Minsk Accords-who broke them-why does it matter?

[gringo]

I doubt the West will ever recognize Crimea and four other regions of Ukraine as Russian territory. https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/09/1129102

It's all Western propaganda, isn't it..https://www.hrw.org/europe/central-asia/ukraine

   The World is moving on, Steve. Nobody gives a fuck what the West recognises.
    It is noticeable that on a thread devoted entirely to a subject, that you have brought up many times in the "Russia" thread, that you have had no rebuttal to the facts supporting the legality of the Russian SMO under R2P doctrine.
     You and David have raised Russia's alleged breaches of Minsk 2 (it is why I started the thread) many times without being able to articulate them. Just the accusation that Russia "broke" the Minsk agreements in a non specified way. I have laid out the timeline of the agreements and details of how and when they were breached by the Ukraine regime - on behalf of their sponsors.
     How the actions that Russia had taken over the previous 8 years via diplomatic channels and by taking agreements to the Security Council meant that they had the responsibility to act when they did. Their actions have always followed the correct legal procedures and made the breaches by Ukraine a matter of official record.
     You have had the opportunity to challenge the above and to inform us of the alleged breaches of "Minsk 2" by Russia. You have pathetically but predictably failed to offer a single rebuttal to the above or a single instance of, "Russia breaking Minsk 2" on a thread devoted to that subject. This, despite making countless vague "drive by" accusations on "Russia " thread.
     Out of your depth.

[Steve_uk]

No I already mentioned the diplomatic leaks by Russia. Additionally Russia claimed not to have forces in Donbas, when it incited the insurgency all along. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/what-are-minsk-agreements-ukraine-conflict-2022-02-21/

[gringo]

No I already mentioned the diplomatic leaks by Russia. Additionally Russia claimed not to have forces in Donbas, when it incited the insurgency all along. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/what-are-minsk-agreements-ukraine-conflict-2022-02-21/

   Well apparently Russia breached diplomatic protocol by releasing confidential correspondence with French and German negotiators. -Steve

    Apparently! You need to do better than that. You also need to then tell how this "apparent breach" of "diplomatic protocol" broke the Minsk agreements You haven't said anything just vague innuendo.
    The second part of your comment is just your un-evidenced biased opinion and irrelevant. It is evidence of nothing but your gullibility.  The Minsk agreements override any notion of who instigated events and your opinion on this issue is irrelevant to the subject. Minsk is the road map to a solution. Arguments about the instigator are of no relevance to the matter.
    Everyone who wants to know already knows who has been doing the provoking. 

[Steve_uk]

   Well apparently Russia breached diplomatic protocol by releasing confidential correspondence with French and German negotiators. -Steve

    Apparently! You need to do better than that. You also need to then tell how this "apparent breach" of "diplomatic protocol" broke the Minsk agreements You haven't said anything just vague innuendo.
    The second part of your comment is just your un-evidenced biased opinion and irrelevant. It is evidence of nothing but your gullibility.  The Minsk agreements override any notion of who instigated events and your opinion on this issue is irrelevant to the subject. Minsk is the road map to a solution. Arguments about the instigator are of no relevance to the matter.
    Everyone who wants to know already knows who has been doing the provoking.

The road became a blind alley. Donbas was offered autonomy, not union with Russia. Don't you understand that Kiev could never accept de facto annexation by Russia?

[gringo]

The road became a blind alley. Donbas was offered autonomy, not union with Russia. Don't you understand that Kiev could never accept de facto annexation by Russia?

   The "road" was a blind alley because of the admissions by Ukraine, German and French leaders of their bad faith from day one. You won't address this. It renders everything that you say redundant. Blaming Russia despite unequivocal admissions and evidence that Russia abided by Minsk whilst Ukraine and sponsors acted in admitted bad faith from the start.
    You are ignoring the equivalent of a signed confession. You have zero credibility and seem to not understand your own incoherent argument.

[Steve_uk]

   The "road" was a blind alley because of the admissions by Ukraine, German and French leaders of their bad faith from day one. You won't address this. It renders everything that you say redundant. Blaming Russia despite unequivocal admissions and evidence that Russia abided by Minsk whilst Ukraine and sponsors acted in admitted bad faith from the start.
    You are ignoring the equivalent of a signed confession. You have zero credibility and seem to not understand your own incoherent argument.

