Ukraine crisis: Leaders agree peace roadmap

a reply to: paraphi

The agreement is a good thing.. However I seriously doubt Putin will honor it if he agrees to it. There was already another report of more Russian tanks / equipment / etc flowing into Ukraine.

Putin wants the land bridge and wont stop until he gets eastern Ukraine.


Fifty tanks, 40 missile systems crossed from Russia into east Ukraine overnight: Ukrainian military

a reply to: noeltrotsky

50 more Russian tanks and 40 more missile artillery crossed over into Ukraine during the 'peace' negotiations in Minsk.

Right...and a Sith Lord and 1500 Imperial Stormtroopers. Forgive me if I take Kiev's claims with a grain of salt until we see some actual proof....

a reply to: Xcathdra
The details of the agreement are fairly scant, but cynically I take the view that ceasefires just help both sides consolidate without fear of disruption.

However, this BBC view starts adding flesh to the bones...

Minsk deal

The question being is whether Russia will seek to spoil this deal, preferring mayhem and violence as this diverts attention from the elephant in the room. Crimea, and the theft thereof.

On the face of it, Russia has gained very little, except Crimea. Maybe, that is enough.

Regards

a reply to: paraphi

All I am seeing is the original agreement but with a time table...

The rebels wont go for the vote since it would be following Ukraine law.
The rebels nor Russia are going to give up the border controls.
The OSCE, as Russia likes to claim, monitors the border however its only 2 crossings out of a hundred plus miles. Russia has refuses to allow the OSCE to station more monitors at other border crossings.

Kiev is not going to go for a federation style constitution and he has stated this many times.

With that said lets see what happens and hope for the best.


ETA:
As I was saying...

No New Memorandums to Be Signed if Minsk Agreements Violated – DPR Leader

Lets wager on how many hours it will be before the rebels claim Ukraine violated the agreement. I am getting a feeling that they think only Ukraine has to comply with the agreement in terms of removal of forces and heavy weapons.

a reply to: noeltrotsky

It`s coming from Kiev, so we can take it with a grain of salt.

Kiev can`t be trusted to comply, in all other cease fire attempts they have sabotaged it.

So it seems only logical to do that. The timelines are strict, and Kiev has no other choice as to fulfil it`s part of the deal, militarily wise it doesn`t hold the cards.

The Separatists/Russia aren`t so foolish as to believe Kiev all of sudden now, but if it starts again it will be Kiev being behind it again, and this will be their last change, if they don`t comply now there will be no agreement again.

Technically, if there have been weapons given to the Separatists it has become theirs and it`s not foreign anymore.

You can also discuss what foreign forces are, Russian volunteers belong to the NAF, and by so are not foreign.

What it`s really about is, if Kiev withdraws its forces from the engaging line and stops the hostilities. Followed up by taking the steps to go forwards to bigger autonomy for Eastern Ukraine as has been agreed.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

That's not what the agreement calls for. ALL sides must withdraw and remove heavy weapons. All groups must be disarmed.

the elections are to be administered via Ukrainian law.

So if the US and other nations conduct military exercises in west Ukraine and leave their weapons there then they technically belong to Ukraine who can use them as they see fit.

The rebels / Russia failed to comply with the first minsk agreement.. I doubt they will now.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
Well I'm sick of seeing the online fighting on ats over the ukraine. Never has one subject been so alienating to the neutral. So I see this as a move in the right direction, which I'm sure will be seen as picking sides, by some

Yeah your a dam communist Obama loving terrorist pacifist pinko!

We should have WAR!!!! *beats cheat" Yeah USA needs to march into Moscow! give them some western whoop ass!

Bring back the draft!

Activate the nukes!

Drop the Napalm

USA USA USA!

(sarcasm by the way)

Incase any missed the point im highlight the stupidity of anyone who thinks negotiations is a bad thing. And I used the USA cause it only seems to be Americans (albit a small minority as most seem to have the IQ to comprehend WW3 would be a bad thing) that want military action.

a reply to: Xcathdra

It is withdrawing weapons behind a certain line.

It only calls for all foreign heavy weapons to be withdrawn out of the Ukraine, so heavy weapons belonging to the Ukrainians and Separatists will remain in the Ukraine on both sides but at a distance of the engagement line.

I wish I could have a positive expectation, but peace treaties lately seem to break pretty quick.
I cant say if its Putin or Kiev that does it, but some rebel somewhere will fire his gun, retaliation will occur and it'll be back on, after both sides have had a chance to rearm and regroup - of-course!

Great news if it actually holds. I don't see that happening though. It was just a few weeks ago that the separatists stated they wouldn't agree to any ceasefire.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

If we follow your logic, then weapons and materiel being used by the separatists which were stolen from Ukraine should be returned to the Ukrainian authorities.

