|
Padmashree Anandhan
8 February 2026 |
CONFLICT WEEKLY NOTE
In the news
On 04 February, ahead of the talks, Ukraine’s military reported massive drone attacks by Russia damaging energy infrastructure and civilian areas. Overall, Ukraine and Russia remain divided over core issues on ceding control of the Donbas region and the Russian-occupied territories.
On 05 February, the US, Ukraine, and Russia resumed the second round of trilateral peace talks in Abu Dhabi, followed by the previous round in January. The delegations included Ukraine’s former Defence Minister, Rustem Umerov, US special envoy Steve Witkoff, and Russia's envoy, Kirill Dmitriev, who met over two days. However, no breakthrough was achieved. The major outcome was only a prisoner swap of 314 soldiers between Kyiv and Moscow.
On 05 February, the US and Russia decided to re-establish high-level military-to-military dialogue, restarting communication channels that have been inactive since 2021. The re-establishment is aimed at reducing risks of miscalculation and managing pressures between the two nuclear powers even as talks continue.
On 06 February, Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz stated that the EU is open to engaging Russia within the current negotiation framework but will not pursue parallel or competing talks that could undermine the trilateral process.
Issues at large
First, the symbolic talks without any breakthrough. The two rounds of talks held between the US, Russia and Ukraine during the last weeks continue to be symbolic. The efforts have so far failed to achieve a breakthrough to stop the war on the ground and establish a peace negotiation on the table. The US administration has been cautious and positive, while Russia has shown no sign of a ceasefire agreement or reduction of hostilities. Central questions on territory and security guarantees still linger. Continuing Russian strikes inside Ukraine are seen by Ukraine as Russian tactics to divert from de-escalation.
Second, a recalibration in the US-Russian relations, and the rising European apprehensions. A major outcome of the trilateral dialogue was the US and Russia’s decision to re-establish military-to-military dialogue. Although framed as a risk-reduction measure to avert miscalculation between two nuclear powers, this development indicates a partial ice-break after years of diplomatic freeze. The bilateral engagement risks strengthening Ukrainian and European fears of stabilising US–Russia relations, while the underlying issues (Security guarantees, Ukraine’s right over Donbas) of the conflict take a backseat.
Third, Europe’s continuing political support with less ground impact for Ukraine. The EU continues to issue strong support for Ukraine, constantly stressing the need for credible security guarantees and warning against any settlement that rewards territorial aggression. However, these statements are yet to translate into tangible, enforceable mechanisms that would empower Ukraine’s negotiating position. Europe remains largely outside the core trilateral framework, forced by internal divisions and dependence on US leadership. EU’s role risks being reduced to that of a normative voice rather than a decisive security actor.
Fourth, the growing role of external mediators. Gulf states such as the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia have been the backbone to facilitate dialogue and achieve humanitarian outcomes. Abu Dhabi’s hosting of trilateral talks and its involvement in prisoner exchanges reflect a broader trend of non-Western actors positioning themselves as realistic mediators in global conflicts. While these efforts have brought tangible results, especially prisoner swaps, they continue to be limited to confidence-building and humanitarian measures rather than conflict resolution.
In perspective
The peace talks are likely to continue to prevent the conflict from escalating further while a ceasefire seems faraway. Reopening of military-to-military channels, humanitarian exchanges, and neutral mediation platforms may be the small wins; however, the core issue over the territorial dispute and the question of Ukraine's security remains frozen. Within the trilateral framework, Ukraine is left in an uncomfortable position dependent on the West, where the US focuses on reducing risk and strategic stability, while Russia seeks to capitalise on battlefield gains.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