You know full well Russia was fomenting unrest amongst a minority of Russian speakers living in Donbas, an integral part of the Ukrainian state. https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/russia-is-not-a-party-to-the-minsk-agreement#

[gringo]

You know full well Russia was fomenting unrest amongst a minority of Russian speakers living in Donbas, an integral part of the Ukrainian state. https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/russia-is-not-a-party-to-the-minsk-agreement#

    Steve-Neither I nor you "know full well Russia was fomenting unrest amongst a minority of Russian speakers". What are known full well are the steps that I have laid out in this thread and that you have failed to challenge. What I have laid out is an undisputed record of agreements, breaches and the presentation of these facts over 8 years by Russia to the UNSC.
    Your link, again, offers nothing and you are unable to articulate any rebuttal to those facts. Were NATO fomenting any unrest? UK, US - anyone else, do you think, fomenting unrest?
    You have nothing to say as you demonstrate time and again. How did Russia break Minsk. You are still nowhere near attempting this question. You have told us often that Russia broke Minsk 2. When asked to elaborate you never have. I started a thread specifically for the cases for the failure of Minsk 2 to be explained. You still have no answers. Your bias and impartiality obscure your thinking. Instead of addressing the inconsistencies in your position- you run from them and change the subject.
    Here is your opportunity, Steve, to clearly and coherently explain how Russia broke the Minsk agreements making their R2P claim illegitimate. That would make their operation illegal. You have posted nothing to challenge this.
    You don't even really understand the debate that you are in.
     

[Steve_uk]

    Steve-Neither I nor you "know full well Russia was fomenting unrest amongst a minority of Russian speakers". What are known full well are the steps that I have laid out in this thread and that you have failed to challenge. What I have laid out is an undisputed record of agreements, breaches and the presentation of these facts over 8 years by Russia to the UNSC.
    Your link, again, offers nothing and you are unable to articulate any rebuttal to those facts. Were NATO fomenting any unrest? UK, US - anyone else, do you think, fomenting unrest?
    You have nothing to say as you demonstrate time and again. How did Russia break Minsk. You are still nowhere near attempting this question. You have told us often that Russia broke Minsk 2. When asked to elaborate you never have. I started a thread specifically for the cases for the failure of Minsk 2 to be explained. You still have no answers. Your bias and impartiality obscure your thinking. Instead of addressing the inconsistencies in your position- you run from them and change the subject.
    Here is your opportunity, Steve, to clearly and coherently explain how Russia broke the Minsk agreements making their R2P claim illegitimate. That would make their operation illegal. You have posted nothing to challenge this.
    You don't even really understand the debate that you are in.
     

I told you previously about breaking diplomatic protocol.  Russia demaded further concessions on 13 May 2015,  to which no self-respecting independent government could acquiesce. Russia was not party to Minsk 2 officially (though if you think Mikhail Zubarov wasn't Putin's puppet then I'm a Dutchman), so I don't know why you continue banging on about it. The ceasefire had broken down, which rendered the agreement null and void.

[gringo]

I told you previously about breaking diplomatic protocol.  Russia demaded further concessions on 13 May 2015,  to which no self-respecting independent government could acquiesce. Russia was not party to Minsk 2 officially (though if you think Mikhail Zubarov wasn't Putin's puppet then I'm a Dutchman), so I don't know why you continue banging on about it. The ceasefire had broken down, which rendered the agreement null and void.

    And I asked you how Russia had broken "diplomatic protocol" to which you had no answer. Just some vague unspecified "thing".
    We need to know how, specifically, Russia "breached protocol", as I have spelt out how Minsk 2 was broken by Ukraine + sponsors. What were these further concessions-how did they break Minsk? The admission of bad faith from the beginning by Ukraine, France and Germany cannot be ignored or hand-waved away. It is a signed confession that they are the aggressors. Your failure to address or understand this most important and telling fact of all, renders your apologia worthless.
     The elephant in the room, Steve, is that Ukraine and their sponsors have admitted that they broke Minsk. Blaming Russia, given what is admitted and known, is a ridiculous and indefensible position-which explains why you can't and just offer vague innuendo.
     The reason I "bang on about it" is because you and David constantly bring up Minsk agreements only to claim that Russia broke them. When asked to specify how, neither of you ever do, instead you quickly change the subject. Nor have you on this thread.
     Now hopefully, you will stop, "banging on about it" every other page on the Russia thread before refusing to discuss further. In future I will just link you to this thread every time you raise Minsk-to demonstrate that you know nothing about it despite raising the subject countless times. And how far out of your depth you are.

