Don’t Let Russia Fool You About the Minsk Agreements

Article

The recent phone discussion between US President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin has renewed the focus on the Minsk Agreements as a potential solution to the escalating Russian military presence in Eastern Ukraine.

The Minsk Agreements, while imperfect and subject to varied interpretations, are crucial for dialogue with Russia and exerting pressure to prevent further invasion. Germany and France, instrumental in crafting the deal, and the United States play key roles in ensuring that Russia doesn't enforce a one-sided interpretation of the Agreements against Ukraine's interests.

Despite their imperfections, the Minsk Agreements are vital to the ongoing diplomatic efforts regarding Ukraine for two reasons: firstly, they represent the latest formal, written commitment by Russia acknowledging Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity; secondly, Russia's non-compliance with the deal forms the basis for maintaining EU sanctions against it. These sanctions are crucial in persuading Russia to conclude the war.

For the Minsk implementation to gain momentum under the Biden Administration and Germany's new government, it's important to correct Russian misinformation about the Agreements and clarify their actual implications.

Key aspects of the Minsk Agreements include:

Two Separate Agreements: The Minsk Agreements comprise two separate documents. The initial Minsk Protocol, signed on September 5, 2014, was primarily a ceasefire agreement along the then line of contact, which Russia failed to honor. Increased hostilities by February 2015 led to the second agreement on February 12, 2015. Despite this, Russian-led forces captured Debaltseve soon after. These agreements are interconnected, with the first establishing the groundwork for an immediate ceasefire and thorough monitoring by the OSCE, including along the Ukraine-Russia border.
Russia as a Signatory: Russia is a party to the Minsk Agreements, along with Ukraine and the OSCE. Contrary to its claims of merely facilitating, Russia is actively involved in the Ukrainian conflict and is obliged to adhere to the terms of the deal.
Non-Recognition of LPR and DPR: The signatures of the leaders of the so-called Luhansk and Donetsk Peoples’ Republics (LPR and DPR) were appended after the initial signing by Ukraine, Russia, and the OSCE. These entities are not recognized as legitimate in the Minsk Agreements, and Ukraine would not have signed the deal had their signatures been included initially. The agreements do not legitimize LPR and DPR, and they should not be considered negotiating parties.
Russian Violations of the Agreements: Russia has breached the Minsk Agreements, which call for a ceasefire, the withdrawal of foreign military forces, the disbandment of illegal armed groups, and the restoration of Ukrainian control over its border with Russia under OSCE supervision. Russia continues to maintain military presence and influence in Eastern Ukraine, contrary to the terms of the agreements.
OSCE's Hindered Mission in Donbas: The OSCE Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) in Ukraine faces obstructions from Russian-led forces in fulfilling its mandate as outlined in the Minsk Agreements. Despite Russia's official approval of the SMM's mandate, it impedes the mission's implementation on the ground in Ukraine. The majority of ceasefire violations and movement restrictions experienced by the SMM are attributed to the Russian-controlled side, with those on the Ukrainian side largely due to safety concerns.