Putting aside the differing views of who broke previous ceasefires, the details of the deal do seem to favour Ukraine, Crimea being the exception.

Apart from the hopeful outbreak of peace, the sovereignty of eastern Ukraine seems to have been a point conceded by Russia and that the wider processes from now on will be in conformance to Ukraine law. That is the important point that should not be missed.

Regards

a reply to: Agit8dChop

There are different fractions with weapons on the West side and not all seem to be following what Kiev wants, but the Separatists retaliate and have stayed reasonably restrained in those matters in the past. So I don`t think that will be the problem, the problem will more be if Kiev starts to go on with provocations by shelling the cities of Luhansk and Donetsk, but that can only only be done if the heavy weapons aren`t pulled back behind the agreed lines.

If Kiev is serious about upholding the agreement, it will be more what are some of the other small armies going to do as being the real danger (not all want the fighting to stop).

originally posted by: paraphi
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

If we follow your logic, then weapons and materiel being used by the separatists which were stolen from Ukraine should be returned to the Ukrainian authorities.

Putting aside the differing views of who broke previous ceasefires, the details of the deal do seem to favour Ukraine, Crimea being the exception.

Apart from the hopeful outbreak of peace, the sovereignty of eastern Ukraine seems to have been a point conceded by Russia and that the wider processes from now on will be in conformance to Ukraine law. That is the important point that should not be missed.

Regards

No, your logic fails because Eastern Ukraine stays within the Ukraine so the weapons will not be foreign.

This deal doesn`t favour Kiev/the West that much...Russia will keep influence in the Ukraine because Eastern Ukraine stays within the Ukraine although with more autonomy.

It`s actually a bit for all 4 parties, all had to give in and at the same time got something.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
Great news if it actually holds. I don't see that happening though. It was just a few weeks ago that the separatists stated they wouldn't agree to any ceasefire.

CNN is reporting that some Ukrainian rebels are already planning to ignore the ceasefire.

As much as I want peace to hold, I see this lasting about as long as the last Minsk agreement.

First thing is that if the hostilities are going to stop, the benefit will be for all 4 parties.


- Kiev gets out of it, it`s military not being completely annihilated and the Ukraine staying "whole"

- The West keeps their puppets in power in the Ukraine

- Eastern Ukrainians a stop in the shelling and great deal of autonomy with "respect" for its civilians interest

- Russia keeps having influence in the Ukraine and no NATO in the Ukraine at least for now

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

For every argument saying its the rebels there's another argument saying its Kiev - it's really either - or and to be frank, they'll probably both do it at the same time.

Its been a year since Sochi, look how far we got so quick. This isn't coming to a end because leaders have an agreement.. one which France, Germany and Ukraine said wasn't 100% agreed upon.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Only two things can be at hand, either it`s a set up to go on with the fighting and already the media is preparing to make it look like the Separatists are at fault, or CNN is screwing up again with describing several of the Ukrainian fractions now as "Rebels."

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
No, your logic fails because Eastern Ukraine stays within the Ukraine so the weapons will not be foreign.

No, but my logic was correct and your reply has reinforced that. The bit you are missing is that if the weapons were originally Ukrainian then they belong with the proper Ukrainian authorities, which you refer to as Kiev. They don't belong with Ukrainian civilians. Come to that, all the military equipment in the vicinity is Ukrainian as (we are told) Russia has provided nothing!

This deal doesn`t favour Kiev/the West that much...Russia will keep influence in the Ukraine because Eastern Ukraine stays within the Ukraine although with more autonomy.

Autonomy granted through due process and in accordance with Ukrainian law and not the gun. The level of autonomy is to be decided. If this deal holds then Russia has gained nothing from this enterprise (except Crimea) and quite a lot of misery and blood for the slate, sanctions and turmoil.

Regards

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

For every argument saying its the rebels there's another argument saying its Kiev - it's really either - or and to be frank, they'll probably both do it at the same time.

I don`t consider Western Media/Kiev spin to be an argument about what actually happened the last few times, I try to keep track about how hostilities have unfolded.

Did you know, according to Minsk I Kiev was going to give up the Donetsk airport and pulled their heavy weapons away which could be used to shell Luhansk and Dontesk, well they never did both and kept on shelling civilians. So fighting continued around the airport and when Kiev lost that fight they made a half backed offensive which made the NAF go in offensive, the constant shelling of civilians was the other reason being behind it.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Only two things can be at hand, either it`s a set up to go on with the fighting and already the media is preparing to make it look like the Separatists are at fault, or CNN is screwing up again with describing several of the Ukrainian fractions now as "Rebels."

With it being CNN, I'm sure there's nuggets of propaganda mixed in with the report. I don't know if the cease fire will last. I hope it does. I really do, but if history is any indication, it will last only long enough for Russia/Ukraine to regroup and re-arm, and then it'll dissolve all over again.