In brief
In Abu Dhabi, Russia, Ukraine and the United States prepared for a second day of talks amid conflicting signals from Moscow and uncertainty about European involvement. United States President Donald Trump expressed optimism about a “big, beautiful agreement,” while Russian spokesman Dmitry Peskov denied that a ceasefire would be part of the agenda. Ukrainian, Russian, and foreign‑policy experts outline realistic expectations for the negotiations, noting the obstacles and opportunities presented by the trilateral format.
In Abu Dhabi on 9 November 2026, delegations from Russia, Ukraine and the United States convened for the second day of a high‑level meetings aimed at resolving the Ukraine conflict. The talks took place against a backdrop of conflicting signals: U.S. President Donald Trump predicted a “big, beautiful agreement,” while Russian officials remained skeptical of any breakthrough.
Trump met with Russian special presidential envoy Kirill Dmitriev in Washington on 5 November, declaring that the discussions could produce an agreement that "might involve all of Europe." The optimism echoed in back‑to‑back meetings in Washington and Abu Dhabi, yet the Kremlin’s stance appeared unchanged. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov reiterated that Moscow does not plan to halt combat operations ahead of the trilateral talks and that a ceasefire would not give Ukrainian forces a respite.
The Russian delegation in Abu Dhabi is led by presidential aide Vladimir Medinsky, a choice that analysts at the Institute for the Study of War see as a sign that the Kremlin is not ready for good‑faith negotiations. Medinsky’s previous conduct at the Geneva meeting in February 2026 stalled progress by focusing on the abstract "historical roots" of the war.
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha, speaking at the Ministerial Meeting of the Council of the Baltic Sea States in Warsaw on 6 November, said the Abu Dhabi negotiations will cover security guarantees, de‑escalation in the Black Sea, the energy sector, prisoner exchanges and a roadmap for a future leaders’ meeting. Ukrainian experts maintain a cautious outlook. Former ambassador Andriy Veselovsky told Ukrinform that the trilateral talks are unlikely to bring immediate results, framing them instead as an opportunity to persuade President Trump’s supporters of the need to back Ukraine.
The brief ceasefire announced last week in Oleshky, which saw limited humanitarian cooperation, underlined the urgency of the talks but also illustrated how stalled the conflict remains. Some observers point out that the exception of a brief humanitarian pause in Oleshky does not signal a broader policy shift.
Trilateral Dynamics and European Ambivalence
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s spokesperson voiced that the Abu Dhabi talks will remain strictly trilateral, involving Russia, Ukraine and the United States. He said that European participation is unlikely, noting that "American channels of communication with Europe are already in place" and that the Ukrainians have their own coordination mechanism. The speaker highlighted that upcoming discussions on European security architecture, such as the Russian‑NATO Council, were brought to the table in a briefing on Monday.
In a related briefing, Peskov stated that Moscow, Beijing and Washington are exchanging proposals for a possible meeting of the leaders on the sidelines of the Asia‑Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit. He added that a wide range of issues could be discussed at that possible face‑to‑face encounter, but did not confirm the inclusion of the Ukraine crisis in the agenda.
“The future talks in Abu Dhabi will remain trilateral between Russia and Ukraine with the United States acting as mediator. European participation is unlikely.”
Dmitry Peskov, Russian Presidential Spokesman, said this at a briefing in Moscow.
The lack of clear European involvement signals a potential gap in the international community’s ability to push for a comprehensive settlement. While the United States plays a mediating role, it has not yet secured a firm European position that may be essential for any lasting agreement.
Experts anticipate that the talks will continue to highlight glaring differences between the parties. Peskov’s emphasis that the shape of Ukraine is already a "different country" based on realities on the ground underscores a central point of contention: whether or not a ceasefire and a negotiated settlement are possible within the current framework.
Both parties enter the second day with entrenched positions. The U.S. president’s optimism is backed by rhetoric of a potential European‑wide accord, while Moscow’s insistence on non‑ceasefire commitments signals that any resolution will require significant concessions. The outcome remains uncertain, and observers across the globe continue to watch the unfolding negotiations, hoping for a break in the long‑standing deadlock.
