Russia will continue to achieve its objectives on the battlefield
In the shadow of ongoing strikes and sub-zero suffering, diplomats from Russia, Ukraine, and the United States gathered in Abu Dhabi to attempt what four years of war have made nearly unthinkable: a negotiated peace. The talks, the first of their kind under Trump's proposal, surface an ancient tension between the language of diplomacy and the grammar of force — one side demanding total withdrawal, the other refusing surrender, while civilians in Kyiv huddle without heat. History has seen such moments before, where the shape of peace is sketched even as the war continues to write its own terms.
- Russian strikes killed one and wounded 22 in Kyiv and Kharkiv on the very morning diplomats sat down to discuss peace, making the contradiction between the negotiating table and the battlefield impossible to ignore.
- Moscow's demand for full Ukrainian withdrawal from Donbas and Kyiv's refusal to accept capitulation terms have created a deadlock so fundamental that both sides appear to be negotiating toward different futures entirely.
- Trump's peace proposal has already been revised multiple times — each draft alienating one side or the other — leaving the framework itself fragile even before the core territorial dispute is addressed.
- Putin's aide signaled Russia's conditional interest in diplomacy while making clear that military objectives would continue on the battlefield if talks failed, undercutting the urgency of any breakthrough.
- The talks are scheduled to continue, with the UAE hosting and framing the effort as dialogue-building, but the distance between the two sides' positions suggests resolution remains far more aspiration than trajectory.
On a Friday in late January, diplomats from Russia, Ukraine, and the United States convened in Abu Dhabi for the first direct negotiations on Trump's peace proposal — the most consequential attempt at a settlement since Istanbul talks the previous summer yielded only prisoner exchanges. This time, the goal was more ambitious: to sketch the actual shape of peace.
Ukraine's chief negotiator Rustem Umerov described the opening day as focused on the parameters for ending the war and the logic of what would follow. But the central obstacle surfaced immediately. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov reiterated Moscow's unchanged demand — full Ukrainian withdrawal from the Donbas. Kyiv, which still controls roughly 20 percent of that region, rejected any terms resembling capitulation. The two sides were not merely far apart; they seemed to be describing different settlements entirely.
Trump's proposal had already endured criticism from both directions — early drafts seen as too favorable to Moscow, later versions floated European peacekeepers and drew Russian objections. Trump himself, fresh from meeting Zelensky at Davos, expressed confidence: 'I believe they're at a point where they can come together and get a deal done. And if they don't, they're stupid — that goes for both of them.' His envoy Steve Witkoff had also traveled to the Kremlin to meet Putin directly.
The war offered its own commentary on the proceedings. That same morning, Russian strikes hit Kyiv and Kharkiv, killing one and wounding 22. Thousands in the capital were without heat in sub-zero temperatures, the result of sustained attacks on infrastructure. Mayor Vitali Klitschko described a city under massive assault while residents sheltered in place. The European Union, which had sent generators to help, accused Moscow of deliberately targeting civilian warmth.
Zelensky, reflecting on the moment, noted that peace required not only Ukraine's desire to end the war, but a similar desire emerging in Russia. That desire remained ambiguous. Putin's aide confirmed Russia's interest in a diplomatic resolution — but added that until one was reached, Moscow would continue pursuing its objectives on the battlefield. The talks were set to continue into Saturday, carrying with them the weight of incompatible demands, an unrelenting war, and the fragile hope that negotiation might yet find a way through.
In Abu Dhabi on a Friday in late January, diplomats from three countries sat down to discuss how to end a war that has already killed tens of thousands and displaced millions. Russia, Ukraine, and the United States were meeting to negotiate a peace proposal being championed by President Trump—the first direct talks between Moscow and Kyiv on his specific plan since the conflict began nearly four years ago. The previous summer, Russian and Ukrainian negotiators had met in Istanbul, but those discussions yielded only prisoner exchanges. This time, the stakes were different. This time, they were trying to sketch the shape of peace itself.
The opening day on Friday focused on what Ukraine's chief negotiator Rustem Umerov called "the parameters for ending Russia's war and the further logic of the negotiation process." But even as the talks began, the fundamental obstacle was already visible: the question of territory, specifically the eastern Donbas region. Moscow's position was unambiguous. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that Russia's demand remained unchanged—Ukraine must withdraw entirely from the Donbas. "This is a very important condition," he said. Kyiv, however, still controlled roughly 20 percent of that eastern territory and had flatly rejected any settlement that amounted to capitulation. The two sides were not just far apart; they appeared to be speaking different languages about what a settlement could even look like.
