As 2025 dawned, Donald Trump vowed to reshape U.S. foreign policy by focusing on ending conflicts and promoting “peace through strength.” Throughout the year, he consistently portrayed his diplomatic efforts as peace-oriented, confidently telling reporters, “We believe we have a path to peace.” He even suggested that his achievements were worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize. In support of his vision, the U.S. State Department, in its annual review of diplomatic ventures, underscored initiatives intended to “secure global peace.”

By the year’s end, several conflicts showed signs of diplomatic breakthroughs, though some regions remained plagued by longstanding animosities and violence.

One of the most significant diplomatic strides of 2025 unfolded in October. The Trump administration played a pivotal role in crafting a ceasefire framework between Israel and Hamas. This agreement effectively paused large-scale hostilities that had been raging for months and facilitated the release of all hostages seized during Hamas’ attack on Israel on October 7, with the notable exception of Ron Gvili, whose remains are still held by Hamas.

This ceasefire agreement was proudly highlighted by the administration as a key achievement in its diplomatic agenda for the year. However, while the ceasefire largely persisted through the end of 2025, fundamental issues like Gaza’s future governance, demilitarization, and enforcement measures remained unresolved. Additionally, the region faced the daunting task of rebuilding following extensive destruction and displacement.

Gaza (Israel–Hamas)

As the fighting subsided, U.S. officials continued to collaborate with regional allies to determine the next steps. Discussions between Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump are anticipated next week, focusing on Gaza’s situation and other pertinent issues.

The administration later cited the ceasefire as a central element of its 2025 diplomatic record. While the truce largely held through the end of the year, core issues including Gaza’s long-term governance, demilitarization and enforcement mechanisms remained unresolved, as well as rebuilding the enclave after the massive destruction and displacement. U.S. officials continued working with regional partners on next steps as fighting paused, as Israel’s Netanyahu is expected to meet with President Trump next week for talks on Gaza and other issues. 

US President Donald Trump (C), Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev (L) and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan display the agreement they signed in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington, DC on Aug. 8, 2025. US President Donald Trump said Friday that Armenia and Azerbaijan were committed to a permanent peace as he hosted a White House summit with the leaders of the two South Caucasus nations, which have fought for decades. (Photo by Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images)

Armenia–Azerbaijan

In August, Trump hosted the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan at the White House for a U.S.-brokered peace declaration aimed at addressing decades of conflict tied to Nagorno-Karabakh. The agreement focused on transit routes, economic cooperation and regional connectivity and was promoted by the administration as a historic step.

While the historic declaration was signed, implementation and deeper reconciliation is still ongoing.

President Donald Trump (R) greets Russian President Vladimir Putin (L) as he arrives at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson on Aug. 15, 2025 in Anchorage, Alaska.  (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

Ukraine–Russia war

Ukraine remained the most ambitious and elusive peace target of Trump’s 2025 agenda. The year opened with Trump insisting the war could be ended through direct U.S. engagement and leverage over both Kyiv and Moscow. Diplomacy intensified in August, when Trump hosted Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska, a summit framed by the White House as a test of whether personal diplomacy could unlock a settlement.

In parallel, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was received at the White House, where Trump reiterated U.S. support for Ukraine while signaling that any peace would require difficult compromises. U.S. officials explored security guarantees and economic incentives, while avoiding public commitments on borders or NATO membership.

Ukrainian servicemen of the 44th artillery brigade fire a 2s22 Bohdana self-propelled howitzer towards Russian positions at the frontline in the Zaporizhzhia region, Ukraine, Wednesday, Aug. 20, 2025. (Danylo Antoniuk/AP Photo)

By December, talks accelerated. Ukraine entered new rounds of U.S.-led negotiations, and Trump told reporters the sides were “getting close to something.” On Christmas Zelenskyy said talks with U.S. officials had produced a 20-point plan and accompanying documents that include security guarantees involving Ukraine, the United States and European partners. He acknowledged the framework was not flawless but described it as a tangible step forward. Zelenskyy is reportedly readying a visit to meet with President Trump, possibly as soon as Sunday.

