Two private citizens want to end a war
Two American businessmen arrived in Kyiv on 6 September. They want to end a war. Their names are Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, and they hold no official position within the American government, acting instead as private citizens on a self appointed peace mission. It is an extraordinary situation. Their journey did not begin in a friendly capital like London or Berlin but in Moscow, where they had just concluded talks with President Vladimir Putin about what they termed ‘substantive plans’ to stop the fighting.
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy met them. The meeting happened in public. They stood in Sophia Square, with the golden domed Saint Sophia Cathedral, a potent symbol of Ukrainian independence and faith, rising up behind them in the Kyiv daylight. A photograph captured the moment as President Zelenskyy embraced Mr Witkoff, a hug between two men who appear to know each other. ‘It’s good to see you, Steve’, the Ukrainian president said, his words audible to the reporters present.
The mission is an act of shadow diplomacy. This is not a White House plan. Nor is it from the State Department. Kushner and Witkoff represent themselves and, by extension, the world of Donald Trump, their close political and business associate who may yet return to the American presidency. They carry the weight of that potential future with them, a fact that both Moscow and Kyiv must carefully calculate as they engage with these unofficial envoys. The BBC reported that after their Moscow meetings, the pair expressed hopes for ‘equally productive meetings’ in Ukraine, a choice of words that places the onus squarely on Kyiv to match whatever was discussed with the Kremlin. The substance of these plans remains entirely secret, a black box into which Ukraine is now being asked to peer, with the whole world watching to see what it finds inside.
The dealmakers arrive
They are not diplomats. Not in any traditional sense. Jared Kushner is the son in law of Donald Trump, a real estate heir who became one of the most powerful and unorthodox advisors in a modern American presidency. He is known for a quiet demeanour that conceals a relentless focus on closing a deal, an approach he honed not in the embassies of Foggy Bottom but in the boardrooms of Manhattan property firms where billions of dollars were at stake. His signature achievement was the Abraham Accords, a series of agreements normalising relations between Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain, which he pushed through by bypassing decades of established foreign policy orthodoxy and the central question of Palestine. It was a purely transactional success. This is his method.
Steve Witkoff is different. He is a property tycoon in his own right, a long time friend and associate of Donald Trump, and a man whose public profile is far lower than Kushner’s. He has no government experience. His world is finance. His expertise is the skyscraper. Yet President Zelenskyy greeted him with a hug and his first name, a familiarity that suggests a connection deeper than this single mission and which may prove crucial. Witkoff is the personal element, the trusted face in a process clouded by geopolitical suspicion. Together, Kushner and Witkoff represent a specific kind of American power, one rooted in private capital, personal loyalty, and the shared belief that any problem, no matter how complex or bloody, can be solved if the right terms are offered. They see a war not as a clash of histories and national destinies, but as a negotiation that has stalled.
Their worldview is commercial. Everything is a transaction. They build things. They buy things. They sell things. This philosophy prizes outcomes over process, speed over deliberation, and tangible agreements over the abstract principles that often guide international relations. For them, sovereignty, historical grievance, and cultural identity are variables in an equation, potential sticking points to be negotiated around or bought out rather than fundamental truths to be respected. This business centric mindset is precisely what makes their presence in Kyiv so disruptive and potentially so dangerous for Ukraine, a nation fighting a war for its very existence which cannot be neatly resolved like a bankruptcy dispute or a zoning variance application in downtown Miami. The art of their deal is to find a price. The question is what, or who, is for sale.
Why Moscow went first
The meeting happened in Moscow first. That was not an accident. For the Kremlin, the sequencing of this visit is a significant diplomatic victory before any substantive negotiations have even begun. Vladimir Putin hosted the American envoys. He spoke with them. He presented his case. By granting an audience to private citizens linked to Donald Trump, the Russian president projects an image of himself as a leader open to dialogue, bypassing the official, and hostile, government channels in Washington and Brussels entirely. It is a carefully calibrated performance for a global audience, and particularly for an American electorate, suggesting that peace is possible if only the right people were in charge. Russia is portrayed not as an intransigent aggressor, but as a pragmatic power waiting for a pragmatic partner. This is a powerful narrative. It costs the Kremlin nothing.
