The Minsk agreements and the debate over halted commitments
Western doubts about Russia’s adherence to the Minsk accords helped set the stage for a new military operation. On the program Moscow, Kremlin channels reported statements from Dmitry Peskov, the press secretary for the Russian president, relayed on Russia 24. He argued that Moscow gradually saw through Kiev and its Western partners’ promises under Minsk as a hoax. Peskov claimed that President Putin and other Russian officials had repeatedly raised these concerns, but the other participants in the negotiations ignored them. He described this as a warning sign of a forthcoming special operation.
These remarks echoed the interpretation later attributed to Angela Merkel, the former German chancellor. In an interview with Zeit published on December 7, Merkel was quoted as saying the Minsk agreements were designed to buy Ukraine time to strengthen. She added that the West understood early on that the conflict between Kiev and Moscow was not fully resolved, though it appeared frozen, and that NATO’s level of military support to Ukraine had grown since 2014.
What are the Minsk agreements?
The initial Minsk accords were signed in 2014 within a tripartite framework involving Ukraine, Russia, and the OSCE. A year later, Minsk-2 was concluded with the participation of Germany and France. The overarching goal was to resolve the conflict in Donbass.
According to the Minsk framework, both sides were to cease fire, establish a buffer zone along the contact line free of heavy weapons, and conduct prisoner exchanges on the basis of reciprocity. Kiev was to enact laws granting special status to parts of Donbass within the borders of the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics and to hold elections in these areas under new arrangements.
In practice, the agreements were not fully implemented. Ukraine repeatedly accused Russia of failing to meet obligations and of resisting negotiations with representatives of the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics. Moscow countered that it was not a party to the internal Ukrainian conflict and argued that Kyiv increasingly used official excuses to evade Minsk compliance.
Merkel’s comments did not go unnoticed in Western and Ukrainian media, while European politicians offered mixed responses. One of the rare foreign leaders to speak up was Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić, who called Merkel’s remarks “incredible” and recalled that former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko had warned Kyiv would not honor Minsk.
“This shifts the political landscape. It is a clear signal not to trust promises at face value. If only they could be deceived by someone stronger than us—Russia—yet since 2012 we have used time better than others,” Vučić remarked during a press conference in Kyrgyzstan.
During a December 9 press conference in Kyrgyzstan, Vladimir Putin commented on Merkel’s statements, noting they were disappointing. He said he did not expect the former German chancellor to speak so openly and warned that such remarks affect trust. The president observed that trust between Russia and the EU had fallen to a low level and questioned how Moscow and Western capitals would negotiate in the future and what guarantees such deals would have.
Despite these tensions, Putin indicated readiness for negotiations with Western countries and expressed confidence that Russia would engage in future agreements.
Maria Zakharova, Russia’s foreign ministry spokesperson, described Merkel’s remarks as a candid admission of misrepresentation. She suggested that while Kyiv had signaled it would not honor Minsk, Western participants in the Normandy format had not stated this so plainly. Zakharova argued that Merkel acknowledged a pattern of deception and weapon deliveries to Kyiv in 2015, underscoring a perceived lack of concern for Donbass civilians and for Ukraine overall. She characterized the situation as a political maneuver and a test for accountability.