The diplomatic effort had already weathered criticism from both directions. An early draft of Trump's proposal had drawn sharp pushback in Kyiv and across Western Europe for appearing to favor Moscow's interests too heavily. Later versions, which floated the possibility of European peacekeepers, prompted complaints from Russia instead. Each revision seemed to move the needle only to anger the other side. Trump himself had met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the World Economic Forum in Davos on Thursday, and his envoy Steve Witkoff had traveled to the Kremlin to meet with Putin. Trump's confidence in a breakthrough was evident. "I believe they're at a point now where they can come together and get a deal done," he said on Wednesday. "And if they don't, they're stupid—that goes for both of them."
Yet the war continued even as negotiators gathered. On the very morning the Abu Dhabi talks began, Russian strikes hit Kyiv and the northeastern city of Kharkiv, killing one person and wounding 22 others. Thousands of residents in the capital were without heat as temperatures dropped below freezing, the result of Russian attacks on infrastructure. Kyiv's mayor, Vitali Klitschko, posted on Telegram that the city was "under a massive enemy attack," with several non-residential buildings struck and residents sheltering in place. The European Union, which had sent hundreds of generators to help, accused Moscow of deliberately depriving civilians of warmth. The contrast was stark: while diplomats discussed peace in an air-conditioned hotel in the Emirates, people in Kyiv were huddling in the cold.
Zelensky had told reporters before the talks that territory remained a "key issue." He also posted a reflection on the nature of the moment: "It is necessary that not only Ukraine has the desire to end the war and achieve full security, but that a similar desire somehow emerges in Russia as well." That desire, however, remained unclear. Putin had repeatedly stated that if diplomacy failed, Moscow would simply take what it wanted by force. After meeting with Trump's envoys, Putin's aide Yuri Ushakov said Russia was "genuinely interested in resolving" the conflict diplomatically, but added a qualifier: "Until that happens, Russia will continue to achieve its objectives... on the battlefield."
The negotiations were scheduled to continue into Saturday, the second day of talks. The UAE foreign ministry framed them as "part of ongoing efforts to promote dialogue and identify political solutions to the crisis." But the language of diplomacy could not mask the reality underneath: two sides with incompatible demands, a war that showed no signs of stopping, and a president in Washington convinced that a deal was within reach if both sides would simply agree to it. Whether Zelensky's hope that Russia might develop a genuine desire for peace would materialize remained the question hanging over everything.
Citas Notables
Russia's position is well known on the fact that Ukraine, Ukrainian armed forces, have to leave the territory of the Donbas. This is a very important condition.— Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov
It is necessary that not only Ukraine has the desire to end the war and achieve full security, but that a similar desire somehow emerges in Russia as well.— President Volodymyr Zelensky
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does the Donbas matter so much that it can stop an entire peace process?
Because it's not really about the territory itself—it's about what controlling it means. For Russia, holding the Donbas is proof of victory, the concrete gain that justifies the war. For Ukraine, keeping any part of it is proof they didn't lose. Neither side can afford to be seen as surrendering.
But people are freezing in Kyiv right now. Doesn't that create pressure to settle quickly?
It does, but it cuts both ways. Yes, Ukrainian civilians are suffering, which pushes Zelensky toward compromise. But those same strikes remind him that Russia isn't negotiating in good faith—they're negotiating while attacking. It's hard to trust someone who's bombing your cities while smiling across the table.
Trump seems very confident a deal is close. Is he reading the room correctly?
He's reading his own confidence, not necessarily the room. Both sides are talking, which is progress. But "close" assumes both sides want the same thing. They don't. Trump thinks they're just haggling over details. They're actually arguing about whether Ukraine survives as a sovereign state.
What does Putin actually want?
Full control of the Donbas, minimum. But his public statements suggest he'd take it by force if talks fail. That's not a negotiating position—that's a threat. It tells Ukraine that even if they agree to something, Russia might just keep fighting anyway.
So why are they even talking?
Because the alternative is worse. For Ukraine, it's a chance to stop the bleeding. For Russia, it's a way to legitimize territorial gains without fighting forever. For Trump, it's a foreign policy win. Everyone has a reason to sit at the table, even if they don't trust what's being said.