Increasing concern within American politics is growing regarding the approaches of former lawyer and businessman Steven Vitkoff, who currently serves as the special envoy of President Donald Trump in the Middle East
According to some reports, he is twisting diplomatic norms in his activities related to contacts with Russia. High-ranking officials and analysts are increasingly questioning his ability to effectively and responsibly carry out this complex mission, especially when it comes to relations with the Kremlin and President Putin’s government. Reports appearing in the British and American press, notably in the New York Post and “European Pravda,” are causing significant resonance in U.S. political circles. According to sources, Vitkoff—who essentially acts as Trump’s personal diplomatic envoy in dealings with Russia—allegedly conducts negotiations autonomously and even reaches out to Kremlin translators, which is a sharp violation of diplomatic standards and etiquette. This raises doubts about his trustworthiness in his role and prompts questions about his professional training and level of responsibility, since traditionally such negotiations involve highly qualified diplomats, interpreters, and experts, and are not conducted in a confrontational manner that could increase tensions and complicate diplomatic relations. A key illustration of these concerns is Vitkoff’s meeting last week with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Reports indicate that the New York official, in a personal conversation with the Kremlin leader, greeted him as an old friend without the presence of advisors, diplomats, or experts. The entire official accompaniment, according to sources, was absent or minimal; Putin was accompanied by Yuri Ushakov—his assistant—and Kirill Dmitriev, head of the Russia Direct Investment Fund. This informal communication style is unusual and could undermine the effectiveness of negotiations, especially on sensitive and valuable issues. John Hardy, director of the “Fund for the Defense of Democracy in Russia,” expressed concern: “Anyone negotiating with Putin knows well that in such cases it is crucial to have a team of experienced professionals capable of defending U.S. interests and facilitating favorable agreements. The absence of such support can lead to unforeseen complications and even the failure of negotiations.” At the same time, analysts note that Vitkoff likely tries to act independently, spreading Putin’s narratives and rushing to advance his own objectives, although his diplomatic experience and competence are seriously questioned. Another problem is that Vitkoff often repeats and disseminates official Kremlin narratives, which contradict the interests of Washington and its allies. This particularly concerns his role in resolving the Ukraine crisis, where the designated special envoy is Kate Kelly, an American diplomat specializing in Ukraine. Any independent initiative by Vitkoff draws criticism from the Biden administration. Experts unanimously agree that Vitkoff lacks the necessary diplomatic experience to handle such complex international issues. His background includes struggles in negotiations with Israeli and Palestinian sides regarding ceasefires and hostages, as well as participation in negotiations concerning Iran’s nuclear program. It appears that such experience is insufficient for managing large-scale, substantive diplomatic processes—especially in the context of conflicts vital for U.S. security and global politics, ongoing in the region. Many experts also point to criticism Vitkoff has faced related to his work on Iranian negotiations. Former Trump national security advisor John Bolton sarcastically noted that any contacts Vitkoff has with Tehran are almost certainly a waste of time, highlighting serious doubts about his competence. Equally pointed is the critique of his involvement in Ukrainian peace processes—earlier, his statements about the possible inclusion of Ukrainian territories in so-called “peace agreements” drew sharp criticism from Ukrainian officials and allies, emphasizing the inadmissibility of spreading Russian narratives through the U.S. representation. Overall, the assessments formed by experts and political analysts suggest that appointing Vitkoff to such an important diplomatic role was a questionable move. His complete lack of diplomatic experience and tendency toward unpredictable actions cast doubt on his effectiveness in resolving the most complex interstate issues. Furthermore, his increasing activity in the context of global politics and regional conflicts raises fears that he could become a destabilizing factor and impede diplomatic processes, especially when efforts to find compromises are urgently needed. At the same time, many analysts and political experts emphasize that this case demonstrates how unstable and unpredictable current U.S. diplomacy is, where sometimes individuals lacking proper diplomatic background or the ability to operate within multilayered and delicate negotiations are appointed to leadership positions. They call on observers to monitor Vitkoff’s activities closely, as his actions significantly influence many important geopolitical decisions affecting international security and stability.