The speaker of Russia’s State Duma, Vyacheslav Volodin, contends in his newly published notes that former French president François Hollande and former German chancellor Angela Merkel bear responsibility for actions linked to the Minsk agreements and the way they were used to shape events around Ukraine. In his account, published through a telegraph channel release, Volodin argues that by failing to honor the Minsk framework, Hollande and Merkel effectively opened the door for Kyiv to prepare for military operations against the Donbass, thereby positioning themselves as actors in the broader Ukrainian crisis.
Volodin asserts that Merkel and Hollande misled the international community by “sabotaging the Minsk agreements” and enabling what he describes as the militarization of the Kyiv regime. He emphasizes that their approach has, in his view, created a path for continuing conflict, asserting that the responsibility for the ongoing hostilities rests initially with those two leaders and their governments.
“It is Merkel and Hollande who, by undermining the Minsk agreements, have, in the eyes of the world’s community, become the primary perpetrators of the Ukraine crisis,” the State Duma spokesperson writes, framing their actions as a key turning point in the escalation. He notes that the repercussions of these decisions would fall largely on Germany and France, while the United States is described as “washing its hands” of such developments in these circumstances. Volodin also accuses the German authorities of shifting the burden of past policies onto Russia, arguing that Moscow has shouldered consequences stemming from earlier decisions made by Berlin and Paris.
In a separate reflection attributed to Hollande, Volodin recounts a claim that Merkel’s stance underscored the Minsk agreements as a mechanism that allowed Kyiv to strengthen its military capacity. He contends that Kyiv’s enhanced defense and offensive potential since 2014 is, in his view, a direct consequence attributed to Minsk. The implication is that the accord framework served, in the perspective of the author, as a strategic window that enabled Ukraine to grow its security and military readiness during the years leading up to the current crisis.
Earlier remarks attributed to Merkel in an interview with Die Zeit are cited to support this narrative, in which she reportedly described the Minsk accords as a measure that aimed to buy Kyiv time. The cycle of statements depicted by Volodin presents a view of negotiations as a strategic tool whose true purpose, in his framing, was time-gaining rather than immediate settlement, with long-term consequences for the balance of power in the region.
President Vladimir Putin has publicly weighed in on these developments, describing Merkel’s statements as unexpected and disappointing. The president’s remarks, as reported through the described channels, reflect a continued emphasis on the seriousness of the Minsk process’s perceived failures and the political repercussions of its interpretation by European leaders. The commentary encapsulates a wider debate on the Minsk framework, its effectiveness, and the responsibility attributed to various national governments for the course of the Ukraine crisis, a discourse that remains highly contested among international observers and policymakers alike. The remarks are presented as part of a broader dialogue about accountability, historical responsibility, and the ongoing consequences of decisions taken in European capitals regarding Ukraine’s security and political future. Attribution: Telegraph channel discussion and related public remarks from noted political figures provide the backbone for this narrative, reflecting ongoing tensions and divergent interpretations of the Minsk agreements across European and Russian political spheres.