There are several objective reasons why the agreements reached during the Minsk negotiations cannot be completed to the end by any of the parties. This article is an attempt to organize information, received from open sources, on the contradictions that exist in the process of the Minsk negotiations.
In lieu of a preface
The essence of Russia tactics in the ongoing processes can be described by a statement, that was once expressed by the Secretary of the Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Mikhail Suslov:
"One of these days the Georgians will start to fight against communism, for independence. The fight against the Georgians should be begun in Abkhazia. Autonomy should be given to Samegrelo and Svaneti. It is necessary to stir up parochial and national feelings in them separately. We need to convince everyone that the Georgians are placed in Abkhazia. Тo Georgia's eastern part. After that, we are to play the role of a mediator."
Russia's imperial policy has led to the occupation of several countries' territory by that state. Russia is trying to present its armed aggression against these countries as internal conflicts. The essence of a hybrid war is that kind of misleading attempts and trying to present an external armed aggression as internal conflicts on the occupied territories.
De-facto, the following events are taking place in Ukraine.
- 1) An invasion of (an attack on) the territory of Ukraine by the armed forces of the Russian Federation and occupation and annexation of a part of the Ukrainian territory including Crimea.
- 2) Blockade of ports, the Ukrainian coastline and airspace, disruption of communication lines of Ukraine by the armed forces of the Russian Federation.
- 3) The assault by the armed forces of the Russian Federation on military ground, sea or air forces, or the civil marine and air fleets of Ukraine.
- 4) The infiltration of the armed groups of regular or irregular forces engaged in acts of military violence against Ukraine by the Russian Federation.
- 5) The slaughter of citizens of Ukraine.
Currently, the international community believes the Minsk negotiations to be one of the means to deter the Russian aggression. However, for Russia, they are a tool to make Ukraine surrender its interests and, in fact, to capitulate. Moreover, as it will be shown below, the text of the agreements was written in Russia and in the interests of Russia itself. Furthermore, the agreements reached clearly contradict many articles of the Constitution of Ukraine. At the same time, due to the existing contradictions, they cannot be completed by any of the parties.
We present an attempt to systematize the existing contradictions in Minsk agreements below. All documents and photos are taken from the open press.
The Minsk negotiations
Part 1. Documents on the basis of which the representatives of Ukraine are assigned.
Most of the facts outlined below are taken from publications and interviews of the ex-judge of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, the first Prosecutor General of Ukraine, merited lawyer of Ukraine Viktor Shishkin. He carried out extensive work on legal assessment of all aspects of the Minsk negotiations. Below, there is one of V. Shishkin's speeches, where he considers the compatibility of the Minsk agreements with the legislation and Constitution of Ukraine in a most detailed way.
Let us start with President Petro Poroshenko's order to confer powers on Leonid Kuchma during the Minsk negotiations.
As it follows from the text of the Order, Leonid Kuchma is granted authority only to represent Ukraine, but not to sign anything. Besides, that order mentions that Leonid Kuchma acts on a voluntary basis during the Minsk negotiations.
There is a contradiction - how can a volunteer sign international agreements? Consequently, the representative of Ukraine in the trilateral contact group has no right to sign any document. Kuchma represents Ukraine and has no other powers.
Next point. According to the Minsk agreements, we make commitments under some international document. However, article 9 of the Constitution of Ukraine stipulates Ukraine's international treaties are only binding if ratified by the Verkhovna Rada. In other words, international treaties become national law if the Parliament gives its consent for them to be binding.
The Minsk agreements were not ratified either by Parliament of Ukraine (as the Constitution requires) or by the Parliament of Russia. Then why does Ukraine or Russia have to fulfill them?
The Minsk agreements are thus not binding for Ukraine, since they were not ratified by the Parliament, and the representative of Ukraine at the negotiations in Minsk, Leonid Kuchma (according to the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko's order) was not authorized to sign them.
Part 2. The personalities of the negotiators.
There are obvious questions about Ukraine's delegation. Apart from Leonid Kuchma, Ukraine is represented by Viktor Medvedchuk at the Minsk negotiations. Below there is a simple set of well-known facts about this "representative of Ukraine."
