Jared Kushner’s controversial return signals a Trump-era diplomacy redux.
Jared Kushner’s return to the heart of peace talks, and in one of the world’s most sensitive geopolitical crises, once again demonstrates that foreign policy in Donald Trump’s second term has become more than ever a web of personal relationships, private investments, and persona-centric displays of power. Kushner, who in the first Trump administration was responsible for everything from Middle East peace to structural reforms in the United States, is back on the scene this time without an official title but with full real-world influence.
It is worth noting that his presence in the negotiations regarding the Russia-Ukraine war – an area in which he has neither a history nor special relationships – is more a result of Trump’s style of governance than a product of his experience: reliance on personal confidants, not organized diplomacy.
In this structure, loyalty is more important than expertise, and financial or friendly connections sometimes trump institutional mechanisms of foreign policy.
Kushner and Steve Witkoff, two figures more known for their real estate and investment careers than for their diplomacy, have been trying to end a war that has struck at the heart of European security. The fact that Witkoff has previously spoken in a pro-Moscow tone with Vladimir Putin’s adviser, and the fact that Kushner is a shareholder in companies that are funded by Gulf sovereign wealth funds, have raised serious questions about their impartiality.
In the Geneva talks, Kushner’s demeanor—taking notes, asking questions, and paying attention to Ukraine’s positions—has led some European diplomats to consider his presence valuable. But it’s important to note that the value of a mediator at this level is not just about his personal style; it also depends on whether he can influence Trump’s decision-making structure.
Trump, who has repeatedly claimed to be pressuring Benjamin Netanyahu or his desire for a compromise between Moscow and Kiev, has shown that for him, negotiations are more of a business deal than a diplomatic process with historical consequences.
In such a context, Kushner is not a technocrat but a Trump-style special envoy: someone who draws his credibility not from the State Department but from his family relationship and symbolic capital with the president.
On the other hand, the cautious welcome of some Ukrainians and Europeans to Kushner’s presence is more a sign of an attempt to influence the real channels of influence in the White House than a sign of trust in him.