In any negotiation, one of the most powerful weapons is knowledge. In that regard, Steve Witkoff is willfully disarmed.
And it’s playing just right for Russia.
The interview that Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy, gave to Tucker Carlson a few days ago revealed a truth that was perceived especially bitterly here in Ukraine:
In the negotiation where everything is at stake, Ukraine’s most powerful ally is represented by a man who either knows next to nothing about Ukraine or woefully misunderstands it. Moreover, the resulting vacuum is being filled with the propaganda that Russians feed to him.
Observing it from Kyiv, knowing that Witkoff is among the people deciding Ukraine’s future, was sobering and terrifying.
Although Witkoff, Donald Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, wasn’t yet officially appointed to lead the negotiations with Russia, informally he has sidelined the Russia envoy Keith Kellogg. It happened due to his success brokering the ceasefire between Israel and Gaza — which has crumbled. One wonders if his approach to the Middle East deal was as devoid of factual knowledge as his tactic with Russia is.
In the interview, Witkoff revealed two key things. One is his apparent infatuation with Russian President Vladimir Putin. No surprises there, since it appears to be a job requirement for anyone in the current U.S. administration.
Witkoff praised Putin for respecting Trump by ordering a portrait of him drawn by a renowned Russian artist, and for praying for Trump following his assassination attempt.
He and Carlson contrasted it with President Volodymyr Zelensky’s “disrespectful” behavior toward Trump during the infamous Oval Office meeting. “The arrogance of small countries!” Carlson quipped. “The ignorance of small men,” we’d like to say back to him. (Here’s our editorial about that meeting).
But after praising Putin, Witkoff moved on to reveal something even worse: His utter lack of knowledge about Ukraine and the war.
At the center of this conflict, Witkoff said, is the fate of “these so-called four regions.” He made an attempt to list them, only to fail embarrassingly.
“Donbas, Crimea…” he started.
“Luhansk,” Carlson helpfully added.
“Yes, Luhansk!” Witkoff said. “And two others.”
Neither of these two men who have strong opinions on Ukraine and Russia (and in the case of Witkoff — the power to dictate their futures) even know the names of the embattled regions of Ukraine that Russia has pronounced theirs.
Here’s a primer for Witkoff and Carlson. The four regions they were trying to recall are: Donetsk Oblast, Luhansk Oblast, Zaporizhizhia Oblast, and Kherson Oblast. “Oblast” is a region. Like a state, but with less autonomy.
These regions have suffered the bulk of Russian aggression, they have bled and lost countless lives and cities. The least they deserve is for people to remember their names.
All four regions are partly occupied by Russia, but in two of them — Kherson and Zaporizhzhia — Ukraine controls the regional capitals. Donbas is an unofficial name of the region that encompasses both Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts. Crimea, which Witkoff tried to put in the same line-up, is a separate entity, a fifth region. It was illegally annexed by Russia in 2014. The annexation wasn’t recognized by the international community.
However, the name confusion wasn't the most concerning issue in the special envoy’s interview.
At the next turn, Witkoff said that the regions were “Russian-speaking” and “there have been referendums where the overwhelming majority of the people have indicated that they want to be under Russian rule.”
This is a dangerous lie.
These statements aim to show that the partially occupied regions belong with Russia anyway — and therefore, should be just given to Russia, no big deal.
They are among the most frequent arguments Russia and its agents have been using to justify Russia’s claims on Ukraine — but hearing them from a person with direct influence on the fate of the war is new, and worrying.
And what’s the reality? It’s true that many people in Ukraine, especially in its eastern and southern areas, speak Russian as their first language. They are not ethnic Russians. They are Ukrainians who speak Russian as the consequence of long years of eradication of the Ukrainian language, first by the Russian Empire, then by the Soviet Union, and its replacement with Russian. Still, they didn’t entirely succeed, and even in the most affected regions, people often speak a mix of two languages. The share of Ukrainian speakers has been growing since Russia’s attack in 2014, and more so since the full-scale invasion in 2022, as people choose to switch to Ukrainian.
Importantly, for Russian-speaking Ukrainians the language isn’t a marker of political affiliation or allegiance. To put it simply, Ukrainians can speak the Russian language and hate Russia at the same time. There are Russian-speaking Ukrainian soldiers fighting against Russia in the trenches.
Finally, there are Ukrainians working at the Kyiv Independent whose first language was Russian — and they are far less pro-Russian than some special envoys.
The other Russian lie that Witkoff disturbingly signs on to is the supposed “referendums” that the occupied regions held, where “the overwhelming majority of the people have indicated that they want to be under Russian rule.”
There was no such vote. In September 2022, when Ukraine was on the offensive, Russia announced so-called “referendums” in the occupied parts of four Ukrainian regions. It was a farce in which Ukrainians had to vote at gunpoint (here’s an example of it). The Kremlin announced, groundlessly, that 98% of the population “voted” to be a part of Russia, and declared annexation. (Here’s our editorial about it).
The validity of these sham referendums is recognized only by North Korea — and now, apparently, by U.S. special envoy Witkoff.
To contradict the outcome of the “referendum,” when less than two months later the Ukrainian army liberated the city of Kherson, thousands of city residents took to the streets in celebration. Since then, Russia has been attacking Kherson daily, killing civilians in the city they claim is theirs.
As Ukrainian journalists, we are no strangers to correcting the misconceptions about Ukraine, or calling out Russian propaganda. But increasingly so, we are forced to correct misconceptions coming from the people with direct influence on the fate of our country.
Watching Witkoff’s interview from anywhere in the world can be embarrassing. Watching it in Kyiv is also frightening.
For Ukrainians, everything is at stake in this war — and in these negotiations. We already know the U.S. representatives will be rooting for Russia, not Ukraine. But Witkoff’s interview raises the question — can the sharp turn of U.S. foreign policy be rooted in incredible ignorance?
The Kyiv Independent
