EXPLAINER: Why Ukraine, Russia, and US See Talks Differently

Ukraine, Russia, and the US concluded two days of peace talks in Abu Dhabi on Wednesday, Nov. 11, with a prisoner exchange agreement and different accounts of how far negotiations had advanced.Sky News noted the contrast: Ukraine’s chief negotiator Rustem Umerov reported “huge progress,” Russian delegation leader Vladimir Medinsky offered a mixed assessment, and US envoy Jared Kushner called the discussions “tough but productive.”JOIN US ON TELEGRAMFollow our coverage of the war on the @Kyivpost_official.Their statements point to movement on individual issues, while leaving the central question unanswered: What terms could actually bring the war to an end?Why do the verdicts sound different?The negotiators emphasized different parts of the discussions.Umerov highlighted progress on security and prosperity – the arrangements intended to protect Ukraine after the war and support its economic recovery. He promised further details later.Medinsky said mutual understanding had been reached on some issues but remained absent on others. He placed particular emphasis on the future system of European security.Kushner acknowledged progress while identifying territory as the hardest unresolved issue.These assessments can coexist. Negotiators can advance work on reconstruction, prisoner releases or future safeguards while remaining divided over the terms of a peace settlement.What did the sides actually agree on?The clearest announced agreement concerns a large-scale prisoner exchange.Umerov, Kushner, and Medinsky all confirmed the planned exchange. Its final size remained under negotiation, with Kushner saying the numbers would be agreed on Thursday, Nov. 12. Other Topics of Interest France Fears Nuclear War as Germany Builds Long-Range Arsenal to Strike Deep Inside Russia Paris is concerned that Moscow could misinterpret the use of long-range weapons by European allies and mistake conventional strikes for the start of a broader attack. President Volodymyr Zelensky had previously described proposals to exchange 1,000 or 1,500 prisoners from each side. Those were possible formats, rather than a confirmed final total.An agreement on an exchange is a practical humanitarian result. Its implementation will depend on the parties completing the arrangements and carrying out the releases.Why does territory remain the biggest obstacle?Russia continues to demand territory that Ukraine refuses to surrender, including parts of the Donbas that Russian forces have failed to capture.Kyiv has also rejected a reported US proposal to redraw the administrative boundaries of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. The idea would allow Moscow to claim it had obtained the entire Donbas while Ukrainian forces retained cities outside the revised boundaries.Ukraine maintains that it will not recognize Russian control over occupied Ukrainian territory.Kushner explained why this dispute affects the rest of the negotiations: Arrangements for postwar security cannot be implemented until territory and other outstanding bilateral questions are settled.Progress on the design of guarantees therefore leaves a major political obstacle unresolved.What does “security” mean in these negotiations?For Ukraine, security guarantees concern how the country would be protected against another Russian attack after a settlement.The discussions included ways to monitor a future ceasefire and prevent renewed fighting.Moscow is seeking a wider discussion about Europe’s security arrangements, including guarantees for Russia itself. Its demands have included restrictions on NATO expansion and the alliance’s military presence in countries that joined after 1997.Ukraine’s delegation has argued that the war must stop first, before a broader European security framework can be developed.The disagreement therefore concerns both the substance of future arrangements and the order in which decisions should be made.Why does Europe’s place at the table matter?European governments would have a direct role in financing Ukraine’s recovery and supporting its long-term defense. Broader negotiations about NATO and European security would also concern their own protection.Representatives of Britain, France, Germany, Italy, NATO and the European Commission held separate consultations with Ukraine and the US in Abu Dhabi.They did not participate in the main three-country negotiations with Russia.Medinsky said Russia had held no discussions with the European delegation and accused Europe of being “complicit in a collective deception” of Ukrainians.Washington wants future talks expanded to include European representatives. Their participation remains another unresolved part of the process.What happens next?Kushner and fellow US envoy Steve Witkoff plan to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Thursday, Nov. 12, then travel to Dublin for discussions with Zelensky.The visits are intended to test the proposals discussed in Abu Dhabi and explore further progress.Ukrainian negotiator Davyd Arakhamia has expressed hope that the diplomatic momentum could produce a solution before the New Year.The next practical tests are whether the prisoner exchange proceeds, whether Europe joins the main negotiations, and whether the sides narrow their territorial differences enough to turn discussions about future security into an implementable settlement. Yuliia Zavadska is a news writer at Kyiv Post. She has experience in breaking news coverage, fact-checking, and digital journalism, with a focus on fast, accurate reporting and clear storytelling. Before joining Kyiv Post, she worked as a news feed editor for several leading Ukrainian media outlets.