What are the Minsk agreements? (The Economist explains)

THE first deal to end the crisis in Ukraine was signed in early September 2014. Two years later, with more than 9,500 people killed, the conflict is still festering. The latest attempt at a ceasefire from September 1st broke down after little more than a week; on September 13th, separatist leaders in eastern Ukraine raised hopes when they announced a unilateral ceasefire, their first such offer. Yet as Germany’s foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, meets Ukraine's president, Petro Poroshenko, in Kiev to discuss the Minsk agreements today, it is clear that peace remains a distant dream. "We have experienced long periods of standstill and when progress has been made, it has been in millimeters," says Mr Steinmeier. What are the Minsk agreements and what do they stipulate? 

In February 2014 Ukraine's ex-president, Viktor Yanukovych, fled Kiev following months of street protests. Russia annexed Crimea in March. Hostilities erupted in eastern Ukraine, where a Russian-backed separatist movement began seizing cities. Ukrainian forces went on the offensive, and appeared poised to retake the separatist-held territories by August. But Russian reinforcements rolled in from across the border, knocking the Ukrainians back and threatening to push farther into the country's heartland. A hasty peace deal between Ukraine, Russia and the separatists halted the onslaught. But this agreement, known as Minsk I, soon broke down. By January 2015, full-scale fighting had broken out again. In February, Germany’s Angela Merkel and France’s François Hollande stepped in to revive the ceasefire, brokering a "Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements", known as Minsk II. 

The product of a marathon all-night negotiating session, Minsk II offers a detailed roadmap for resolving the conflict. The 13 point-plan begins with a ceasefire and the withdrawal of heavy weapons from the front lines, to be monitored by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). An “all for all” prisoner exchange, local elections and amnesty for fighters are to follow; both sides are to ensure the safe delivery of humanitarian aid and work toward the socio-economic reintegration of the separatist-held territories. Ukraine promises to implement constitutional changes to provide for “decentralisation”; in exchange, all “foreign armed formations” will be withdrawn and Ukraine will regain control of its state borders. But the agreement is riddled with loose language and the sequencing of many steps is highly convoluted.  

In public, officials declare that there is no alternative to the Minsk agreements. But in private, few see any chance for its full implementation. Although the worst of the violence has abated, skirmishes along the line of contact continue. Ukraine and the West insist on a full ceasefire before moving forward with the political elements of the deal. Russia, in turn, accuses Ukraine of failing to fulfill its political promises. Domestically Ukraine’s president, Petro Poroshenko, faces staunch resistance to an agreement that grants Moscow most of what it wanted, saddling Kiev with responsibility for the separatist territories while giving them enough autonomy to hinder Ukraine’s Western integration. Working group meetings continue in Minsk, but they are a fig leaf for real progress. Although the worst of the violence has abated, skirmishes along the line of contact continue. Yet the simmering status quo is not peace, and thus no guarantee that there will not be more war.

Original