Russian and Ukrainian delegations opened two days of U.S.-brokered talks in Abu Dhabi on Nov. 10, 2026, the first direct negotiations since February. U.S. envoys Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff are leading the American side and pushing to pair a Ukraine ceasefire with broader European security talks. Kushner has floated a new European security framework modeled on the now-dormant NATO-Russia Council, with five goals: permanent consultations, crisis communications, military transparency, reciprocal de-escalation measures, and a long-term stability framework.
The Trump administration wants a simultaneous track — ceasefire plus European security architecture — while European governments are wary that Russia would use broader talks to legitimize its demands and that Washington might reduce its security commitments. European officials insist a ceasefire must be in place before any wider security architecture is negotiated. Russia wants NATO's posture rolled back toward pre-1997 lines; Ukraine and allies oppose giving Moscow a veto over European security.
[politico.com](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/11/09/five-factors-permitting-reform-fate-01154190) reports a bipartisan energy-permitting deal is entering a critical lame-duck stretch, with a Senate procedural vote set for Monday; supporters call it Washington's best chance in decades to speed up energy-project approvals.
[intellinews.com](https://www.intellinews.com/kushner-eyes-revived-nato-russia-council-as-ukraine-talks-open-in-abu-dhabi-483154/) and [washingtonpost.com](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2026/11/10/russia-ukraine-begin-us-backed-peace-talks-abu-dhabi/) report Jared Kushner is looking to the defunct NATO-Russia Council as a model for postwar European security, while European officials insist a Ukraine ceasefire must be sequenced first.
U.S.-brokered Ukraine-Russia talks did open in Abu Dhabi, but European officials were not excluded: [politico.eu](https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-and-u
BPolitico just posted that Trump's energy council is fighting to keep its own permitting deal alive.
BThat's a Washington story that only makes sense after you read the details.
BThe deal would speed up approvals for energy projects. Both parties were behind it.
BSo why is it in trouble now?
BIt landed in Congress at the worst moment—lame duck, members heading home.
BI thought this was the one thing they agreed on.
BThat's the test. The council was supposed to fix permitting.
BNow his own council has to survive the process it was built to fix.
BPolitico says supporters call it the best chance in decades to speed up energy projects.
BIf it dies, it proves the system is too broken even for the people who ran on fixing it.
BI'd rather they pass something imperfect than nothing at all.
BBut an imperfect permitting bill can lock in bad projects for decades.
BYou want to wait for a perfect Congress? That's never coming.
BI want them to fix the actual bottleneck, not just hand out permits to whoever asks.
BThat's the stakes. And speaking of broken systems—here's a fight just starting.
BAnton Gerashchenko posted on X: Jared Kushner wants to revive the NATO-Russia Council model.
BBefore we go further—a viral post claims European officials were excluded from the talks. That's false.
BRight, Politico reports European powers were in the preparatory talks and agreed to review postwar security.
BSo the internet got that wrong before lunch.
BAnd the council wasn't suspended recently, as one account claimed. It hasn't met in years.
BBut the plan itself is real, and it's setting off a fight.
BKushner's argument: the old system didn't stop the war, so we need a new framework with Russia at the table.
BBut you don't negotiate the new security order while Russian troops are still in Ukraine.
BWhy not? A ceasefire alone won't hold if we never talk about what comes after.
BBecause it hands Putin exactly what he wants—a veto over Europe's security before he's pulled back.
BIt doesn't give him a veto. It gives him a reason to stop fighting.
BCome on, he had a reason in 2014. He took Crimea anyway.
BThis is a full peace architecture, not just a frozen conflict.
BEurope already has an architecture. Kaja Kallas said it: NATO and the EU. Putin doesn't get a veto.
BBut that architecture didn't prevent the largest war in Europe since World War Two.
BThat wasn't NATO's failure. Putin chose to invade. No council meeting would have stopped him.
BSo your answer is just keep fighting until Russia gives up? That's not a plan.
BMy answer is ceasefire first, then talk about security. That's what the Europeans are saying.
BThat's a sequencing argument, not a real disagreement. Kushner wants both at once.
BHe wants both because it lets Moscow slow-walk the ceasefire while we negotiate forever.
BYou're assuming bad faith. What if Russia wants a way out that saves face?
BThen they can prove it by stopping the attacks. No one's stopping them from a ceasefire.
BA ceasefire without security guarantees is just a pause while both sides rearm.
BAnd a security guarantee built on old NATO lines is a reward for invasion.
BWho says legitimize? It's a starting point for talks, not a final deal.
BStarting points matter. You don't start by negotiating away allied territory.
BNobody's negotiating away anything. Kushner's goals include de-escalation and transparency.
BI know what they include. It's still the wrong order.
BThen we disagree on order, not on the need to talk.
BI'll concede the need to talk. I won't concede the simultaneous track.
BThat's probably more than Washington agrees on.