Russia demanded NATO pull back to its 1997 positions at the Abu Dhabi talks, The New York Times reports
Russian officials circulated a paper at this week's Abu Dhabi negotiations with US envoys demanding that NATO return its forces to the positions they held in 1997, rule out any further expansion of the alliance, and bar military activity in Ukraine and elsewhere in Eastern Europe, the South Caucasus and Central Asia, The New York Times reports from a copy obtained from a person involved in the talks. The paper, dated 10 November and carrying no letterhead or signature, echoes the demands Moscow made in December 2021 before its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. European leaders rejected the demand: Lithuania's president said it cannot be met, and Bulgaria's Rumen Radev called it unthinkable.
Checking in progress
This story is still being checked. Claims below are published as claims — never dressed as facts — and each one moves only when the evidence earns it.
- Collecting reportsDone
- Grouping the versionsDone
- 3Checking claims9 of 12 claims checked
- 4Human gateStill to come
9 of 12 claims checked so far · step 3 of 4: Checking claims
Key points
- A Russian paper circulated at the Abu Dhabi talks demands NATO pull back to its 1997 positions and rule out further expansion, The New York Times reports.
- Zelensky says US negotiators raised for the first time whether Ukraine would withdraw from Donbas if it joined NATO; he says Ukraine will not retreat, and Washington has not confirmed his account.
- Kremlin aide Ushakov has confirmed on the record that Russia is demanding a return to the 1997 posture.
Show more (1)
- Lithuania's president says the demand cannot be met; Bulgaria's Radev calls it unthinkable.
What happened
The Abu Dhabi talks between Russia, Ukraine and US envoys ended this week with a large prisoner exchange agreed but no breakthrough on ending the war, and the envoys travelled on to Moscow and then Dublin. The reported paper shows what Russia put on the table beyond Ukraine itself: the shape of European security.
A pullback to 1997 lines would remove NATO forces and bases from Poland and the Baltic states and every other country that joined after 1997 — the demand NATO refused in the weeks before Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022.
Both sides, in their own words
Both sides heard. Neither believed for free. Publishing a side's version is not endorsing it — the claim checks below are where verdicts live.
Side A · Russia — the position in the reported paper
- NATO must rule out further expansion and any military activity in Ukraine, Eastern Europe, the South Caucasus and Central Asia, and pull its troops and bases back to the alliance's 1997 lines; Russian officials argued the Cold War's separate spheres of influence reduced the risk of conflict.
Side B · European leaders responding
- Lithuania's President Gitanas Nauseda said the demand to withdraw NATO troops from the eastern flank cannot be met because Europe's security architecture must remain unchanged; Bulgaria's Rumen Radev called the demand unthinkable and not open for discussion.
Independently verified
9 claims independently verified — listed in the claim-by-claim check below.Not yet verified
3 claims not yet verified — listed in the claim-by-claim check below.What we know / what we don't know yet
What we know
- The Times' account of the paper, Ushakov's on-record confirmation of the 1997 demand, and the European rejections are all in the reporting read.
- The demand revives the December 2021 drafts, which are public record.
- Zelensky's account of the Donbas-for-NATO question, in his own words released by his office, is reported the same way by the BBC, France 24 and other outlets.
What we don't know yet
- The paper's full text — it has not been published, and its contents rest on the Times' anonymous sources.
- The Kremlin's own direct response to the Times' report of this paper — spokesman Peskov has denied a separate reported demand about Finland, and no statement on this document was read.
- Whether the demand is a final position or an opening bid — the Times' sources describe signals of possible flexibility.
Show more (2)
- Whether the United States confirms Zelensky's account of the Donbas-for-NATO question in those terms — Kushner says new ideas from the talks are being explored, but no US official has confirmed the question as Zelensky described it, and Russia has not responded to the disclosure.
- The date and agenda of the next round of trilateral talks Kushner says the United States is preparing.
Claim by claim
Show all claims (12)
Why this label: The paper itself has not been published; the account rests on the Times' two anonymous sources, so the document's contents are carried as reported, not as independently verified.
On the ladder: the evidence so far sits low — early, single or social sources. We publish the claim as a claim, never as fact.
Why this label: From the Times' description of the document; the talks in Abu Dhabi also included Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, the top US military commander in Europe, the Times reports.
On the ladder: the evidence so far sits low — early, single or social sources. We publish the claim as a claim, never as fact.
Why this label: Anonymous-source accounts of a closed negotiation, carried as the Times reports them.
On the ladder: the evidence so far sits low — early, single or social sources. We publish the claim as a claim, never as fact.
Why this label: Ushakov's confirmation is an on-record Kremlin account of Russia's stance, reported from his 12 November briefing; it corroborates the direction of the reported paper without publishing the paper itself.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
Why this label: Both rejections are the leaders' own on-record words, reported from the Dublin European Political Community summit.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
Why this label: The 2021 drafts are a matter of public record; 16 countries have joined NATO since 1997.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
Why this label: The words are Zelensky's own, reported the same way by the BBC, France 24 and other outlets from his office's release. The American side of the conversation is his account only: US officials had previously said Ukrainian membership was off the table, and no US official has confirmed his account.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
Why this label: His stated position and his referendum conditions, in his own words to reporters.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
Why this label: Zelensky's own words in the same remarks released by his office, reported by both Reuters and CNN.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
Why this label: Zelensky's stated position, in his own words; Moscow denies deliberately targeting civilians, and Russia has not responded to this dismissal in the reporting read.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
Why this label: The exchange and its scale are stated by Zelensky and reported by both outlets; the exact final number has not been announced.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
Why this label: Kushner's own words, in his post on X as reported by both outlets; what the new ideas are, and whether Moscow and Kyiv accept them, are separate questions carried in the don't-know list.
On the ladder: a claim earns Verified from primary evidence, or from two independent sources that do not copy each other.
Why it matters
If the Times' account is right, Moscow's price for ending the war in Ukraine includes rewinding NATO's presence across Eastern Europe — a condition European governments are already publicly rejecting, and one that reaches far beyond Ukraine's own borders.
Background
Show the background timeline (5)
Russia presents draft agreements demanding NATO halt enlargement and roll back to its May 1997 posture; NATO rejects them.
The date on the Russian paper later circulated at the Abu Dhabi talks, on the Times' account.
Kremlin aide Ushakov confirms Russia is demanding a halt to NATO expansion and a return to the 1997 military posture.
Zelensky tells reporters US negotiators raised whether Ukraine would withdraw from Donbas if it joined NATO; he says Ukraine will not retreat and sets the conditions under which he would put a proposal to a referendum.
Kushner says the US focus is now facilitating direct engagement between Moscow and European partners and preparing the next trilateral round; Zelensky dismisses settling a new European security framework before the war ends.
Update history
No silent edits. Every change is written here, with its time.
- Latest
US envoy Jared Kushner said the United States is now focused on facilitating direct engagement between Moscow and its European partners and preparing the agenda for the next round of trilateral talks, and that several new ideas from the talks are being explored. President Zelensky, in his remarks, dismissed settling a broad new European security framework before the war ends, and said the agreed prisoner exchange will involve more than 1,000 people, with the final numbers still under discussion.
Checking in progress — President Zelensky says US negotiators raised for the first time whether Ukraine would withdraw from Donbas if it joined NATO, following this week's Abu Dhabi talks. He says Ukraine will not retreat from its land, and that he would put a proposal to a referendum only if it brought security guarantees, no restrictions on Ukraine's army and funds for restoration. The United States has not confirmed his account.
Published in Checking state — the paper's contents are reported by The New York Times from anonymous sources and have not been published in full, so its claims are labelled as reported.