mineral wealth.

His interventions on Egypt and Ethiopia, meanwhile, are based on a bitter standoff over a massive dam project on the Nile River. Trump has called for both sides to compromise, but no binding deal has been reached so far. The Serbia-Kosovo agreement is similar. Normalization measures are in place from Trump’s first term, but the two nations remain at loggerheads, with the most recent round of talks led mainly by the European Union.

Has He Successfully Applied Pressure?

Trump’s unorthodox style of diplomacy — which favors big announcements and personal branding over detailed negotiations and quiet diplomacy — has had mixed results in each of the cases, observers say. Critics argue that his deep cuts to the State Department and scaling back of the U.S. Agency for International Development are making it difficult for the U.S. to convert short-term deals into longer-term peace.

Nonetheless, some observers say Trump’s interventions have been effective. Celeste Wallander, who served as assistant secretary of defense in the Obama administration and is now a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, said Trump’s involvement in India-Pakistan tensions was handled “in a professional way, quietly, diplomatically … finding common ground between the parties.”

Trump’s track record as the “President of Peace” will now be tested in Ukraine. It is not clear what role he will play in resolving the conflict or if he will make good on his claim of ending six wars so far in his second term. His record so far is a mixed bag: headline-grabbing agreements that fall well short of the mark but a handful of cases where Washington’s economic and political pressure has helped to at least stop fighting from escalating further. The longer-term durability of those outcomes is yet to be seen.