European governments are expressing growing concern about being excluded from upcoming negotiations aimed at ending the conflict in Ukraine, even as they remain divided over how best to influence the process. The talks, scheduled to take place in Abu Dhabi, involve the United States, Russia, and Ukraine, with little formal European participation. This situation has been further complicated by recent moves from U.S. President Donald Trump, who has relaxed sanctions on Moscow and urged Kyiv to seek a peace deal with Russia, prompting unease among European capitals.

The prospect of significant decisions affecting European security being made without their input has fueled tensions within the continent. Last week, the leaders of Norway and Finland took the unusual step of calling Russian President Vladimir Putin directly to convey their positions, without first securing backing from the European Union. The call drew swift criticism from various EU member states including Denmark, Italy, and Lithuania, with Lithuania’s foreign minister Kęstutis Budrys emphasizing the need for a unified European stance and a clear agenda when engaging with Russia.

Norway’s Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre defended the outreach, stating that while he did not expect Putin’s stance to change, the dialogue ensured that Moscow heard Norway’s concerns firsthand. Støre acknowledged internal divisions within Europe on how such contacts should be handled, noting that he had not sought formal EU approval given differing perspectives among member states.

European diplomats and officials have highlighted a broader dilemma: despite Europe’s significant economic leverage—ranging from sanctions relief potential and over €200 billion in frozen Russian assets to Ukraine’s bid for EU membership—it has struggled to convert this influence into meaningful diplomatic clout in the peace process. While Washington and Kyiv increasingly recognize Europe’s essential role in any lasting agreement, European governments remain sidelined in direct negotiations, heightening fears that the U.S. and Russia might reach accords on issues such as security guarantees that could impact NATO without consulting European partners.

Russia has explicitly rejected European participation in the talks. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the negotiations did not envision EU involvement, a position reiterated by Putin, who defended the Nordic leaders’ contacts as part of a constructive dialogue by some European figures who do not seek Russia’s strategic defeat.

Analysts note that Russia may prefer European involvement that is indirect, allowing the U.S. to exert pressure on Europe to acquiesce to Russian demands. Alexander Gabuev, director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, suggested Moscow is likely to avoid substantive negotiations until after the winter, counting on military pressure such as heavy air strikes to weaken Ukraine’s position at the negotiating table.

Within Europe, opinions differ on the approach to securing influence. Germany, the largest military supporter of Ukraine, sought to downplay the internal backlash over the bilateral contacts with Putin, stressing that Norway and Finland communicated positions aligned with ongoing negotiations. However, some German lawmakers criticized the uncoordinated outreach, warning it risked legitimizing Russia’s intentions and undermining collective European strategy.

Meanwhile, several European diplomats cited the so-called E3 group—Britain, France, and Germany—as the most probable European actors to engage in any formal talks, a dynamic that some smaller countries worry may marginalize their voices. As the conflict persists, European nations continue to navigate complex internal divisions while seeking a role in shaping the future of Ukraine and regional security.