US proposes new security architecture amid Ukraine talks
- The first substantive trilateral talks between Russia, the United States and Ukraine since February have begun in Abu Dhabi.
- The United States is discussing a new security architecture and guarantees for Ukraine, but their specific terms have not yet been disclosed.
- European representatives are demanding a role in the discussions and fear concessions to Russia.
Abu Dhabi talks and the idea of a new security system
Trilateral talks between Russia, the United States and Ukraine have begun in Abu Dhabi—the first substantive discussions between the two warring countries since February, according to a report by The Guardian. U.S. representatives describe one of the goals as seeking a “definitive end” to the war, rather than just a short-term pause. But the start of talks does not yet mean the parties have agreed on terms: the details of the proposals and the possible final format are still under discussion.
Washington is proposing the development of a new, long-term security architecture for relations between Russia and Europe. The U.S. administration links this idea to an effort to find a solution that will work after the conflict ends. The report does not disclose the specific design of such a system. European officials fear that Moscow may seek to reduce NATO’s military presence in Eastern Europe, which they believe could increase Russian influence and create additional risks for allies.
In Europe, concerns extend beyond the contents of any possible agreement to the many parallel negotiating channels. This fragmentation has raised fears that key decisions could be discussed without the coordinated involvement of European governments. European leaders also doubt that Russia is ready to negotiate in good faith and insist on having a place at the negotiating table. As a result, the question of who takes part in the diplomatic process has become part of the dispute over the future security system.
Europe seeks a role and clear guarantees
On Tuesday, European representatives held separate meetings with delegations from Ukraine and the United States. In a joint statement, participants set out the principles they believe future agreements should uphold: respect for Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and right to make its own decisions. The statement also says the country needs reliable security guarantees. It records the shared position of those who attended the meetings, but does not in itself explain exactly how such guarantees might be structured.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the format of future talks is expected to be expanded to include representatives of other European countries. He dismissed concerns that Washington might reach an agreement with Moscow while leaving Europe out, and stressed that Europe is participating in the discussions. Another U.S. administration official also said that the United States needs European involvement to end the war. However, the report does not specify the final composition or working procedures of the expanded format.
Among the possible topics for discussion, U.S. officials cited resuming the work of the Russia–NATO Council, whose activities were suspended after Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. They also said that sanctions against Russia and the possibility of lifting them to reach an agreement could potentially be discussed. These were options mentioned during the consultations, not decisions that have been made. No agreement between the parties or conditions for possible steps on sanctions have been reported.
The substance of the guarantees and possible concessions remains disputed
The U.S. side said it had discussed with Russia possible security guarantees for Ukraine comparable in substance to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which provides for the defense of NATO members in the event of an attack. Russia, however, categorically opposes Ukraine joining the alliance and the deployment of Western troops on Ukrainian territory. Thus, the discussion of guarantees concerns issues sensitive to Moscow, but the report does not specify what mechanism is being discussed or who exactly would be responsible for providing it.
One U.S. administration official described the possible guarantees as a very serious step and noted that Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky would need to discuss the matter. According to the official, if the Ukrainian president opts for such an arrangement, it would require significant commitments in terms of resources, funding, and military support. These remarks indicate the possible scale of U.S. involvement, but do not confirm that any specific commitment has been offered or accepted. A European security official, meanwhile, called the U.S. initiative insufficiently clear for now.
European foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas recalled that the European security architecture already includes international agreements under which Russia pledged to respect, among other things, sovereignty and territorial integrity. In her view, the problem is not that such documents are lacking, but that Moscow does not abide by them. This objection goes to the heart of the American proposal: European participants need to understand exactly what the new system would change compared with existing agreements and how compliance would be ensured.
Moscow’s previous demands and next steps
Another source of uncertainty is Trump’s remark that, as part of a final agreement, Ukraine will probably be required to cede some territory, after which the country may take on “somewhat different contours.” Critics fear that Trump and Vladimir Putin may try to reach an agreement without European leaders and on terms that entail serious concessions to Russia. These are concerns, not an established outcome of the negotiations. A U.S. representative acknowledged that Europeans are extremely cautious about this prospect.
European caution is also linked to Russia’s 2021 proposals, which the publication describes as an ultimatum perceived by NATO. Moscow demanded that the alliance not expand to include new countries, including Ukraine, that troops be withdrawn to the borders as they stood in 1997, and that missile deployments be restricted. NATO rejected these demands, and less than a month later Russia invaded Ukraine. A U.S. official cited this episode while discussing the need to seek a new security system, but European concerns about making concessions to Moscow remain.
After meeting with Kremlin adviser Kirill Dmitriev last week, Trump spoke of his ambition to strike a major deal that could affect all of Europe. Media reports said that U.S. special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner might travel to Moscow and Kyiv after meetings in Abu Dhabi for direct talks with Putin and Zelensky. This is a possible itinerary described in reports, not a confirmed outcome. The details of the guarantees, the involvement of European countries, and the terms on which the parties are willing to discuss ending the war remain open questions.
Source: UNIAN
