The confirmation of Russian attendance at the meeting was announced after Vladimir Putin met with Donald Trump's peace envoy Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner in Moscow on Thursday night.
The Kremlin described the four hours of talks as "exceptionally substantive, constructive, and… extremely frank and trusting", but also cast doubt over a breakthrough.
A statement repeated a long-time warning that there's no prospect of a long-term settlement if territorial issues are not solved, according to what the Kremlin said was agreed at last year's Trump-Putin summit in Alaska.
Moscow added that Russia would continue on the battlefield until a diplomatic settlement is reached.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy appeared to suggest the trilateral meeting was a last-minute idea from Washington that was only arranged after a meeting between him and Mr Trump on Thursday in Davos.
Kyiv said it would send its lead negotiator Rustem Umerov and Mr Zelenskyy's chief of staff Kyrylo Budanov, while Moscow has said it will send admiral Igor Kostyukov to head its team at the UAE-based security talks.
What was agreed at Alaskan summit?
While no deal was struck when Mr Trump met Mr Putin in Alaska in August, the two leaders are believed to have discussed the possibility of Ukraine giving up territory in exchange for an end to the fighting.
The Russian leader is said to have told the US president he wants the eastern Donetsk and Luhansk regions, even areas not seized by his forces.
Mr Zelenskyy previously said Moscow wanted the rest of Donetsk - and in effect the entire eastern Donbas region - as part of a ceasefire plan.
He said Kyiv would reject such a proposal as it would deprive Ukraine of its crucial "fortress belt" defensive line, and open the way for Moscow to conduct further offensives.
Zelenskyy lashes out
The agreement on trilateral talks comes after Mr Zelenskyy expressed frustration at Ukraine's European allies and lashed out at them during a fiery speech in Davos.
In remarks that at times seemed reminiscent of Mr Trump's attitude, he warned the continent about a never-ending "groundhog day" and accused countries of a lack of action.
"Just last year here in Davos, I ended my speech with the words 'Europe needs to know how to defend itself' - a year has passed and nothing has changed," he said.
Ursula von der Leyen, European Commission president, later hit back: "We've been supporting the heroic fight of the Ukrainian people for four years. I think on our side, actions speak louder than words."
She added: "We are the largest supporter of Ukraine. In the last four years, more than €193bn (£168bn) and the European Council has just decided to add to this sum another €90bn (£78bn) for the next two years."
Read more from Sky News:
Police forces to be slashed in sweeping reforms
Trump claims NATO allies avoided Afghanistan frontline
Mr Zelenskyy's speech came after a "positive" meeting with Mr Trump, with a peace plan "nearly ready".
However, like Moscow, Kyiv is now focused on territorial disagreements and convincing the White House why Ukrainian red lines should prevail over Russian demands.
Mr Zelenskyy left the Davos forum saying his country had clinched agreements on a new air defence package, and claimed Russia was suffering losses of 45,000 troops a month.
Invoking the spectacle of Bill Murray's classic comedy, Groundhog Day, at a speech in Davos, the Ukrainian president said the UK and Europe are stuck in a doom loop, repeating rhetoric about what needs to be done - without taking the action required to make things change.
This, he said, meant they were left scrambling to respond to world events instead of standing united as a great power with the ability to shape their collective destiny.
Latest - Trump envoy in Moscow
Only from such a position of strength could Europe hope to influence supposed friends such as Trump and foes like Putin.
Addressing the World Economic Forum following a face-to-face meeting with Trump, Zelenskyy said Europe "remains a beautiful but fragmented kaleidoscope of small and middle powers".
"Instead of taking the lead in defending freedom worldwide, especially when America's focus shifts elsewhere, Europe looks lost, trying to convince the US president to change," he said. "But he will not change. President Trump loves who he is, and he says he loves Europe, but he will not listen to this kind of Europe."
Making no effort to mask his frustration, Ukraine's wartime leader listed failure after failure by London, Berlin, Paris, and the rest of Europe's NATO capitals to adopt a united front in the face of rapidly evolving challenges.
In particular, Zelenskyy pointed to the row with Washington over Greenland, which was started and ended by Trump after he threatened to seize the territory, only to back down, but not before plunging the rest of the alliance into crisis and taking attention away from Russia's war in Ukraine.
He also slammed the Europeans for standing on the sidelines while Iran killed thousands of protesters earlier this month, asking: "What will Iran become after this bloodshed? If the regime survives, it sends a clear signal to every bully - kill enough people, and you stay in power. Who in Europe needs that message to become a reality?"
But his strongest condemnation was for the continued weakness of European allies in the face of Russia's full-scale invasion of his country, which is about to enter its fifth year.
Zelenskyy's pointed question
Zelenskyy noted how Trump had moved quickly to capture Venezuela's former president Nicolas Maduro and put him on trial, while Putin remains at large despite European desires to establish a special tribunal to try him for war crimes.
"What's missing - time or political will?" he asked. "Too often in Europe, something else is always more urgent than justice."