- Viktor Medvedchuk was a KGB informer in prison where he was serving a criminal sentence for beating a minor;
- Viktor Medvedchuk was recruited by the KGB and had the cover name "Sokolovsky";
- Viktor Medvedchuk was the well-known Ukrainian human rights defenders, dissidents, Yuri Lytvyn and Vasyl Stus's lawyer. Medvedchuk did everything to put the famous poet Stus in jail. Vasyl Stus and Yuriy Lytvyn died in the camps;
- 2004 Ukrainian election fraud.
- Viktor Medvedchuk appears in a number of criminal cases, in particular the case on the illegal privatization. One of the episodes: he captured a piece of land and had the facilities of the Baranov children's antitubercular sanatorium demolished for the construction of his Crimean villa.
- It is Viktor Medvedchuk who is the main ideologist of separatism in Ukraine. Under his direct participation the separatist organizations in Ukraine were created and funded through him by the Kremlin. Later they became the basis for the formation of the armed terrorist groups.
- It is Viktor Medvedchuk who is the author of the idea of the so-called "decentralization" and the federalization of Ukraine. It is actually aimed at the destruction of Ukraine as a unified state.
- It is Victor Medvedchuk who advised Putin to tear 8 regions off from Ukraine with about half of the population of Ukraine and to create an entity subordinate to the Kremlin in that region — the so-called "Ukrainian Federation". Medvedchuk was supposed to become its head.
- It is Viktor Medvedchuk who supervised the preparation of the so-called "referendum" in Crimea and the preparation of Crimea's takeover by Russia.
- It is Viktor Medvedchuk who is now blackmailing the People of Ukraine by the execution of prisoners of war. Although the collaborators in power say that Medvedchuk is busy with the release of prisoners of war.
In fact, Viktor Medvedchuk is a new concept in international politics. He is called a “Representative of terrorists".
In addition to Medvedchuk on the side of Ukraine in the negotiations, a close friend of Medvedchuk's (and his purse at the same time) Nestor Shufrych is involved. By the way, he does not appear anywhere in official documents and is also an odious pro-Russian politician.
Another side of the negotiations is represented by Heidi Tagliavini. In President Petro Poroshenko's order she is called (literally): "the special representative of the acting head of the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe." She is known for her statements that the Russian-Georgian war was started by Georgia. It is noteworthy that the main provisions of the EU report on the war between Russia and Georgia, compiled under her direct guidance, call the Russian occupation army the "Russian peacekeepers on Georgian territory (in South Ossetia)." Now, this lie has become obvious worldwide.
On the part of the terrorists some Zakharchenko and Plotnitskiy are taking part in the negotiations. Who are Zacharchenko and Plotnitskiy?
There is no document confirming their powers as representatives of anyone or anything. Neither their position nor date nor anything else has been mentioned. Those individuals' participation in the negotiations is not required by any documents.
In Ukraine, the world's first precedent was set, when the terrorists are one of the parties of the negotiations.
Although in fact, the Russian regular troops operating on the occupied territories meet the definition of "terrorists" very figuratively. If we can call a spade a spade, this is a Russian armed attack on Ukraine. And it has a clear definition - the "war".
The world’s first precedent was thus created in Ukraine when a country (Ukraine) being subjected to aggression by the country-guarantor of the Budapest Memorandum (Russia), which committed itself to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, was forced to make concessions to the aggressor. Moreover - in this case, negotiations were initiated and are conducted with the representatives of the puppet administration created by that aggressor.
There is a legitimate question. Can we consider a piece of paper signed by that kind of "representatives" binding for Ukraine? That sort of "agreements" have nothing to do with international agreements.
The representatives of Ukraine at the Minsk negotiations didn't therefore have the legal powers to. Not to speak of the representatives of the other parties.
The evidence of this fact results in the Ukrainian people's adequate attitude towards the Minsk negotiations. It was often said that the Minsk agreements were written in the Kremlin and were essentially aimed at the capitulation of Ukraine to the Kremlin. Suffice it to recall the human rights activist, political prisoner of the Soviet concentration camps, the Ukrainian 1st, 2nd and 4th convocations MP, the Hero of Ukraine, one of the authors of the Declaration of Independence of Ukraine Stepan Khmara's appeal to the People of Ukraine. In his appeal, he directly and reasonably highlights the fact that Minsk negotiations are nothing more than a surrender of Ukraine's interests and the capitulation of Ukraine to the aggressor country of Russia.
Part 3. The Minsk agreements
Below are the agreements signed by the trilateral contact group. The full text of this "document" is published on the official website of the President of Russia. You can also read the full text here >>>