Trump's Envoy Heads to Moscow and His Mission Betrays Ukraine

This week, Steve Witkoff, a New York real estate tycoon and Donald Trump’s handpicked envoy, will land in Moscow to meet with Russian officials, including Vladimir Putin. The visit, announced by Kremlin aides, marks another chapter in the Trump administration’s bewildering pivot toward cozying up to Russia, a move that threatens to unravel decades of U.S. foreign policy rooted in democratic values and collective security. For those who believe in standing firm against authoritarian aggression, Witkoff’s trip is a flashing red warning.

At the heart of this diplomatic gambit is a proposal that feels like a betrayal of Ukraine, a nation fighting for its survival against Russia’s unprovoked invasion. Witkoff, a businessman with no diplomatic credentials, is reportedly pushing terms that echo Putin’s demands: recognizing Russia’s grip on five Ukrainian territories and blocking Ukraine’s path to NATO. This isn’t diplomacy; it’s capitulation dressed up as pragmatism, and it sends a chilling message to allies worldwide.

The stakes couldn’t be higher. Russia’s war in Ukraine, now in its third year, has exposed the fragility of international norms against territorial conquest. Yet, instead of rallying behind Kyiv, the Trump administration seems eager to broker a deal that rewards Moscow’s aggression. For Americans who value justice and sovereignty, this approach isn’t just misguided—it’s a moral failure that risks emboldening autocrats everywhere.

Witkoff’s role as Trump’s envoy only deepens the unease. His ties to Kremlin-linked billionaire Len Blavatnik, whose real estate ventures with Witkoff have raked in over $1 billion, raise serious questions about conflicts of interest. When a U.S. negotiator’s business dealings intertwine with Russian elites, it’s hard to trust that America’s interests, or Ukraine’s, are the priority.

Witkoff’s Moscow mission fits a broader pattern in Trump’s second term: a foreign policy driven by transactional deals rather than democratic ideals. Since taking office in 2025, Trump has leaned heavily on business allies like Witkoff to navigate complex global crises, blurring the line between diplomacy and commerce. This approach, rooted in the conservative Project 2025 blueprint, prioritizes economic gains and deregulation over human rights or international law.

The evidence is stark. Trump’s administration has floated sanctions relief for Russia as part of peace talks, despite the devastating impact of over 16,000 sanctions since 2022, which have slashed Russia’s banking assets by 70% and cratered U.S.-Russia trade from $36 billion in 2021 to just $3.5 billion in 2024. These measures have hobbled Russia’s economy, forcing it to rely on China and shadow fleets to skirt oil export bans. Easing sanctions now would not only undermine years of pressure but also signal to Putin that aggression pays off.

Contrast this with the Biden administration’s unwavering support for Ukraine, which paired robust military aid with sanctions to weaken Russia’s war machine. That strategy, while imperfect, kept the focus on Ukraine’s sovereignty and NATO’s unity. Trump’s pivot, by contrast, seems to treat Ukraine as a bargaining chip in a larger game of countering China, a strategy that misreads Russia’s deepening ties with Beijing, where bilateral trade hit $237 billion in 2023.

Witkoff’s advocacy for terms that favor Moscow—like recognizing the 2014 annexation of Crimea—ignores the human cost of Russia’s actions. Over 10 million Ukrainians have been displaced, and thousands have died defending their homeland. To those who argue that a quick deal brings stability, the response is clear: peace at the expense of justice is no peace at all. It’s a lesson history teaches, from Munich in 1938 to the annexation of Crimea itself.

The implications of Witkoff’s mission extend far beyond Ukraine. By sidelining NATO and encouraging Europe to fend for itself, Trump’s administration is fraying alliances that have underpinned global security since World War II. European leaders, already rattled by Trump’s deprioritization of NATO, see Witkoff’s talks as a sign that the U.S. is willing to sacrifice smaller nations for geopolitical expediency. This erosion of trust could leave the West fractured at a time when unity is critical.

Russia, meanwhile, remains a resilient threat. The U.S. intelligence community warns that Moscow continues to deploy cyberattacks, disinformation, and gray-zone tactics to undermine Western democracies. Rewarding Putin with territorial gains or sanctions relief risks emboldening these tactics, not curbing them. For those who champion a rules-based international order, this is a reckless gamble that could haunt the U.S. for decades.

Back-channel talks, like those in Switzerland involving American and Russian interlocutors, offer a faint hope of de-escalation. But these unofficial efforts, while valuable, can’t substitute for principled leadership. Witkoff’s high-profile role, steeped in business ties and opaque motives, undermines the transparency needed for credible diplomacy. Americans deserve a foreign policy that reflects their values, not one that mirrors the dealmaking of a corporate boardroom.

As Witkoff prepares to meet Putin, the urgency for a course correction grows. The U.S. must reject a foreign policy that trades democratic principles for short-term deals. Supporting Ukraine’s fight for sovereignty isn’t just about one nation; it’s about defending the idea that might doesn’t make right. Lawmakers, activists, and citizens who believe in justice must demand accountability from an administration that seems all too willing to appease autocrats.

The path forward lies in doubling down on support for Ukraine, strengthening NATO, and maintaining sanctions that have brought Russia’s economy to its knees. These steps, grounded in a commitment to human rights and international law, offer a vision of American leadership that resonates with those who see the world not as a chessboard for dealmakers, but as a community of nations bound by shared values. Witkoff’s Moscow trip may mark a low point, but it also galvanizes the fight for a foreign policy worthy of America’s promise.