Bloomberg reported that Russia views the 20-point plan agreed to between Ukraine and the U.S. as only a starting point. According to a person close to the Kremlin, Moscow intends to seek key changes, including additional restrictions on Ukraine’s military, arguing that the proposal lacks provisions important to Russia and leaves many questions unanswered.

President Donald Trump arrives for a signing ceremony with Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame and Democratic Republic of Congo President Felix-Antoine Tshisekedi at the Donald J. Trump Institute of Peace, Thursday, Dec. 4, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Democratic Republic of Congo–Rwanda

In early December, Trump hosted the signing of the Washington Accords for Peace and Prosperity between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda. The agreement reaffirmed commitments to end decades of conflict and expand economic cooperation through a regional integration framework.

By the end of the year, Reuters and the Associated Press reported that armed groups remained active in eastern Congo, underscoring the fragility of the accord, though both sides seemed to be invested in a long-term peace.

Indian army officers stands guard near Pahalgam in south Kashmir after assailants indiscriminately opened fired at tourists visiting Pahalgam, Indian controlled Kashmir, Tuesday, April 22, 2025. (Dar Yasin/AP Photo)

India–Pakistan

After a terrorist attack in Kashmir and retaliatory strikes raised fears of escalation, U.S. officials engaged in emergency diplomacy. Trump announced a ceasefire between the two nuclear-armed rivals, with a potentially catastrophic escalation between the two nuclear powers avoided.

Thai Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul and Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet shake hands following the signing of a Cambodia-Thailand peace deal as U.S. President Donald Trump reacts at Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre on October 26, 2025 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

Cambodia–Thailand border dispute

On the sidelines of an ASEAN summit, Trump helped mediate a ceasefire between Cambodia and Thailand following months of border clashes. 

Diplomatic efforts led by ASEAN and supported by external parties are ongoing, but fresh clashes and mutual recriminations between Thailand and Cambodia continue to challenge peace prospects and have led to large-scale displacement and civilian harm. Following the recent flare-ups, and with offers for mediation from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a new ceasefire was agreed upon on Saturday to end weeks of fighting on the border.

B-2s  carried out strike on Iranian nuclear sites in June.  (U.S. Air Force photo by Bobbie Garcia/Maxar Technologies via AP)

Iran–Israel confrontation

Following U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, the Trump administration focused on containing escalation and reinforcing deterrence. No diplomatic agreement followed, but the confrontation did not expand into a broader regional war by year’s end.

Recently Israel warned that Iran might use its ballistic missile drills as a cover for a surprise attack. 

Armed men salute the governor of Sudan’s Red Sea State Mustafa Mahmud in Port Sudan in the war-torn country on July 24, 2024. Sudan has been gripped by war since April 2023, when fighting erupted between forces loyal to army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and the RSF led by his former deputy Mohamed Hamdan Daglo. The conflict in the country of 48 million has killed tens of thousands, displaced millions and triggered one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises. (AFP via Getty Images)

Sudan

Sudan remained one of the world’s deadliest conflicts. U.S. diplomacy has focused primarily on efforts to halt fighting and expand humanitarian access rather than brokering a comprehensive peace.

In December, Saudi Arabia and the United States presented Sudanese army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan with a three-point proposal aimed at ending the war, facilitating aid delivery and transferring power to civilians, according to Sudan Tribune.

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro holds a ceremonial sword said to have belonged to independence hero Simon Bolivar during a government-organized civic-military march in Caracas, Venezuela, Tuesday, Nov. 25, 2025.  (Ariana Cubillos/AP Photo)

Venezuela

As the year closed, Venezuela emerged as the United States’ clearest point of direct confrontation. The administration framed its posture as an extension of its broader “peace through strength” doctrine, even as the risk of escalation lingered.

While the White House pursued de-escalation and negotiated arrangements elsewhere, its approach toward Nicolás Maduro relied almost entirely on pressure, not talks. Trump continued to cast Maduro as a criminal threat tied to drug trafficking, accusing him of rejecting the results of Venezuela’s last election and stealing the presidency.

With no diplomatic channel open, the U.S. maintained sweeping sanctions and stepped up efforts against cartel networks linked to the regime. There was no peace process in sight — but some opposition figures and U.S. allies argued that sustained pressure could still force political change in 2026, and ultimately hasten the end of Maduro’s rule.