MOSCOW, Russia — 12 November 2026: U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff and presidential adviser Jared Kushner arrived in Moscow on Thursday for talks with President Vladimir Putin, carrying the results of two days of U.S.-mediated negotiations between Russian and Ukrainian delegations in Abu Dhabi. The latest diplomatic push has produced an agreement in principle for a major prisoner exchange, but no public breakthrough on ending the war.

The Moscow meeting is part of a sequence of high-level contacts intended to test whether the limited progress made by negotiators can be turned into a wider settlement. Reuters reported that the envoys were expected to meet Putin during the first half of Thursday. The Associated Press said Kushner indicated that he and Witkoff would then travel to Dublin to meet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

View of the Moscow Kremlin from the Kremlin Embankment in central Moscow.
The Moscow Kremlin. Photo: Александровы АГ, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0. This is a contextual photograph, not an image of Thursday’s diplomatic meeting. Image source · Licence.

Prisoner Exchange Is The Clearest Outcome So Far

The Abu Dhabi discussions, which concluded on Wednesday, were the first direct U.S.-mediated negotiations between Russian and Ukrainian delegations in nine months, according to reporting by Reuters and the AP. The sides agreed in principle to a large-scale prisoner-of-war exchange. The final number of people involved and the timing still needed to be settled, so the arrangement should not yet be described as a completed swap.

U.S. envoy Jared Kushner described the proposed exchange as a significant humanitarian step. Russia’s chief negotiator Vladimir Medinsky and Ukraine’s negotiating team also acknowledged the agreement, while officials discussed when and how it could be implemented. Al Jazeera reported that Russian state media had suggested a possible timeframe of two to three weeks, but the details remained subject to confirmation.

Prisoner exchanges have taken place during the war even when political negotiations have stalled. Their value is immediate for families and people held in captivity, but they do not by themselves resolve the military and political issues that have kept the conflict going. The latest understanding is therefore a tangible humanitarian development, not evidence that a ceasefire or peace agreement is close to being signed.

View of the Abu Dhabi skyline from Saadiyat Island, where the latest Russia-Ukraine talks were held.
Abu Dhabi skyline, where the latest round of U.S.-mediated talks took place. Photo: comedian44, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0. Image source · Licence.

Territory Remains The Central Obstacle

The most difficult issue remains control of Ukrainian territory occupied by Russia and Moscow’s demand that Kyiv surrender the rest of the Donbas region. Ukraine has rejected that demand. Zelenskyy has maintained that territorial decisions cannot be imposed on his country as the price of ending the fighting, while Russian officials continue to frame territorial and security questions as central to any settlement.

Reuters reported that U.S. mediators have tried to direct more of the discussion toward postwar security guarantees and reconstruction because the territorial dispute remains deadlocked. Those subjects are closely connected: Kyiv wants credible arrangements to deter another Russian attack, while Moscow is seeking a wider European security framework that addresses its objections to NATO’s presence and expansion.

A senior Russian diplomat said Moscow could consider non-aggression agreements with NATO member states as part of a new European security arrangement. The proposal does not amount to an agreed framework, and European governments remain wary of discussing the continent’s security without meaningful progress on Ukraine, including a ceasefire.

Europe’s Role Could Shape The Next Stage

The question of European participation is becoming more prominent as negotiations move beyond immediate humanitarian measures. Kushner has argued that Europe, the European Union and NATO must have a role in discussions about postwar security. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov has said European representatives could eventually join, while also criticising European governments’ current positions on the conflict.

European officials have repeatedly warned that an agreement affecting the continent’s security cannot be negotiated without them. Their concern is not simply about diplomatic representation. Any future guarantees, monitoring arrangements, sanctions decisions or security commitments would have practical consequences for European governments, Ukraine and NATO members.

View of the Moskva River and modern towers in Moscow.
Moscow’s cityscape along the Moskva River. Photo: Zeynel Cebeci, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0. Image source · Licence.

What The Moscow And Dublin Meetings Could Establish

The immediate task for the U.S. envoys is to brief Putin on the Abu Dhabi discussions and determine whether the areas of possible agreement can be developed further. The planned follow-up with Zelenskyy in Dublin would give the Ukrainian president an opportunity to hear the Russian response and assess whether any proposals are compatible with Kyiv’s position on sovereignty and security.

Several questions remain open: the final number and timetable for the prisoner exchange; whether the two sides can narrow their differences over territory; what security guarantees Ukraine would accept; and whether European governments can be brought into a format that Russia is prepared to engage with. Until those questions are addressed, the diplomatic process remains exploratory.

Fighting has continued while the negotiations have taken place. The AP reported that both countries continued using missiles and drones along the front, underlining the gap between diplomatic activity and conditions on the battlefield. The absence of a ceasefire means that the humanitarian and military risks remain immediate for civilians and service members.

HeadlinesXtra Analysis

The proposed prisoner exchange is a meaningful humanitarian result because it can bring people home and demonstrate that communication between the parties remains possible. But it should be measured for what it is: a limited agreement in principle, not a settlement of the war. Previous exchanges have shown that the sides can cooperate on specific humanitarian issues even while disagreeing fundamentally about territory and security.

The Moscow meeting is important because it tests whether the United States can move beyond shuttle diplomacy and obtain clearer positions from the Russian leadership. The subsequent Dublin meeting could help determine whether those positions leave room for an arrangement Ukraine can accept. Yet a process that depends heavily on bilateral U.S. engagement will face questions about durability if Ukraine and European governments do not have a meaningful role in shaping the outcome.

The central measure of progress will not be optimistic language or the number of diplomatic meetings. It will be verifiable steps: a completed prisoner exchange, a credible reduction in attacks, a workable ceasefire framework and security guarantees that both Ukraine and its partners consider enforceable. Until then, the latest talks represent movement in diplomacy, but not a demonstrated path to peace.

Sources And Further Reading

Image Credits And Licences