He was similarly scathing about efforts to bring about a ceasefire in Ukraine, signalling that work led by the UK and France to establish a "coalition of the willing" - while "positive" - was an empty gesture without US involvement.
And pointless unless the fighting stops.
"What about the ceasefire itself? Who can help make it happen?" he asked. "Europe loves to discuss the future, but avoids taking action today. Action that defines what kind of future we will have. That's the problem."
Finally - and this was a point Zelenskyy first made a year ago, so it is hardly surprisingly he is exasperated at having to make it again - the president called on nations across Europe to create a united armed forces to defend their continent.
This would be instead of relying on an increasingly unpredictable US as part of the NATO alliance - an idea that has in the past been rejected by countries like the UK that put operating with US forces as a central part of their security planning.
Zelenskyy warned that world events right now - from Trump's social media posts to Putin's next bout of hostilities - were moving faster than Europe could cope with.
Read more on Sky News:
Davos trip 'incredible' - Trump
Who's on Trump's Board of Peace?
'Penny dropped' over Greenland
"We should not accept that Europe is just a salad of small and middle powers seasoned with enemies of Europe," he said. "When united, we are truly invincible.
"Europe can and must be a global force, not one that reacts late, but one that defines the future."
The words of John Cuddihy, whose daughter was diagnosed with cancer aged 15 before contracting an infection possibly linked to contaminated hospital water.
The scandal centres on the near £1bn Queen Elizabeth University Hospital in Glasgow that opened in 2015, days after a report, which was leaked by whistleblowers, warned of "high risks" with the water supply.
Several children died and more than 80 fell ill at the campus, which health bosses admit opened too early.
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, the local health board, had always denied any link between the bacteria-related illnesses and the water system. This week the NHS finally conceded some infections were probably linked.
Police and prosecutors in Scotland have named Glasgow's NHS as a suspect in a corporate homicide investigation.
Health leaders have in recent days issued a "full and unreserved apology" for the handling of the crisis and the harm caused.
In 2021, Molly Cuddihy told a public inquiry that she was informed her infection was linked to the "environment", such as water or air.
She died in 2025. Prosecutors have told Sky News they are separately examining her death.
'Failings cost my daughter her life'
Her father, Professor John Cuddihy, had made it his mission to get answers.
The former police officer is at pains to stress the staff treating his daughter over the years were "world class", but he condemns NHS leaders and the lack of transparency.
"It cost Molly her life. The bacterial infection that she had had such a debilitating impact on her quality of life. It was a consequence of… the infection that should never have happened."
An emotional John describes his daughter as "the most remarkable wee girl".
Mr Cuddihy continued: "Molly's life was cut short because of the failings, the corporate failings within an institution that was there to protect her. They failed to protect her. That is very, very hard to forgive."
Mother claims daughter was murdered
The case of 10-year-old cancer patient Milly Main became one of the main catalysts for the creation of the judge-led public inquiry.
She passed away in 2017 after contracting an infection found in water while recovering from leukaemia treatment. Her mother claims she was murdered.
Detectives are examining her death as part of the ongoing investigation.
The whistleblower who isn't convinced the hospital is safe today
Sky News has interviewed Dr Christine Peters, a prominent consultant microbiologist who still works at the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital.
She was the infection control doctor on site when the building opened and she describes "immediately having concerns about the validation of the building".
She risked her career to whistle blow publicly about her concerns when the campus opened, and the ongoing worry she still has.
Dr Peters said: "My concerns were very much focused on the potential for there to be fatal infections and that is why we did what we did."
The senior clinician describes being "mocked" and "intimidated" when raising the alarm among senior NHS leaders, including her contribution being treated as "irrelevant" at hospital meetings.
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde admitted it previously mistreated whistleblowers.
When asked by Sky News if deaths and harm may have been avoided if whistleblowers were listened to, Dr Peters replied: "That is my belief. It is an awful thought. It is difficult to prove because there are so many factors involved."
Dr Peters was questioned about whether she believed the Glasgow super hospital was safe today, as NHS leaders suggest.
She replied: "Clearly everyday thousands of patients are going to that hospital, and my colleagues are brilliant. Do we have the evidence to show us the hospital is safe today? From my personal point of view, I don't have the evidence that satisfies me."
When asked to clarify, she said: "I think in terms of specific details, I don't have details to say one way or the other and after 10 years that is not acceptable."
The battle between cancer and infection
Charmaine Lacock's daughter Paige was two years old when she was diagnosed with leukaemia at the Glasgow super hospital.
Paige is now 10 but is still living with the consequences of an infection she contracted during her cancer treatment.
Ms Lacock told Sky News: "We were told she had a life-threatening infection and that it could go either way. You automatically think my kid is going to die.
"So you prepare for the worst. We should have been in a position where we had all our time and energy to fight the cancer."
The mother, who lives in Clydebank, said she was met with a culture of denial when she pushed for answers and believes there was a conspiracy to cover up what was really happening.
Hospital is safe, says NHS trust…
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde recognises communications failings but has denied a campaign to cover up.
