Posted on 10/31/2022 8:52:49 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
RE: You are arguing technicalities again and not the essence, and the technicalities were designed to procrastinate the whole thing.
Nope,I am arguing THE POINT. You talk about procrastination yet IGNORE the factors behind WHY the delays occurred.
Why did the Minsk Agreements fail?
There are certainly problems with Minsk. But they are not the problems that well-intentioned detractors claim.
The first problem is relying on the Russian narrative on Minsk as if that is a reliable read of the actual text of the agreements.
Russian-led forces prevent the OSCE from accomplishing its mission in Donbas as spelled out in the Minsk Agreements. It is an unstated irony in Vienna — understood by every single diplomatic mission and member of the international staff — that Russia approves the mandate of the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) in Ukraine when it votes in Vienna, but then blocks implementation of that same mission on the ground in Ukraine. That is NOT a technicality. It is what is stopping Minskfrombeing implemente.
Because Russia is a member of the OSCE, and the SMM wants to preserve what little access it has to the occupied territories, the mission is guarded in what it says about ceasefire violations and restrictions on its freedom of movement.
Privately, however, they acknowledge that some 80% of such violations and restrictions come from the Russian-controlled side of the border, and those that occur on the Ukrainian side are largely for safety reasons (e.g., avoiding mined approaches to bridges.)
Possibly one of the biggest misunderstandings about Minsk (certainly in Ukraine itself) is that the much-discussed Special Status for these Russian-dominated regions equates to autonomy. It does not. And, again, that is what Russia would like us to think it means.
Minsk does not foresee local elections PRIOR to de-occupation. Nor does it imply that Russia is a mediator. Nor does it imply that the war in the Donbas is an internal conflict. All three of those points are, again, on Russia’s wish list of how the world should view the agreement.
There were indeed serious problems with the Minsk Protocol. The biggest is that Russia simply failed to heed it ( while at the same time mouthing platitudes). On a daily basis Russia and the forces it directs flout the first three (and most basic) provisions of the deal ( Those were outlined by yourself in detail above ):
* A ceasefire;
* The withdrawal of heavy weapons;
and
* Providing full access to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and its Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) to Ukraine.
On the last point, Russia in September 2021 ( Prior to their full scale invasion months later) vetoed an extension of the OSCE SMM mandate to monitor two small border crossing posts on the internationally recognized border.
The biggest flaw in Minsk (along with the notion that Russia or the separatist she supports would respect it) is that it could not contain any mechanisms for failure to uphold the provisions.
You might want to call it a technicality but IT IS THE POINT.
Any future negotations ( if there ever will be one ) MUST take these flaws into account.
But to repeat, UNFORTUNATELY, Russia has shown that it has no patience for continued negotation by launching this full scale invasion that has already killed hundreds of thousands on both sides.
Your trying to analogize this to some theorteical California- Mexico struggle is out of place here. Negotations would have allowed the Russians speakers in Donbas to continue learning and studying Russian. Kyiv would have provided amnesty to combatants who have not committed severe crimes, and Ukraine would hold local elections and awarding special status to territories now held by separatists.
So, going back to your Mexico- California analogy, Had there been such a problem, the solution would STILL be continued negotations, not the USA invading Mexico and bombing the hell out of their cities ( or vice versa ).
RE: How silly is it to side with Kiev on that?
And what is my alternative? TO side with the INVADER who could have continued a difficult negoation but instead, opted for death and destruction? In fact, it would be SILLY OF ME ( Silly is an unerstatement ) to side with the Kremlin on this.
I don’t think you are so gullible to believe all of this.
The language issue was raised by Kiev in 2014 specifically for the reason of tweaking Russia.
It naturally provoked unrest and desproportional response from Kiev with the idea for Russia to either let it float and let the far right within Russia to undermine Putin as weak and turn away international allies. Alternatively, he had to directly intervene and be branded “aggressor”.
Your government wanted this war, it finally got it and losing it, along with the US international prestige and world standing.
Yet, it is all Putin’s fault.
The only reason why the Minsk agreements failed was that Kiev’s sponsor wanted the situation to escalate further and further at the expense of people of the land.
Your crocodile tears are out of place, aren’t they?
bttt
RE: The only reason why the Minsk agreements failed was that Kiev’s sponsor wanted the situation to escalate further and further at the expense of people of the land.
Your crocodile tears are out of place, aren’t they?
No They’re NOT out of place. Your narrative is that of Russia’s.
The agreements require political measures on Ukraine’s side, including a special status for the region, an amnesty for those who committed crimes as part of the conflict, local elections, and some form of decentralization under the Ukrainian constitution. But the form of these measures is not specified, and Ukraine has already passed legislation addressing every point.
It has passed – and extended with renewals – legislation on special status and amnesty, and already has legislation on the books governing local elections. It has passed constitutional amendments. The Minsk Agreements do not require Ukraine to grant autonomy to Donbas, or to become a federalized state.
It is the Kremlin’s unique interpretation that the measures passed by Ukraine are somehow insufficient, even though the agreements do not specify what details should be included, and Ukraine has already complied with what is actually specified to the degree it can.
What is lacking in Ukraine’s passage of these political measures is not the legislation per se, but implementation — which Russia itself prevents by continuing to occupy the territory. For example, international legal norms would never recognize the results of elections held under conditions of occupation, yet that is exactly what Russia seeks by demanding local elections before it relinquishes control.
And guess what? Putin did it again by FORCING THROUGH a sham referendum just a few weeks ago.
So yes, this has to be Putin’s fault ( I differentiate his personal culpability from those of ordinary Russians ).
RE: Your government wanted this war, it finally got it and losing it, along with the US international prestige and world standing.
My government DID NOT want this war. The proof of this can be very simple. If Russia withdrew hwe troops and stops mobilization, there would be no need for my government or NATO to arm Ukraine. I can guarantee you that.
RE: Your crocodile tears are out of place, aren’t they?
I guess this is typical of the Putin war supporter. He see’s the death of hundreds of thousands as mere statistics an numbers and does not care a whit about these people. And anyone who expresses concern are by your view, crying crocodile tears.
Why didn’t you shoot Bush and burned White House when the Iraq 2 took place?
RE: Why didn’t you shoot Bush and burned White House when the Iraq 2 took place?
I did not support Bush’s invasion of Iraq and openly voiced against it in these threads.
But your argument amounts to — Because President Bush did wrong, Therefore Putin is similarly justified in doing wrong as well.
The situations are unparalleled.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.