Abu Dhabi Talks on Ukraine ـ Leverage in Negotiations and Their Limited Impact
European Centre for Counterterrorism and Intelligence Studies (ECCI) Germany & The Netherlands
The war in Ukraine, which began on February 24, 2022, has entered its fourth year. The end still seems far off, despite renewed talks in Abu Dhabi in February 2026. Military expert Markus Reisner explains why the prospects for a resolution appear better than ever.
Delegations from Ukraine, Russia, and the United States met in Abu Dhabi to negotiate an end to the war. Yet peace remains elusive. Instead, Russia continued to bomb Ukrainian cities and infrastructure while maintaining its customary demands in the negotiations.
Markus Reisner, a colonel in the Austrian Armed Forces, stated, “The Russians will not budge an inch in negotiations unless they feel pressure.” However, both the United States and European actors have long lacked such leverage. Nevertheless, the military expert believes that the chances of ending the war are higher today than ever before.
Russia’s Strategy to Strengthen Its Negotiating Position
Russia has significantly intensified its air raids in 2026. Damage to Ukrainian power plants and substations has reached a level likely irreparable until after the war. For Ukraine, this represents a strategic weakness. Russia has increased pressure by refusing to reduce its attacks, despite U.S. President Trump’s assurances that Putin would honor a purported peace commitment regarding the energy sector.
Against this unfavorable backdrop, Ukraine entered the negotiations. Russia clearly sees itself in a position of strength, reflected in the talks. The Russians have no desire to make concessions. Reports indicate that Russia now demands not only full control over Donbas but also recognition of this claim by all negotiating parties—a demand Ukraine rejects as unrealistic.
President Zelensky has already expressed readiness for a Ukrainian-side settlement by proposing a freeze along the current frontline. Other proposals included a mutual withdrawal from a demilitarized zone in Donbas, contingent on effective security guarantees.
Washington’s Strategy to Pressure Russia and Ukraine
Since 2025, the U.S. President has stressed the urgent need to end the war and has exerted significant pressure on Ukraine. Analytical data shows that Russian air campaigns have intensified in both scale and scope since Trump took office.
Reisner explains: “The Russians want to demonstrate their dominance in this war.” This seems to have influenced Trump and his advisors, who initially considered freezing support for Ukraine entirely. However, according to reports, CIA Director John Ratcliffe persuaded Trump to continue providing Ukraine with intelligence, applying pressure on Russia. Ratcliffe understands that the Russians will not yield in negotiations without significant pressure—they must feel immense strain to make concessions.
The U.S. has taken a cautious approach. Comparing the current American military buildup in the Middle East with support for Ukraine makes priorities clear, as even Trump acknowledges. So far, the only agreement reached in Abu Dhabi involves a new prisoner exchange, leaving Donbas unresolved.
A key point of contention is the management of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. Reports suggest the U.S. offered itself as a potential operator. Yet the critical issue remains regional sovereignty, and no significant progress has been made.
It appears that the U.S. and Russia have already agreed on a Ukrainian withdrawal, exerting pressure on Kyiv. However, Secretary of State Marco Rubio noted that negotiations seem “completely hopeless” due to entrenched positions on Donbas. Still, he hopes for a “breakthrough,” although a long-term compromise is unlikely at this stage.
Chances of Ending the War
The opportunity to end the war is greater than ever—but not in Ukraine’s favor. A full U.S. withdrawal would leave Europeans unable to compensate. Any negotiated solution would favor Russia as the aggressor; although flawed, it would at least halt the killings. Yet, if the war continues for another year, both sides will suffer significant losses. Reisner comments, “It seems very bitter. But if the West is clearly unwilling to intervene fully in Ukraine, Kyiv must be informed that the war needs to end. With current slow support, Ukraine cannot make progress. Ultimately, it depends on available soldiers, and the Ukrainian forces are already exhausted.”
Why Have Ukrainian Attacks on Russia Decreased?
Ukraine attempted to exert pressure through air raids on Russian energy facilities and tanker fleets. U.S. intelligence has been crucial to these operations. However, attacks have recently declined.
Reisner explains: “This is speculative. In reality, Ukraine should escalate now to strengthen its negotiating position and demonstrate dominance. Ultimately, the country’s support depends on it. However, Russian air strikes on Ukrainian energy supplies may have hindered Ukraine’s production of long-range weapons capable of striking Russia. Europe and the U.S. should assist Ukraine by providing weapons now. But there are significant problems. Deliveries of PAC-3 surface-to-air missiles, vital for Ukraine’s air defense, amounted to only a few dozen. Yet Russia repeatedly launches hundreds of drones and dozens of cruise and ballistic missiles—these numbers are insufficient.”
Is the Problem U.S.-Based or European?
Washington provides aid, albeit in limited quantities. European systems, such as the SAMP/T, are still insufficiently available. Ultimately, it comes down to money. European willingness to invest remains low, while the U.S. must also support Israel’s defense.
President Zelensky noted that Russia shifted its attacks from energy infrastructure to logistics. Reisner clarifies: “The Russians primarily focus on securing coal supplies. The air campaign’s goal is to spread terror and pressure the Ukrainian people. They attack not only generation and conversion facilities but also resources like coal that feed them. The essence of the attack hasn’t changed—only the target focus.”
Zelensky again cited casualty numbers after more than a year: reportedly 55,000 Ukrainian soldiers killed since the start of the war. He made this statement during Abu Dhabi negotiations to show that the cost is not prohibitive and that Ukraine can continue fighting. Yet he overlooks a critical detail: the missing soldiers—the number whose fate is unknown—which is the figure that truly commands attention.
Conclusions
The Ukraine war is likely to move toward a coerced settlement rather than a balanced negotiated solution. Abu Dhabi talks aim for a real shift in party positions rather than conflict management. Russia enters any negotiation from a position of strength, relying on air superiority and continued capability to wear down Ukrainian infrastructure, especially the energy sector, weakening Kyiv’s long-term resilience.
Ukraine faces increasingly constrained maneuvering space. Continuing the war at the current pace, coupled with slow Western support and shortages of air defense systems and specialized munitions, threatens its military and human capacity. Although Kyiv attempts to use long-range attacks as leverage, their effectiveness is directly tied to ongoing U.S. intelligence and military support, now subject to broader political calculations in Washington.
The United States appears closer to a strategy of managing losses rather than achieving a clear victory. U.S. priorities—from the Middle East to competition with China—reduce willingness for deep engagement in the Ukraine war. In this context, the U.S. may push Kyiv toward a settlement unfavorable to Ukraine, based on freezing frontline positions in exchange for a ceasefire, even at the cost of Ukrainian territorial sovereignty.
Military constraints and hesitant political decisions remain critical factors weakening Western leverage. With limited defense investment, Europe is unlikely to compensate for any U.S. retrenchment. Consequently, 2026 is likely to see increased pressure on Ukraine to accept an unequal ceasefire, consolidating Russian battlefield gains and placing the war in prolonged stalemate. The conflict, at its core, is moving not toward just peace but toward a temporary halt in fighting on terms of force.
If you want, I can also produce a concise news-article style version under 900 words for media publication, keeping it professional and easy to read while emphasizing the main negotiation dynamics.
European Centre for Counterterrorism and Intelligence Studies (ECCI) Germany & The Netherlands