A spokeswoman said: "We offer our sincere and unreserved apology to the patients and families affected.
"We want to reassure patients and families that the QEUH and RHC are safe today. Ensuring the safe care of our patients is our key priority at all times.
"Comprehensive steps have been taken to address past physical defects in the building, and a significant and ongoing programme of maintenance and monitoring is in place. Our staff are committed to providing safe, high-quality care.
"In our closing statements we have acknowledged issues with past culture and communication, and we are committed to learn and continue to improve our approach. We have outlined the significant improvements undertaken as an organisation during this time to improve governance and oversight, and that issues are being addressed both proactively and reactively, and in a timely manner."
…but 'cover-up' claims persist
Karen Stirrat flew her son Caleb to the US for proton beam therapy after he was diagnosed with a brain tumour at the age of three.
She alleges American doctors revealed the medication her son had been prescribed in Scotland was due to "dirty water" and a "dirty hospital" rather than drugs to deal with the cancer.
Ms Stirrat told Sky News about the moment US doctors examined the situation
She said: "It was disclosed over there that it (the drugs given in Scotland) wasn't actually part of his chemo regime after all.
"We were puzzled. They looked at us flabbergasted, and they said they had to phone Glasgow [for answer]."
Karen returned the next day with her husband for answers where she said "the words out the clinician's mouth was 'your dirty water and your dirty hospital'."
Ms Stirrat also alleges a "cover-up" and believes it is to protect themselves from "any future prosecutions".
Scottish Labour has been pressuring the SNP Scottish government over whether there was pressure from ministers in 2015 to open the hospital before it was ready.
First Minister John Swinney rejected the claim.
To suggest that coalition forces fighting with the Americans in Afghanistan "stayed a little back; a little off the frontlines" will also resonate far wider than debates over geopolitical realignment.
It's hard to know sometimes whether Trump is ignorant or just doesn't really care.
As James Matthews and I discussed on the Trump100 podcast, it's probably both, perhaps combined too with some intentional provocation - easier for someone seemingly incapable of empathy.
👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈
His words will be a gut punch for the families of the 1,160 non-American coalition soldiers who were killed in Afghanistan.
It will be a gut punch too for the thousands more who were wounded fighting this war, many left without limbs.
And it will be a gut punch to the soldiers of so many nations who stood up to fight alongside American soldiers on the frontlines and for whom not a day will pass without them thinking about their experiences in that war.
Afghanistan was America's war. America's friends stood up and answered the call for support after 9/11. For over two decades, America's allies would continue with that support in an increasingly futile conflict.
The troops who didn't come home
I spent time with British and Danish soldiers in Helmand Province in 2007. They were very much on the frontline. The Danish lost more soldiers in Afghanistan per capita than any other NATO nation.
Battles in towns like Sangin, Musa Qala, Babaji and Nad Ali are etched in the memories of the many who were there and the many families of those who didn't come back.
Britons remember what became a desperately sad routine: coffins draped in the Union flag passing through the Wiltshire town of Wootton Bassett as the fallen were repatriated and returned to their loved ones.
Read more from Sky News:
Russia to join peace talks with Ukraine and US for first time
Warning issued after three deaths in 18 months at beauty spot
457 British service men and women died in Afghanistan.
Donald Trump dodged the draft for the Vietnam War five times.
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood will reveal plans next week to significantly cut the number of forces from 43.
Critics have argued the current model is bureaucratic and wastes too much money - and some inside government believe smaller forces are not equipped to deal with serious crimes.
It is understood the reforms would involve merging back-office functions to free up resources to be invested in more police officers.
Ministers will also reveal plans for Local Policing Areas - which allow officers to focus on neighbourhood policing, targeting lower level "local crime" such as shoplifting and anti-social behaviour.
The plans - which the Conservatives have said risk "undermining efforts to fight crime" - will not come into place until around 2034, insiders have warned.
The shift in strategy marks the latest development in tensions between the police and home secretary, who last week welcomed plans to allow her to force the resignation of chief constables.
'All forces will have tools they need'
Earlier, a government source pointed to Wiltshire Police, which needed support from 40 other forces to respond to the Salisbury poisonings in 2018, as well as vast differences in charge rates for some offences.
They said: "Under this new structure, all forces - regardless of where they are - will have the tools and resources they need to fight serious crime.
"Where you live will no longer determine the outcomes you get from your force."
It is unclear exactly how many forces will operate under the new framework, but an independent review will be announced to look at precise details.
Read more from Sky News:
Trump sues JPMorgan Chase
Bristol man died tying flags to lamp post
Similar cuts were proposed as long as 20 years ago, also under Labour, when then home secretary Charles Clarke suggested cutting the number of forces to 12.
But the plans were scrapped by his successor John Reid just four months later after the proposed merger of Lancashire and Cumbria police forces collapsed, and senior officers turned against the idea.
Allies of Ms Mahmood stressed her commitment to the reforms, but Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp said there was "no evidence" that merging police forces would cut crime or improve performance.