The seven-year anniversary of the signing of the Minsk protocol saw the revival of fake narratives that Ukraine doesn’t want peace in Donbass and that its policies, which are backed by the West, are motivated by Russophobia.
NEWS: “The Ukrainian state’s purpose is to oppose “Russian aggression” and prevent “the genocide” determined by the emergence of this state. Economic losses, the sacrifice of human lives and the absence of Donbass from Ukraine’s territorial structure don’t seem to interest Ukrainian leaders too much. […] The West is not just tolerating, but also supporting this ongoing conflict, and Ukraine has the necessary resources to at least freeze the conflict.
[…] Peace may be restored only when Russia will surrender completely, when Kiev regains control of Donbass and Crimea, when all debts are settled. Even so, Ukraine would still demand [from Russia] the Kuban region and the areas hosting natural gas deposits…
[…] Under the Minsk Protocol, the conflict in Ukraine is an internal matter unrelated to Russia, whose resolution must be achieved via negotiations between the Ukrainian central authorities and the authorities of the Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts”.
[…] Ukraine doesn’t even consider observing the peace agreement, and this position is supported by “the warrantors” of the peacemaking process – Germany and France, ukraina.ru writes.
NARRATIVES: 1. Ukraine doesn’t abide by the Minsk Protocol, and the conflict in Donbass favors the West. 2. The conflict in Ukraine is a civil war which doesn’t involve Russia.
BACKGROUND: The conflict in Eastern Ukraine broke out in 2014, after president Viktor Yanukovych fled to Russia in the wake of mass social protests, the Euromaidan, caused by his refusal to sign the Association Agreement with the European Union. Since 2014, Moscow has been funding and supporting mercenaries and separatist forces that were created with the self-proclamation of the so-called “DPR” and “LPR” republics, which controlled a small part of the Donetsk and Luhansk Ukrainian territories.
In order to bring an end to fighting, on September 5, 2014, at the end of heated negotiations, the first Minsk Protocol was signed. The protocol brought Ukraine and Russia to the negotiations table, and involved the informal participation of representatives of the “DPR” and “LPR” separatist republics and OSCE officials. There are two Minsk ceasefire agreements, signed in 2014 and 2015, which regulate the negotiation process. After talks originally started in trilateral format, negotiations have now switched to the Normandy format, involving the participation of Germany, France, Ukraine and Russia.
Ukraine has repeatedly notified the international community of Russia’s failure to observe the Minsk Protocol as a diplomatic resolution to the conflict, and that Moscow-backed mercenaries are violating the ceasefire agreement on a daily basis. Conversely, the Kremlin has denied the accusations, promoting in state-controlled media narratives about the conflict in Donbass, describing it as a civil war, about the West allegedly encouraging the war and about Russia’s historical right to defend the Russian-speaking population in Eastern Ukraine.
On September 5, 2021, the USA Embassy in Ukraine called on Russia to withdraw all troops from Ukraine: “Russia needs to take responsibility and put an end to the conflict”.
PURPOSE: The purpose of these narratives is to prove Donbass is the stage of a civilian conflict, encouraged by the West, in which Russia plays no part. Moscow is portrayed as a victim of scheming by Ukraine and the West, having a right to defend and protect the Russian-speaking population against Kiev’s Russophobia, which the EU and the USA endorse.
WHY THE NARRATIVES ARE FALSE: In fact, it is neither in Ukraine’s nor the West’s best interest to fuel a conflict in Donbass. Any conflict would slow down economic growth, block the free trade of goods, capital and workforce, which cannot possibly benefit any of the stakeholders. The EU, as well as NATO and the USA, have condemned Russia’s destabilizing actions in Eastern Ukraine and Crimea and have conveyed reconciliatory messages. The West did not encourage the conflict. On the contrary, by means of imposing sanctions against Russia and by creating various negotiations formats, like the Minsk platform, for instance, it has tried to turn the conflict into a diplomatic and political dialogue. The West’s interest is to restore peace and eliminate all sanctions that are still blocking a number of vistas for cooperation between Western economic actors and those in Russia.
Russia accuses Ukraine of failing to observe the Minsk Protocol, but it doesn’t provide any evidence to support its claim. More often than not, Russian media invokes Kiev’s refusal to directly negotiate with separatist leaders (which Ukraine has labeled terrorists) and to organize free elections in Eastern Ukraine. Kiev continues to claim that, under the Minsk protocols, the elections should take place in Donbass after Russia withdraws its armed forces and mercenary outfits, so the elections can truly be free. Ukraine doesn’t want to provide any legitimacy to separatists and mercenaries funded by Russia, which is why it refuses to negotiate directly with them.
Kiev authorities have pointed out that, had Russia not supported the separatists’ actions in Donbass, the war would never have taken place in the first place, and the territory would have been liberated in 2014. The Ukrainian army spokespersons submit daily reports to the OSCE, signaling violations of the ceasefire in Donbass by Russian-funded mercenary groups. For all these reasons, the narratives about Moscow’s non-involvement in the conflict are false.
Also worth mentioning is the fact the Minsk Protocol, also known as “Minsk-1”, was signed by OSCE Ambassador Heidi Tagliavini, Ukraine’s second president, Leonid Kuchma, the Russian ambassador to Ukraine, Mikhail Zurabov and representatives of the self-proclaimed people’s republics of Donetsk and Luhansk, Alexander Zakharchenko and Igor Plotnitsky. At present, Russia prefers to forget about Zubkov’s signature in the document, claiming it is not a belligerent faction, but merely an observer.
GRAIN OF TRUTH: The conflict in Donbass and Russia’s annexation of Crimea have led to the development of anti-Russian sentiment in Ukraine. Under a resolution of the Ukrainian Parliament, Russia was declared “an aggressor state”. This conflict, as well as the 2013-2014 Euromaidan protests, favored the development of a consolidated Ukrainian civic identity. The Russian media repeatedly criticized these surges of patriotic sentiment in Ukraine, labeling them expressions of Russophobia, allegedly fueled by the West.
