Abu Dhabi as a test: are the parties ready to move from words to decisions?

Tripartite negotiations to end the war between Ukraine, Russia And USAheld in Abu Dhabiended without formal agreements, but with the clear intention of the parties to continue the dialogue.

The fact of the end of the round was confirmed by representatives of the Ukrainian delegation, and Russian news agencies reported that the Russian delegation had returned to the hotel.

President of Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky described the negotiations as “constructive”clarifying that the key subject of discussion was precisely parameters for ending the warand not abstract truce formulas.

“The main thing that the discussions focused on was the possible parameters for ending the war. I really appreciate the awareness of the need for American monitoring and control over the process of ending the war and maintaining security,” – Zelensky said, essentially outlining the role of the United States as a central element of the future control mechanism.

According to him, all parties agreed to report in their capitals on each aspect of the negotiations and agree on further steps with the political leadership. The military delegations have already drawn up a list of issues that are expected to be brought up for the next round of discussions.

“If we are ready to move on – and Ukraine is ready – the next meetings will take place, potentially as early as next week,” — Zelensky noted, confirming that the negotiation process has not been completed, but has only been paused.

Against this background, the most sensitive part of the agenda becomes clearer. As previously reported, the key issue of the negotiations in the UAE was the discussion of a possible withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from Donetsk region. This is precisely what, according to media reports, he insists on Russia and this position is said to be supported by the President of the United States Donald Trump.

Thus, the negotiations in Abu Dhabi were devoted not to declarations of peace, but to a discussion of its price and form. The central issue remains not the fact of the cessation of hostilities itself, but conditions, control mechanisms and security guaranteeswithout which any agreements risk remaining temporary.

In fact, the parties separated for internal consultations, without closing the door to continue the dialogue. For diplomacy, this means one thing: decisions have not yet been made, but the framework for them has already been outlined – and it is noticeably tougher than public rhetoric about “constructiveness”.

Source link