Ukraine security guarantees are the commitments Kyiv wants from the United States and its European partners about exactly what they would do if Russia attacked again — and they are the item most likely to decide whether the US-Ukraine-Russia talks opening in Abu Dhabi on November 10-11 produce a settlement or another stalemate. Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, wants clear commitments pointing to NATO's Article 5 mutual-defence principle as the model, the Associated Press reported in a November 9 explainer ahead of the talks. Moscow's counter-position — limits on Ukraine's armed forces, no foreign troops on Ukrainian soil, and a NATO rolled back to its 1997 borders — describes a different agreement altogether. This explainer sets out what each side means by "guarantees," what Washington has actually put on the table, and why the definition is the negotiation. It updates this site's earlier report on the announcement of the Abu Dhabi round, and sits alongside the Ukraine war explainer.
What does Ukraine mean by security guarantees?
Kyiv means a promise with a tripwire. As AP reported Zelenskyy's position, Ukraine wants clear commitments on what partner countries would do if Russia invaded again, and it points to NATO's Article 5 — the alliance's principle that an attack on one member is an attack on all — as the model for the strength of commitment it is seeking. The demand is deliberately specific: not assurances of support in general, but an agreed answer, in advance, to the question of who does what on the day a future invasion begins. Ukraine also wants a ceasefire first, to create the negotiating space in which such a settlement could be reached, and it refuses to cede territory that remains under Ukrainian control.
What has the United States actually proposed?
The United States is exploring a five-part framework — permanent security consultations, reliable crisis communications, greater military transparency, reciprocal measures to reduce escalation risk, and an enduring framework for long-term European security — according to the Institute for the Study of War's November 6 assessment, which reported that envoy Jared Kushner called the November 5 Brussels talks with Ukrainian, NATO and European partners productive. The framework is narrower than Kyiv's Article 5 model — so far. In it, NATO remains central, and each state retains authority over its own alliances.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on November 8 that President Trump had been alluding to progress on security guarantees, and that "some advances made in what that architecture could look like post-conflict" — with nothing finalised. The US delegation in Abu Dhabi, led by Steve Witkoff, will pursue ending the war, post-war security pacts and de-escalation, Reuters reported. A broader multilateral format with direct European participation is possible if the Abu Dhabi round makes progress, ISW reported.
What does Russia demand instead — and who sits at the table?
Moscow wants a comprehensive settlement first, before any ceasefire — on conditions that include limits on the size of Ukraine's armed forces and the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from areas of the four regions Russia claims to have annexed, including areas still under Ukrainian control, which Kyiv refuses to cede, AP reported. ISW reported that the Kremlin has recently reiterated its 2021 demand that NATO roll back to its 1997 borders, has repeatedly rejected the deployment of foreign forces to Ukraine, and has discussed Russia and China acting as guarantors of Ukraine's security — a formulation that would put Moscow itself among the guarantors of its neighbour's safety.
Who sits at the table is itself disputed. Kyiv wants European countries involved in the process; the Kremlin opposes their participation in this round while acknowledging a possible European role later, AP reported. France intends to be present regardless: Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot told RTL on November 8 that "the Europeans will be well represented. France will be in Abu Dhabi to take part," Reuters reported, though Paris had not yet named its representative. ISW's assessment of the geometry is blunt: the parties' stated positions remain incompatible, and the institute judges a settlement unlikely on current terms. The one recent precedent for a limited pause is small and local — last month's weeklong truce in Oleshky, during which residents left the area and aid reached it, AP reported. Whether Abu Dhabi can scale that into a framework is what the next two days will test.
Sources: Associated Press explainer (9 November 2026, read in full via The Tower Post, which carries AP copy verbatim); Institute for the Study of War, Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment (6 November 2026, toplines read in full — analysis attributed to ISW where used); Reuters (8 November 2026, read in full via europesays.com, which carries Reuters copy verbatim). Each side's position is published as that side's stated position, per this site's two-source rule; no position is presented as this site's own conclusion.
