There is a delicious irony unfolding in the White House. The one person who appears genuinely interested in securing peace in Ukraine is not Donald Trump, who has repeatedly promised to end the war, but his wife, Melania. While the president and his secretary of war, Pete Hegseth, have favoured muscular rhetoric and military posturing, the first lady has quietly been pursuing something rather different: humanitarian diplomacy that has brought Russia and Ukraine to the negotiating table.

There is an extraordinary symmetry in the possibility that Melania, rather than her husband, might one day find herself being seriously considered for the Nobel Peace Prize. I would certainly not begrudge her the recognition if she could bring a little more humanity, humility and genuine statesmanship into the White House.

After all, Melania Trump is something of an anomaly in the Maga universe. Born in Slovenia, she is a naturalised American citizen and the first first lady whose native language is not English. Her European background offers a perspective that can sometimes seem conspicuously absent from an administration whose instincts are rooted in an increasingly inward-looking version of American nationalism.

Now she appears to have achieved something tangible. A ceasefire in the Russian-occupied Ukrainian city of Oleshky has come into force, allowing humanitarian assistance to reach civilians and creating an opportunity for civilians trapped there to escape. The agreement, announced by the White House, is a rare example of direct humanitarian diplomacy between the two warring countries.

Oleshky, in the Kherson region, has been under Russian occupation since February 2022. Its remaining population is estimated to number between 1,700 and 2,000, many elderly and vulnerable. Food, medicine and clean water are desperately short. For these people, a humanitarian corridor is not an abstract diplomatic achievement. It could quite literally be the difference between life and death.

Melania says she and her representative have worked directly with Russian and Ukrainian officials to secure the arrangements. This builds on her previous involvement in efforts to reunite Ukrainian children separated from their families during the war. It is an unusual role for a first lady, but one that appears to have produced practical results.

There are, however, some deeply troubling qualifications. Under the arrangements, civilians leaving Oleshky may initially be transported to Crimea or Russia before being allowed to return to Ukrainian-controlled territory. That is hardly an ideal humanitarian corridor, particularly given the record of Russian occupation and the serious concerns surrounding the forced transfer of Ukrainian civilians.

More worrying still are reports from Ukrainian soldiers that Russia may be exploiting the pause in fighting to prepare further military operations. Drone footage has reportedly shown Russian KamAZ military lorries transporting troops and equipment, while anti-drone netting is being installed around the industrial area of Kakhovka, east of Oleshky.

One Ukrainian soldier warned that Russian forces could be preparing a renewed offensive towards Kherson once the ceasefire expires on Nov 1. If these reports prove accurate, it would be a familiar and deeply cynical Russian tactic: use a humanitarian pause to reposition forces and prepare for the next assault. A ceasefire must never become cover for an offensive. The Ukrainians have every reason to remain vigilant.

Nevertheless, we should not dismiss what Melania Trump has achieved. In a war where diplomacy has repeatedly struggled to make progress, even a limited agreement that allows food, medicine and civilians to move safely is significant. For the people of Oleshky, the immediate consequences matter far more than the political theatre surrounding it.

There is a wider lesson here for the president. Donald Trump has made little secret of his desire to be recognised as the man who ends wars. But peace is not simply a transaction, nor is it a property deal in which the parties divide the spoils and the most powerful walk away with the greatest reward.

A sustainable settlement in Ukraine must recognise that Russia invaded a sovereign country. Any lasting peace must respect Ukraine’s independence, territorial integrity and right to determine its own future. The danger is that a White House too preoccupied with the appearance of a diplomatic victory may overlook the difference between ending the fighting and securing a just peace.

Ukrainians have already paid an appalling price for the international community’s failure to deter Putin. They should not now be expected to pay again by accepting a settlement that rewards aggression.

Perhaps Melania understands something that her husband and his advisers have yet to grasp: behind the grand declarations, geopolitical manoeuvring and presidential ambitions are ordinary people whose lives have been destroyed by war.

If Melania finds herself being considered for the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo next year, it would be an irony I suspect many would enjoy. Her husband has made no secret of his own desire for the award. But perhaps the greatest prize she could bring home would be something rather more valuable: a lesson to the president that peace is about humanity, not personal glory, and that true statesmanship begins with putting other people’s lives before self-interest.

And if the Russians do misuse Melania’s peace deal to mount a treacherous attack, perhaps this might at last make her husband realise he is being “had” by the tyrant in the Kremlin.