As the Russian threat intensifies in Ukraine, two Minsk agreements have emerged, signed at the beginning of the war in eastern Ukraine in 2014 and 2015. Russia is the biggest beneficiary of the agreements, says Arkady Moshes, program director at the Foreign Policy Institute.
The threat of war in Ukraine has once again lifted the so-called Minsk agreements. They have even been presented as one of the keys to a solution to a tense situation.
There are still a number of problems with the agreements, says director of the Foreign Policy Institute’s EU Eastern Neighborhood and Russia research program Arkady Moshes Ylelle.
In this story, we will tell you what the treaties are all about and whether they can alleviate the threat of war in Europe.
1. What are the agreements about?
These are two peace agreements that are trying to resolve the war in eastern Ukraine. Among other things, they set out a ceasefire in eastern Ukraine.
There are two peace agreements in Minsk: the first was signed by the warring parties in September 2014. The agreement did not bring peace and the fighting intensified again. Another agreement, the so-called Minsk II (switch to another service)was signed in February 2015.
The Minsk II agreement extends what was previously agreed. In addition to the ceasefire, it outlines political issues related to the rebel areas in eastern Ukraine and the recognition of the areas as special areas as part of Ukraine.
The agreement also mentions the withdrawal of heavy weapons from the front line, the access of OSCE observers to monitor the ceasefire, and the greater independence of the rebel areas in eastern Ukraine as part of Ukraine.
In addition, foreign fighters and weapons should be withdrawn from the area. The agreement states that Ukraine should regain control of the border area with Russia, which is now in the hands of the capital.
The parties have not complied with the agreement.
2. Who are the parties to the agreement?
The peace agreement was signed between Germany, France, Ukraine and Russia, although Russia is not mentioned in it.
On 12 February 2015, the so-called Normandy Group, ie Germany, France, Ukraine and Russia, met in Minsk, Belarus. In addition, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) was mandated to oversee the implementation of the agreement.
Russia is not mentioned in the agreement by name. According to the Kremlin, Russia acts as an observer and “mediator”, even though the country supports the rebel areas of eastern Ukraine both financially and militarily.
The agreement was preceded by fierce fighting in eastern Ukraine in January-February 2015.
– Unfortunately, it happened that the West rewarded people who broke the ceasefire and caused a military escalation. It was a mistake made by Germany, France and other Western powers, the Foreign Policy Institute Moshes assessed to over the phone.
3. Who will benefit from the agreement?
The biggest benefits will be for Russia if Ukraine is not allowed to limit its control until regional elections are held in Donetsk and Luhansk.
Russia has repeatedly accused Ukraine of failing to implement the provisions of the Minsk II agreement relating to the recognition of the special status of Luhansk and Donetsk.
The separate status of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions would give them a constitutional veto over Ukraine’s foreign policy decisions, including the decision to join NATO.
It would be to Russia’s advantage if the Luhansk and Donetsk regional elections were held before Ukraine gained control of the border. Moshes estimates that Russia should ensure that rebels who receive financial and military support from it gain power in special areas.
– The clauses in the agreement are in conflict with common sense. It cannot be assumed that elections in accordance with European standards could be held in the regions so that Ukrainian parties could stand as candidates or the people would receive objective information.
The reintegration of the rebel areas into Ukraine would, in practice, allow Moscow to influence Ukraine’s domestic and foreign policy processes.
– If the Minsk agreements were implemented as they are, the current constitution of Ukraine would become a mere blank paper, because then Ukraine would lose its status as a unified state, Moshes says.
Ukraine buried the agreement as early as early 2015, when Russian-backed rebels began a military escalation. In seven years, attitudes towards the agreement have not changed. Ukraine is demanding the withdrawal of Russian troops from eastern Ukraine, but Russia denies the presence of its troops in the region.
4. Why is the agreement relevant right now?
Russia has repeatedly referred to the Minsk II agreement recently. There are several reasons.
According to Moshes, the Ukrainian army has strengthened in recent years. Furthermore, contrary to Russia’s expectations, the conflict in eastern Ukraine has not isolated Ukraine from Europe, but on the contrary, for example, economic cooperation between Europe and Ukraine has strengthened in recent years.
– Russia has become more active because it wants to slow down this development. Apart from the Minsk agreements, it has virtually no other means, at least not recognized by the international community, Moshes says.
In recent weeks, it has become increasingly clear that the West has included Ukraine as part of its own security strategy. This has been reflected in the delivery of unprecedented military assistance to Ukraine.
Without the Minsk agreements, Russia will only have the means to exert pressure, such as disrupting energy supplies and port operations, as well as cyber-attacks.
5. Does the Minsk II Agreement reduce the threat of war?
The Minsk agreements are unlikely to help ease tensions between the West and Russia.
Minsk II is a legal document that will allow Russia to pursue its own demands, but the inflamed state between the West and Russia is hardly affected by the Minsk agreements.
At the heart of the conflict between Russia and the West is security disputes. From Russia’s perspective, in addition to NATO enlargement, the conflict consists of many other real and imagined threats.
Ukraine is only one scene in the conflict between the West and Russia, although it is very important to Russia.
According to Moshes, Germany and France have thought since the early days of the conflict in eastern Ukraine that if tensions in Ukraine are cooled, relations between Russia and the West will return to normal.
According to Moshes, this will not happen, because the situation in Ukraine will not be resolved in accordance with Russia’s demands.
– The paradox is that the conflict cannot be resolved today, but without resolving the conflict, relations between the West and Russia cannot be promoted in the long term.
You can discuss the topic until Saturday 19.2. until 11 p.m.