Where do the Minsk agreements come from?
The accords were the result of negotiations between Ukraine and Russia with which France and Germany sought to end the fighting in eastern Ukraine in 2014. There, pro-Russian separatists, supported by Moscow, had proclaimed two republics: the Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR) and the Luhansk People’s Republic (LNR). At the beginning of 2015, the agreement was expanded with a series of political agreements into a new agreement: Minsk-2.
Did the chords yield anything?
As a result of the agreements, the intensity of fighting around the rebel areas has decreased considerably, although the pro-Russian separatists captured the strategically located city of Debaltseve from the Ukrainians a few days after the signing of Minsk-2.
Under OSCE supervision, the rebels and Kiev have also exchanged hundreds of prisoners, but the fighting has never completely stopped.
Ukraine accuses Russia of not living up to the agreement that all foreign (read: Russian) troops would be withdrawn from the area. Moscow has also continued to arm the separatist army, which now numbers some 40,000. The separatists and Kiev are accusing each other of violating other ceasefire agreements, such as withdrawing heavy weapons from the front lines.
As far as the political agreements are concerned, the Minsk agreements have remained a dead letter.
What is the biggest stumbling block?
The main problem is that Russia and Ukraine are in complete disagreement about the future status of the insurgent areas. According to Minsk-2, those areas should return to Kiev’s control, but with “special status” within Ukraine.
Moscow is demanding that Ukraine give the territories extensive autonomy, including a de facto veto over foreign policy, such as possible accession to NATO and the European Union. That is unacceptable for Kiev, especially since Moscow is in practice the ruler in the rebel republics.
It was also agreed that Ukraine would regain control of the border with Russia as soon as local elections were held in the areas according to OSCE standards. But that is only possible, according to Kiev, if Russia has removed all its soldiers. A bottleneck is also: can the hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians who have fled from the areas also participate in the elections?
What are the chances that Russia and Ukraine will get out?
Very small. Kiev does not want to go beyond some form of local self-government, including the right to maintain people’s militia units. According to the Ukrainian leaders, yielding to Russian demands would mean that Ukraine would lose its sovereignty and lose another part of its territory after Crimea. Moscow has now given a large part of the inhabitants of the DNR and the LNR Russian passports, with which Russia now presents itself as a protector of their rights.
It is also highly questionable whether President Zelensky will dare to accept Putin’s demands, even if he wanted to. That would probably lead him to a popular uprising against his government. Since the annexation of Crimea by Russia, the anti-Russian mood among the population has risen sharply.
Why then do France and Germany put so much emphasis on the importance of further negotiations on the Minsk agreements?
First of all, because they have also put their signature to the agreements. But the most obvious explanation is: to waste time. As long as there is talk, the guns are silent.
There is also a more cynical interpretation. On principle, the western countries do not want to give Russia the guarantee that Ukraine will never join NATO, but if Kiev itself opts for a settlement in the negotiations that amounts to a guarantee of neutrality, nobody will object. President Macron even spoke of the ‘Finlandization’ of Ukraine, following the example of Finland, which had to comply for decades under pressure from the Soviet Union in a far-reaching form of neutrality.
Yet the Franco-German attempt to revive the Minsk accords also poses a danger. Because France and Germany have guaranteed compliance with the agreement, Ukraine will come under extra pressure. If Kiev stands firm and rejects the Russian demands, the Kremlin can use that as ‘proof’ that Ukraine is not adhering to the ceasefire agreements despite the mediation services of Paris and Berlin. That could become an argument for a military operation for Moscow.