On November 10, 2026, in Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates, negotiations between Ukraine, the USA, and Russia resumed for the first time since February. Formally, the discussion is about ending the war. However, a Reuters source in the Russian delegation called the settlement in Ukraine only part of a broader task: creating a new security system for Europe.
Author: Elena Gunko
While diplomats meet, Russia continues strikes on Ukrainian energy ahead of winter, Ukraine attacks Russian oil refineries, and the front line stretches approximately 1,200 kilometers. Ukraine, meanwhile, lacks missiles for the Patriot systems.
Who is at the table
The mediators are Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, Donald Trump’s son-in-law. The Ukrainian delegation is headed by the head of the Foreign Intelligence Service, Rustem Umerov; working with him are the head of the presidential office Kyrylo Budanov, Serhiy Kyslytsia, David Arakhamia, and Vadym Skibitsky.
The Russian group of 11 includes Vladimir Medinsky, Deputy Foreign Ministers Sergey Ryabkov and Mikhail Galuzin, head of military intelligence Igor Kostyukov, and General Staff representative Yuri Zhigarlovsky.
Before the trilateral meeting, Ukrainians and Americans held separate consultations with the UK, France, Germany, Italy, NATO, and the European Commission. Moscow did not agree to seat Europeans at the common table, although Washington intends to seek their participation in future rounds.
“Big Deal” and old Kremlin demands
After a meeting on November 5 with Kremlin representative Kirill Dmitriev, Trump announced a possible agreement affecting not only Ukraine but also Europe.
Kushner listed five directions: permanent security consultations, emergency communication during crises, transparency of military actions, mutual risk reduction of escalation, and long-term stability. At the same time, he separately promised to respect the sovereignty of countries and their right to independently choose alliances.
But Moscow has long invested a different meaning in the concept of European security. In December 2021, it demanded that NATO limit the deployment of troops and weapons in countries that joined the Alliance after 1997.
This is not about excluding Poland, the Baltic states, Finland, or Sweden from NATO, but about reducing military infrastructure in the eastern direction. There is currently no US agreement to such a revision.
American officials allow for the resumption of the Russia-NATO Council, easing sanctions, and guarantees to Ukraine modeled on Article 5 of the Alliance treaty. These are discussed options, not an agreed deal.
Threat before negotiations
On November 9, Ryabkov stated that a possible war between Russia and Europe would be “different and very short.” He spoke about the Baltic Sea, Kaliningrad, and alleged obstacles to Russian shipping.
At the same time, the diplomat claimed that Moscow does not plan to attack first. Therefore, the statement should be understood as a conditional military threat, not a message about a scheduled attack; the mentioned scenarios for 2029–2030 are also not an established forecast.
Territories and guarantees: where disagreements lie
According to Reuters, the American representative allows for a territorial compromise: in exchange, Ukraine is offered an end to the war, security guarantees, and a path to EU membership.
But a high-ranking Ukrainian interlocutor of the agency rejected Kyiv’s readiness to cede territories. Such issues, he said, can only be resolved by state leaders and with reliable guarantees.
Russia still demands the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from the Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson regions, which it declared its own, although it does not fully control them, Ukraine’s renunciation of NATO, restrictions on its army, and changes in language and church policy; Kyiv rejects these conditions.
Zelensky seeks a ceasefire, protection of energy, freedom of navigation in the Black Sea, prisoner exchanges, and a meeting of leaders. Reports that a truce will not be on the agenda at all contradict the stated Ukrainian priorities: its discussion and actual achievement are different things.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on November 9 that guarantees must be acceptable to Russia as well.
For understanding the dispute: Article 4 of NATO provides for consultations in the event of a threat, Article 5 for collective defense, but not automatic identical military intervention by all allies. There is no approved guarantee project; a treaty with the US would require complex ratification in the Senate.
Europe and a weakened Trump
Kaja Kallas reminds that a security system already exists — NATO, the EU, and treaties that Russia violates.
After surveying 12 European and NATO officials, Politico reported concerns: a new deal could be linked to the December review of the American military presence in Europe.
In the November 3 elections, Democrats gained a majority in both houses of Congress; the new composition will begin work in January 2027. It will become more difficult for Trump to pass laws and international treaties, but he will not be deprived of foreign policy powers.
Expert Vladimir Dubovik does not see new ideas from Washington for a breakthrough. Maria Zolkina believes that the weakening of Trump also affects Putin: the Kremlin may lure the US president with the promise of a major victory, hoping for a split in Europe and Ukraine, and then shift the responsibility for failure onto them. Democrats, in turn, may begin investigations into the administration’s activities.
Why this concerns Israel
Negotiations resumed after a nine-month pause, influenced by the US-Israeli war against Iran.
For the Israeli reader, not only this context is significant. A precedent is being discussed: how effective are security guarantees if their conditions must be approved by a potential aggressor?
Changes in Congress will also affect the White House’s ability to make decisions on Ukraine and the Middle East, but do not predetermine their content.
So far, the start of negotiations and the expansion of the topic to European security have been confirmed. Washington promises to include Europeans in the future format, but the timing and conditions are unknown.
There are no territorial concessions from Kyiv, no agreement from Washington to return NATO to the 1997 configuration, and no agreement on a ceasefire.