This approach also functions as a powerful solvent on western unity. It is shadow diplomacy. Its purpose is to create doubt. The entire process implicitly delegitimises the current American administration, suggesting its Ukraine policy has failed and that a different, better deal is available through alternative channels. For European leaders who have invested immense political capital and billions of pounds in supporting Kyiv, the sight of Trump’s son in law being fêted in Moscow is deeply unsettling. It signals that their transatlantic partner might be preparing for a radical policy shift, leaving them exposed and their strategy in tatters. This creates fissures. It breeds uncertainty. The simple act of meeting Kushner and Witkoff allows Putin to whisper in the ear of every allied government that their collective stance is fragile and that American resolve might evaporate after the next election cycle. The message is clear. Washington cannot be trusted.
Finally, the Moscow first strategy places President Zelenskyy in an impossible position. He is forced to welcome two men to his capital, Kyiv, who have just come from a cordial meeting with the leader of the invading army. The agenda for their discussion in Sophia Square has already been invisibly shaped by the conversations that took place in the Kremlin the day before. Ukraine is immediately on the back foot. Zelenskyy cannot refuse the meeting, as that would risk alienating a powerful faction in American politics and appearing to reject a chance for peace, however slim or compromised. Yet by accepting it, he lends credibility to a backchannel process over which he has no control and which began with his enemy. He must smile. He must listen. He must engage with a negotiation whose opening terms were written by his opponent, a reality that turns the simple act of a welcome hug for Steve Witkoff into a painful exercise in political necessity. The pressure is immense.
Zelenskyy’s painful welcome
The greeting was warm. A hug for Steve Witkoff. ‘It’s good to see you, Steve’, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said, his voice carrying across Kyiv’s Sophia Square on 6 September. The performance of cordiality was faultless, set against the ancient gold domes of Saint Sophia Cathedral, a powerful symbol of Ukrainian endurance. It was also an act of profound political necessity. This is a painful welcome. Zelenskyy, the leader of a nation fighting for its survival, is forced to embrace men who have just come from Moscow, their pockets full of what the Kremlin calls ‘substantive plans’ for peace. He has no real choice. To refuse a meeting with allies of a potential future American president would be to risk being labelled an obstacle to peace, a catastrophic branding for a country entirely dependent on western military and financial aid. So he must smile and listen, knowing the script for this conversation was drafted in the capital of the country that is trying to erase his.
This is the impossible position Ukraine now occupies. The country is fighting two battles. One is on the front line with Russian soldiers. The other is here, in the gilded halls and historic squares where diplomacy happens, a battle for political survival where the rules are opaque and the allies are unreliable. By engaging with Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, Zelenskyy legitimises a backchannel that operates outside all official government structures, a shadow process that began not in Kyiv or Brussels but in Moscow. He grants credibility to an initiative that gives his enemy, Vladimir Putin, a direct line into the heart of American politics and a tool to fracture the western alliance that has, so far, held a fragile line against him. Ukraine is put on the defensive. It must react to proposals it did not help form. This is not a negotiation between equals.
Every gesture is scrutinised. Every word is weighed. The hug in Sophia Square is not just for Witkoff or the American television crews. It is a signal to Washington, a message to the faction of the Republican party orbiting Donald Trump that Kyiv is a reasonable partner, willing to explore any path to ending the war. It is an insurance policy. Zelenskyy cannot afford to alienate the people who may control the flow of American weapons and money in the near future. He must consider the risks of a disadvantageous peace against the certain catastrophe of being abandoned completely. He has to show he is willing to talk. The calculation is brutal. Accepting this meeting, with all its inherent humiliations, is deemed less dangerous than the alternative. The risk of a bad deal is preferable to the certainty of no support. The pressure is immense.
