How Russian strikes shaped Kyiv’s view of the Abu Dhabi negotiations

“These are not negotiations. This is a game of pretending,” a lawmaker from the ruling Servant of the People party told NV on condition of anonymity, describing expectations for the next round of Ukraine-U.S.-Russia talks.

Recent events surrounding the so-called “peace track,” the lawmaker said, only reinforce that view.

A revealing night

Just a few hours during a bitterly cold night on Feb. 3 offered a stark illustration of what these consultations with Russia — involving the United States and held primarily in Abu Dhabi — really look like.

On the evening of Feb. 2, Zelenskyy chaired a meeting in Kyiv with Ukraine’s negotiating team, including National Security and Defense Council Secretary Rustem Umerov and senior presidential officials. Shortly afterward, the delegation departed for the second round of talks in the United Arab Emirates, scheduled for Feb. 4–5.

Zelenskyy said Ukraine was ready for concrete steps toward peace and expected to sign a security agreement with the United States. He also noted that Russia had not struck Ukraine’s energy infrastructure in the days prior — a sign, he suggested, that Moscow was observing an informal pause.

Hours later, during the night of Feb. 3 Kyiv time, U.S. President Donald Trump publicly boasted that he had asked Russian leader Vladimir Putin to refrain from attacking Ukraine’s energy facilities during what was expected to be the coldest week of winter — and that Putin had agreed. Trump added that “very good things” were happening in Ukraine-Russia talks and expressed optimism about peace.

At the same time, dozens of Russian Shahed drones entered Ukrainian airspace. Within hours, the activity escalated into a large-scale missile and drone attack — targeting energy facilities.

The strikes continued into the morning, even as NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte arrived in Kyiv. Speaking from the rostrum of Ukraine’s parliament, Rutte said the overnight assault once again demonstrated that Russia is not serious about genuine peace negotiations.

Zelenskyy later said Russia had used the proposed short-term pause not to support diplomacy, but to stockpile missiles and wait for the coldest days of the year, when temperatures in parts of Ukraine dropped to minus 20 Celsius.

“Every Russian strike confirms that nothing has changed in Moscow,” Zelenskyy said. “They still count on war and the destruction of Ukraine and do not take diplomacy seriously.” He added that Ukraine’s negotiating strategy would be adjusted accordingly.

No breakthroughs expected

Despite the diplomatic activity, expectations within Zelenskyy’s own political circle remain low.

The most difficult issues — territorial control and the future of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant — remain unresolved. A member of the president’s team familiar with the talks told NV on condition of anonymity that Ukraine’s position has not changed: Kyiv will not cede territory to Russia.

Against that backdrop, remarks by Vitaliy Kim, the head of the Mykolaiv Regional Military Administration, drew attention. In a recent interview with The Independent, Kim said that while land matters, people matter more — and that no one knows what tomorrow will bring.

He said restoring Ukraine’s 1991 borders would be a victory, but added that simply ending the war could also be seen as a win for a population exhausted by years of fighting.

One NV source in the Servant of the People parliamentary faction described Kim’s remarks as “testing the ground.” A separate source close to the presidential team dismissed them as “early positioning ahead of elections.”

At the same time, Yevheniia Kravchuk, deputy head of the Servant of the People faction, said Ukrainians have long stopped believing Russian promises.

“I hope the American side pays attention to this,” she told NV. “President Trump publicly said Putin promised not to strike Ukraine during the coldest week — and Putin struck on the coldest night.”

Kravchuk said she expects little from the Abu Dhabi talks beyond limited progress on humanitarian issues, particularly prisoner exchanges. The last such exchange took place in October.

Another lawmaker from the ruling faction, speaking anonymously, said Russia may agree to prisoner swaps only if it sees an added benefit — namely, portraying itself to Trump as a supposed “peacemaker.” For now, he said, Moscow is focused on demonstrating military momentum.

The same source described the talks as a “game of imitation,” in which both sides try to shift blame and expose the other to Trump’s frustration.

Kyiv’s participation, he said, is tactical: to deny Moscow any opportunity to accuse Ukraine of rejecting White House peace initiatives and to keep the United States engaged — and supplying weapons and intelligence — for as long as possible.

When talks may become real

One NV source in the ruling party said a positive sign is that sanctions relief for Moscow is not currently on the table, even as Russian financiers warn of an emerging banking crisis. Falling oil prices, amid easing U.S.-Iran tensions, are also adding pressure.

If Russia enters a full-scale financial crisis, the source said, it will struggle to fund the war — including recruiting infantry, foreign fighters included, for costly frontal assaults.

That, the source argued, is why Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov has spoken publicly about the need to inflict losses of up to 50,000 Russian troops per month.

“We need to create a gap where Russia can recruit fewer soldiers than we take out of action each month,” the source said. “I think that’s achievable within a year.”

Only when Russia finds itself in a weakened position — and facing the prospect of another mass mobilization — will real negotiations begin, the source said, possibly as early as spring. Until then, he added, expectations of a ceasefire or meaningful change are unrealistic.