European, Ukrainian and United States representatives have discussed Ukraine’s future security and the wider European security order at a meeting in Abu Dhabi, ahead of separate talks involving Russia.
The meeting on 10 November brought together representatives of the European Union, France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, Ukraine, the United States and NATO. It was followed by a US-mediated session between Ukrainian and Russian delegations.
The European Council said the earlier gathering focused on coordination towards ending the war and establishing conditions for a lasting peace. The participants supported credible security guarantees for Ukraine as part of any settlement, it said.
That statement describes shared objectives among Ukraine, its European partners and the US. It does not establish that Russia has accepted those objectives, or that a peace agreement has been reached.
Security after the war
The representatives discussed how existing European security institutions and agreements might provide a foundation for arrangements after the war. They also considered ways to manage risks and prevent dangerous escalation, according to the Council.
Participants said future arrangements must respect sovereignty, territorial integrity and independent decision-making. They reaffirmed the central role of a strong NATO in collective defence across the Euro-Atlantic area.
The Council said the aim was to develop a practical security framework that would strengthen Ukraine’s long-term security and build confidence in a negotiated settlement. It did not announce the text of a new treaty or set out a completed system of guarantees.
Before the meeting, US negotiator Jared Kushner had described possible elements of a wider framework, including stronger consultation, reliable communication in a crisis, greater military transparency and reciprocal steps to reduce escalation. Those ideas are not the same as an agreed set of measures.
US officials also said they had discussed with Russia potential guarantees for Ukraine similar to NATO’s collective-defence provision. The officials’ account does not establish that Moscow has accepted such a guarantee or that its terms have been settled.
Under Article 5 of NATO’s founding treaty, an armed attack on an ally within the treaty’s scope is considered an attack on all. Each ally undertakes to assist by taking the action it considers necessary, which can include armed force. Ukraine is not a NATO member, and any separate guarantee would depend on its own terms.
Different views on the next steps
Ukraine’s delegation was led by Rustem Umerov, the country’s foreign intelligence chief. US envoys Steve Witkoff and Kushner took part in the diplomatic effort. The European consultation was separate from the subsequent three-way meeting of Ukrainian, Russian and American representatives.
After the first day, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky described the trilateral discussions as constructive and substantive. He said they had covered humanitarian measures, the release of prisoners of war, security guarantees and steps to reduce escalation.
The president identified prisoners’ release as a priority, but his account did not announce a completed exchange. A further day of trilateral discussions was scheduled for 11 November.
There are also differences over the order in which wider security issues should be addressed. Zelensky said the war should stop and Ukraine’s security guarantees should be addressed before a possible broader discussion about security in Europe and beyond.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, by contrast, expressed support for defining a broad future security framework before resolving the specifics of the war. Russia has also demanded that Ukraine adopt neutral status and not join NATO, while Zelensky has rejected handing over land still held by Ukrainian forces.
EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has pointed to existing European security agreements and accused Russia of failing to respect obligations concerning sovereignty and territorial integrity. The disagreement illustrates why discussing a framework is distinct from settling its content.
The European Council said the partners would continue to coordinate throughout the negotiating process, with the aim of moving towards broader discussions involving European representatives. No timetable for such a wider meeting was announced in its statement.
