Monday, February 16, 2015

The New Minsk2 Agreement in Western Media was Greeted with Little Enthusiasm

The Western press about the "Minsk-2": an agreement that is unlikely to change anything...

The New Minsk2 agreement to Western media was greeted with little enthusiasm: a peaceful settlement of the few people believe, however, politely stating "a glimmer of hope." Basically journalists were busy with disputes about who mostly signed by the contact group on Ukraine agreement is beneficial - Kiev or the Kremlin. Any significant changes in the rhetoric did not happen - the West is still stubbornly demanding peace in the Ukraine by the Russian president, and if he does not organize the world, then Moscow will exert pressure with new sanctions.

For example, according to The Independent , the cease-fire agreement is vital, but its unequal in conditions and more beneficial to the Kremlin. At the same time, any weakening of the onslaught in the fighting on the Eastern Ukraine, of course, is an achievement, but no one entertains the illusion that a peace settlement is not still very far off.

The article says that Putin on his hands too "strong hand" because it "powers him over the fate of the Ukrainian economy, dependent on Russian gas." The "righteous posture defender integrity of Russia" raises its rating from citizens, simultaneously diverting attention from economic problems. "A brazen hypocrisy with which he continues to deny the fact that all observers know without a shadow of a doubt: that Russian forces have long played a dominant role in the conflict, does not encourage much credibility as a partner in negotiations," - the author writes.

This is followed by the usual appeal to the US and EU to agree together and "clearly make it clear that easing existing sanctions will not be up to full implementation of the conditions of the" Minsk-2 ". 

Like, you need to explain that Russia will pay much, if not return control of Ukraine Ukrainian-Russian border. Usually sounds and concluded that although Putin in Minsk won a lot, but I have to understand that "if it is cynical and prevent disruption of the cease-fire, waiting for him unpleasant consequences."

German publication Der Spiegel believes that if the main points of the agreement are still in Ukraine are met, the EU and the US will be able to normalize relations with Russia and to lift the sanctions. In this case, the publication noted that if the fighting continues, the summit in Minsk would be useless, as is likely, given that in the Ukrainian army, and "separatists" have units "only play by their own rules."

So if they continue fighting the same Hollande and Merkel again will attempt to start negotiations, but in this case the new sanctions and delivery of lethal weapons in Ukraine will have inevitable that generate a new round of sharpening. The publication also notes that the implementation of all the other cardinal points of the agreement is highly unlikely: hardly "Verkhovna Rada did adopt a law on the special status of eastern Ukraine in the past month," and "Russia will remove from the territory of Ukraine troops."

But in the article The Guardian claimed that this is a turning point for Ukraine. The author notes that Putin Poroshenko hardly dared a handshake at the beginning of the peace talks in Minsk, "the fact that the discussion lasted all night, suggests that both of them had to force concessions that they do not like", which, however, means that the agreement is very "fragile" and "hanging by a thread."

The immediate task, according to the publication, should be to create a lasting ceasefire, ending the terrible bloodshed, but a political settlement - the next part of the plan of Minsk - even more difficult. In this case, it would be a disaster "to solve the self-proclaimed" People's Republic "remain in their current state, creating around the cities of Donetsk and Lugansk" frozen conflict ".

At the same time, talking about how great the opportunity to Putin's control "insurgents", the author points out that "their determination to have their own state" is reinforced. So constitutional reforms guaranteeing the rights of Russians living in the south and east of the country - is the execution that the West should check, "putting pressure on Kiev to quickly deliver on their promises." The author also warns against weapons of Ukraine, as this will only spur the development of the conflict.

"If you do not mind the cold prevail, with all sides, the consequences for Europe would be catastrophic," - said in conclusion.

The New York Times in a new peace plan finds reasons for hope and doubt. As the author points out, the next few days will be fast and specific test for the effectiveness of a new peace agreement. When thinking optimistically, it must be borne in mind that "Minsk-2" was signed in the presence and with the personal approval of two major European leaders and President Putin and Poroshenko. 

However, the "pessimists (some would call them realists) believe that the new agreement only veils many of relentless problems that initially provoked hostilities", - says the publication. The article quoted a former US Ambassador to Ukraine Steven Pifer, "This is a fragile agreement requiring integrity and installation to complete efforts of the parties, which in the past is not particularly showed these properties."

As pointed out by a number of dissatisfied with the results of negotiations in the West, the new agreement will help Moscow in the long term to create a "frozen conflict", despite the fact that Ukraine will assume responsibility for financing the rebel areas. The "Kiev will not have effective control over these areas, but Russia will not be official responsibility."

No comments:

Post a Comment