The negotiations in Berlin lasted significantly longer than planned: Jens Plötner, foreign policy advisor to Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD), sat with his colleagues from Kiev, Moscow and Paris until late in the evening on Thursday.
In view of the Russian troop deployment on the border with Ukraine, hopes are now being pinned on a seven-year-old agreement: the Minsk agreements are intended to point the way to a peace solution for eastern Ukraine – and ideally to defuse the current crisis at the same time. But the Minsk agreements are now seen less as a way to solve the problem than as part of the problem by those familiar with the details.
The two agreements that Russia and Ukraine reached in 2014 and 2015, mediated by Germany and France, contain a number of steps to end the war in eastern Ukraine. However, implementation has not progressed for years, and not even the ceasefire has been observed. The matter of the Minsk agreements turned out to be more complicated than expected. For example, the peace plan lacks a clear chronological sequence of steps towards peace.
Various interpretations in Kiev and Moscow
This shortcoming was later to be eliminated by the “Steinmeier formula”, named after the German foreign minister at the time. Accordingly, Ukraine would have to grant the self-proclaimed people’s republics a temporary special status from the day on which elections take place there. If the elections could be considered free and fair, the special status would be permanently enshrined in the Ukrainian constitution. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy agreed to this formula despite domestic criticism. But even that does not end the dissent between Kiev and Moscow.
[Wenn Sie aktuelle Nachrichten aus Berlin, Deutschland und der Welt live auf Ihr Handy haben wollen, empfehlen wir Ihnen unsere App, die Sie hier für Apple- und Android-Geräte herunterladen können.]
Ukraine believes that free elections in the Donbass will only be possible once Moscow has withdrawn its fighters and weapons and the border with Russia is once again under Ukrainian control. In contrast, the Kremlin has claimed since 2014 that it is not itself a party to the conflict, even though the separatists in eastern Ukraine are largely directed and financed by Russia and supported by Russian fighters and Russian weapons.
Moscow is repeatedly calling for the implementation of the Minsk agreements for one reason in particular, knowing full well that this is unacceptable for Kiev: according to Moscow’s interpretation, a special status for eastern Ukraine and the corresponding constitutional amendment would result in the “people’s republics” having a right of veto central government decisions. This could prevent the country from joining the EU and NATO. The Ukrainian interpretation of the agreements, on the other hand, does not provide for such far-reaching co-determination rights.
The Kremlin is increasing the pressure
Russia also wants Ukraine to negotiate directly with the separatists about further steps in the peace process. The government in Kiev rejects this because such talks would represent recognition of the self-proclaimed people’s republics and would support Moscow’s legend of a “civil war” without Russian participation.
The Kremlin is currently increasing the pressure on Ukraine to implement the Minsk agreements – in the Russian version, of course. President Vladimir Putin criticized that the agreements were being ignored by Ukraine. At the same time, there is growing concern in Kiev that Western partners could pressure the country to make concessions with far-reaching consequences in order to persuade Putin to withdraw his troops stationed around Ukraine.