[Steve_uk]

    And I asked you how Russia had broken "diplomatic protocol" to which you had no answer. Just some vague unspecified "thing".
    We need to know how, specifically, Russia "breached protocol", as I have spelt out how Minsk 2 was broken by Ukraine + sponsors. What were these further concessions-how did they break Minsk? The admission of bad faith from the beginning by Ukraine, France and Germany cannot be ignored or hand-waved away. It is a signed confession that they are the aggressors. Your failure to address or understand this most important and telling fact of all, renders your apologia worthless.
     The elephant in the room, Steve, is that Ukraine and their sponsors have admitted that they broke Minsk. Blaming Russia, given what is admitted and known, is a ridiculous and indefensible position-which explains why you can't and just offer vague innuendo.
     The reason I "bang on about it" is because you and David constantly bring up Minsk agreements only to claim that Russia broke them. When asked to specify how, neither of you ever do, instead you quickly change the subject. Nor have you on this thread.
     Now hopefully, you will stop, "banging on about it" every other page on the Russia thread before refusing to discuss further. In future I will just link you to this thread every time you raise Minsk-to demonstrate that you know nothing about it despite raising the subject countless times. And how far out of your depth you are.

Maybe you don't understand diplomacy or confidentiality. France and Germany complained this had been breached. I don't have the details, and why would I? As for the further demands, they were for Donetsk and Luhansk to control the border between the Donbas and Russia, the right to conclude agreements between foreign states, their own charters overriding the President of Ukraine, the right to decide their own budgets, to introduce states of emergency and hold their own elections and referendums, and compel Ukraine to write a neutrality clause into its constitution.

It seems you don't know as much as you thought after all.

[David1819]

  The reason I "bang on about it" is because you and David constantly bring up Minsk agreements

I have never brought up the Minsk agreements.

[gringo]

Maybe you don't understand diplomacy or confidentiality. France and Germany complained this had been breached. I don't have the details, and why would I? As for the further demands, they were for Donetsk and Luhansk to control the border between the Donbas and Russia, the right to conclude agreements between foreign states, their own charters overriding the President of Ukraine, the right to decide their own budgets, to introduce states of emergency and hold their own elections and referendums, and compel Ukraine to write a neutrality clause into its constitution.

It seems you don't know as much as you thought after all.

   You don't have the details. Of course you don't. There are no details because there is no credible accusation.
    The supposed "extra demands" are nothing of the sort and a straight up lie. Russia could not make these "demands". The negotiations that were meant to be started by the Ukrainian government were never started. How could Russia make extra demands? The "demands" that you list are the starting point of negotiations by the republics representatives. It is how negotiations work. The Ukrainians failed to put forward anything by way of negotiation or even recognise the leaders as specified in Minsk 2. Ukraine were already admittedly ignoring the whole agreement.
    So you don't know what these protocol breaches are but believe them anyway without even knowing what they are?!
    Your accusation about Russian demands lacks any substance whatsoever. How, specifically, Russia broke an agreement it wasn't party to- that the other side have already admitted nullifying by their non compliance and bad faith from day one.
    All that you have written is unsupported by anything and you are unable to enlighten us. So, perhaps I do know as much as I think I do. I can, at least, coherently put my case forward.
    You're nowhere near that.

[Steve_uk]

   You don't have the details. Of course you don't. There are no details because there is no credible accusation.
    The supposed "extra demands" are nothing of the sort and a straight up lie. Russia could not make these "demands". The negotiations that were meant to be started by the Ukrainian government were never started. How could Russia make extra demands? The "demands" that you list are the starting point of negotiations by the republics representatives. It is how negotiations work. The Ukrainians failed to put forward anything by way of negotiation or even recognise the leaders as specified in Minsk 2. Ukraine were already admittedly ignoring the whole agreement.
    So you don't know what these protocol breaches are but believe them anyway without even knowing what they are?!
    Your accusation about Russian demands lacks any substance whatsoever. How, specifically, Russia broke an agreement it wasn't party to- that the other side have already admitted nullifying by their non compliance and bad faith from day one.
    All that you have written is unsupported by anything and you are unable to enlighten us. So, perhaps I do know as much as I think I do. I can, at least, coherently put my case forward.
    You're nowhere near that.

Yes and I still look like Kurt Cobain.

[gringo]

Yes and I still look like Kurt Cobain.

    Snide comments, such as the above, don't change facts. Russia are not a party to the Minsk agreements. It isn't even an arguable point, but is all that you have. To dispute this just shows that you have nothing.
     

[David1819]

https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/ukraine-destroyed-the-minsk-agreements#