ABU DHABI - Russian and Ukrainian delegations held nearly four hours of U.S.-mediated talks in Abu Dhabi on Tuesday, their first direct peace negotiations under American sponsorship since February, as Washington sought a path toward ending a war approaching its fifth year.

The discussions brought officials from all three countries into the same room for the opening day of a planned two-day meeting. No ceasefire, territorial agreement or other breakthrough was announced after the session.

U.S. mediators Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner led Washington's effort. Kushner told delegates that recent contacts had narrowed some gaps and that the American side had ideas for bridging remaining differences, according to Reuters. That assessment reflected cautious optimism, not a completed agreement.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy confirmed that the trilateral format had begun and said he expected a detailed briefing from his negotiating team and partners. Kyiv has argued that Russia must demonstrate the same willingness to de-escalate that Ukraine says it is bringing to the process.

European officials also met separately with the United States and Ukraine. In a joint position reported during the talks, they stressed that any future arrangement must respect Ukrainian sovereignty, territorial integrity and independent decision-making while providing credible security guarantees.

Russia entered the talks seeking a wider postwar security framework for Europe. Moscow has demanded that Ukrainian forces withdraw from Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, four regions Russia claimed to annex in 2022 despite never fully controlling them. Ukraine has rejected surrendering land by decree and says territorial questions can be decided only at leadership level and alongside enforceable guarantees.

Russian forces currently occupy about one-fifth of Ukraine, including Crimea, which Moscow seized in 2014. The full-scale invasion launched in February 2022 has killed and wounded hundreds of thousands of people, displaced millions and brought repeated attacks on Ukrainian cities and energy infrastructure.

Previous rounds of negotiations produced limited humanitarian arrangements but did not resolve the central dispute. Moscow wants recognition of territorial gains and constraints on Ukraine's strategic alignment. Kyiv wants its sovereignty restored and protection against Russia using any pause to rearm and attack again.

The Abu Dhabi meeting therefore matters even without immediate results. Sustained direct contact can reduce miscalculation, establish channels for prisoner exchanges and local ceasefires, and clarify which claims are bargaining positions and which are immovable demands.

Diplomacy must not turn aggression into a reward

The United States is right to bring the parties together. American leverage, military support and relationships with European allies give Washington a unique ability to test whether a negotiated end is possible. Refusing to negotiate forever would leave Ukrainians trapped in a war with no political horizon.

But speed cannot become the main measure of success. Russia began the full-scale war and seized territory by force. A settlement that simply converts battlefield occupation into internationally accepted ownership would teach every authoritarian government that invasion can be profitable if it lasts long enough.

That principle does not require pretending Ukraine can recover every kilometer immediately or without cost. It requires distinguishing a practical ceasefire from legal recognition of conquest. Borders, sanctions and reconstruction obligations must not be traded away merely to produce a ceremony.

Security guarantees are the central test. Ukraine accepted assurances in the past and later faced invasion. Any new promise must specify who responds, how quickly, with what military capacity and what happens if Russia violates the agreement. Vague language would create an interval between wars, not peace.

Europe must also remain inside the process. European countries will carry much of the long-term burden of deterrence, reconstruction and refugee support. Moscow's preference to exclude them is understandable as a negotiating tactic, but a durable European security arrangement cannot be written over Europe's objections.

President Donald Trump can claim credit if American mediation produces a defensible peace. The stronger legacy, however, would be an agreement that lasts because it protects Ukraine's democratic choice, not one that looks fast because the victim was pressured more heavily than the aggressor.

The hardest reality is that talks can be used as cover. Russia may negotiate sincerely, seek only relief from pressure, or combine both approaches. Washington should judge conduct alongside words: attacks on civilians, troop movements and compliance with limited agreements are evidence of intent.

Nearly four hours at a table is a beginning. It is not proof that the gaps are small, and it is not a reason to reduce support for Ukraine before Russia accepts enforceable terms. Diplomacy deserves room to work, but peace must be measured by whether Ukrainians remain free and secure after the cameras leave.