The missing governments
Official governments are absent. The White House is silent. So is Downing Street. No statements have come from the Élysée Palace in Paris or from the Chancellery in Berlin, the traditional engines of European foreign policy. This is unusual. Major peace initiatives, especially those involving a nuclear power and the territorial integrity of a European state, are typically the exclusive domain of sovereign governments, conducted through established diplomatic channels like the State Department or the Foreign Office. The Kushner Witkoff mission bypasses them all. It suggests a fracture in western policy. It is a vacuum. The void is being filled by private actors whose ultimate loyalties are not to the state but to a political project centred on Donald Trump.
Washington is paralysed. The current administration finds itself in a bind, unable to condemn an effort ostensibly aimed at peace but equally unable to endorse a process it does not control and which is being run by political rivals. To denounce the mission risks appearing opposed to ending the war. That is a difficult position in an election year. To embrace it would be to surrender American foreign policy to private citizens with their own commercial and political interests, some tied directly to the Trump family's business empire. This paralysis creates an opportunity for Moscow. It allows Vladimir Putin to exploit the divisions within the American political system, using Trump's allies as a lever against the formal policies of the United States government. The official channels are frozen. The backchannels are wide open.
Europe is a spectator. For the European Union, whose member states have absorbed millions of Ukrainian refugees and whose economies are strained by the war, these talks represent a profound marginalisation. Decisions about the continent's security architecture are being discussed in Moscow and Kyiv by two American property developers. It is a humiliation. It is also a warning. The mission is a rehearsal for a potential future, one where American policy becomes purely transactional and unilateral, bypassing traditional alliances like NATO and bilateral relationships built up over eighty years. European capitals watch nervously. They see the coherence of the western response to Russian aggression beginning to fray, not on the battlefield but in these quiet, unofficial meetings. This is what a loss of American leadership looks like.
A plan without details
The phrase 'substantive plans' hangs in the air. This term, reported after the Moscow meeting, is the mission's entire foundation, yet it has no public definition and no content. The plan is a secret. Or it does not exist. This ambiguity allows Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff to project success while forcing Ukraine to negotiate against a ghost, a proposal whose terms are known only to Moscow and two American businessmen. The pressure now falls entirely on President Zelenskyy, who must respond to a peace initiative that may be nothing more than a carefully constructed trap, designed to make him appear unreasonable if he refuses its unknown terms.
The next indicator will be the official reaction. So far there is none. The US State Department has said nothing, and the major European governments have remained studiously silent, treating the talks as a private affair they can safely ignore. That strategy is temporary. It cannot survive a declaration of progress from Kushner. A statement from the envoys claiming a framework for peace has been agreed would force a response from Washington, London and Berlin, compelling them to either endorse a deal they had no part in or risk looking like spoilers. Zelenskyy's next words are equally critical. They will be scrutinised for any hint of concession or commitment following his polite welcome for the envoys in Kyiv's Sophia Square.
Everything depends on what happens now. The fighting goes on. Nothing has changed on the ground. The critical question is whether these backchannel talks produce any verifiable action, such as a local ceasefire, or if they simply generate headlines for a domestic American audience ahead of an election. The mission's success will not be measured by friendly greetings outside Saint Sophia Cathedral but by a tangible reduction in violence or a clear, public proposal that can be debated by the governments actually funding and fighting the war. Until then, these are just talks. Two men are shuttling between capitals. The war continues.
Sources. BBC News World: US envoys set for Ukraine talks after meeting Putin in Moscow. Guardian World: US envoys Kushner and Witkoff arrive in Kyiv after talks with Putin.
Analysis. Drafted with AI assistance from the sources listed above and reviewed by an editor before publication. Jnews links to the organisations it writes about.
