World press on the new Minsk agreement (February 12, 2015)Commenting on the agreement recently reached in Minsk, British newspaper the Telegraph writes that the agreement in its present form "requires no real concessions from Vladimir Putin. Instead, the proposals for a ceasefire and a withdrawal of heavy artillery impose disproportionate obligations on Ukraine.... One of the few ways by which Ukraine has been able to hit back is by using heavy artillery. But if the guns fall silent under the new Minsk agreement, then Ukraine will lose its main way of pounding its enemies in the lost territory. A withdrawal of forces along the ceasefire line will also provide little comfort. After all, this will mark the de facto partition of Ukrainian territory." According to the article the emerging agreement does not satisfy Poroshenko's demands and will turn the conflict into a frozen one."Ukrainian Truce Sealed as All-Night Summit Fails to Erase Doubts," American business news publication Bloomberg Business writes. Many are skeptical that the new agreement will ensure a ceasefire. This skepticism was reflected in prices for the ruble today, which weakened 0.5 % against the dollar today, the article reads. Despite the behavior of the ruble, Russian stock and bonds climbed after the new Minsk agreement was made public, another article on Bloomberg reads. If the new deal holds, there will be a reduced risk of anti-Russian sanctions, which would lead the markets to continue to react positively to the change in Ukraine, the article reads."Ukraine peace deal looks fragile in the extreme," British newspaper the Guardian believes. "In the short term, the Franco-German duo appears to have stopped the fighting – for now, at least – prevented further escalation, headed off US pressure to supply arms to Kiev, and dragged the recalcitrant Putin back onboard. Europe can breathe a brief sigh of relief. But the Minsk achievement looks fragile in the extreme. It is still very much in the making, the second beginning of a long, fraught process. Unseen calamities could suddenly unravel all the leaders’ work. Merkel was candid. The deal provided a “glimmer of hope” and no more, she said. When Hollande stressed there was still much work to do, he never spoke a truer word," Simon Tisdall, the author of the article writes."This is a make-or-break moment for Ukraine," another article in the Guardian reads. According to the article, reaching a political settlement in Ukraine will be the most difficult task, since Kiev wants to have its south-eastern territories. "The people of Ukraine need Putin to do all he can to persuade the rebels that the deal is in their interests, and for the west to do nothing that gives Putin an excuse not to do so," it reads. In the end, the ceasefire agreement will depend on Putin's influence on the rebels, which "has not always been as strong as it might appear on the surface." At the same time, "Putin needs to be encouraged to drop his military support for the rebels rather than feeling compelled to continue it in the face of a western-armed Ukrainian offensive," the article reads. "If cool thinking does not prevail, on all sides, the consequences for Europe could be cataclysmic," it concludes."In Ukraine, it's Putin's Game," American newspaper the New York Times writes. According to the article, Putin "held the decisive cards" at the meeting with the leaders of Ukraine, Germany and France in Minsk. While not showing Russia's real intentions in the conflict, Putin was openly informed about the plans of the West. By being honest with Putin, "the West assisted Russia’s tactical maneuvering by making it clear what it wanted while Mr. Putin constantly keeps everyone guessing," the article quotes Fiona Hilla, the director of the Center on the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution. "The gap between Europe’s dogged diplomacy and Mr. Putin’s approach to Ukraine, which mixes regular calls for peace with stealthy supplies of Russian weapons and even soldiers to the separatists, has left Moscow and Brussels 'playing entirely different games'," the article quotes another political expert as saying. However, despite all of this, the article admits that Europe "has strong reasons to reject the idea of arming Ukraine."American magazine Time offers an interesting perspective on the conflict in an article "China Is the Big Winner in the Conflict Between Russia and the West." According to the article, "As Russia turns East, China will drive a harder bargain in their commercial relations while taking care to ensure that relations with America and Europe continue to expand. The tactics of playing both sides will work very well for China."
Commenting on the agreement recently reached in Minsk, British newspaper the Telegraph writes that the agreement in its present form "requires no real concessions from Vladimir Putin. Instead, the proposals for a ceasefire and a withdrawal of heavy artillery impose disproportionate obligations on Ukraine.... One of the few ways by which Ukraine has been able to hit back is by using heavy artillery. But if the guns fall silent under the new Minsk agreement, then Ukraine will lose its main way of pounding its enemies in the lost territory. A withdrawal of forces along the ceasefire line will also provide little comfort. After all, this will mark the de facto partition of Ukrainian territory." According to the article the emerging agreement does not satisfy Poroshenko's demands and will turn the conflict into a frozen one.
"Ukrainian Truce Sealed as All-Night Summit Fails to Erase Doubts," American business news publication Bloomberg Business writes. Many are skeptical that the new agreement will ensure a ceasefire. This skepticism was reflected in prices for the ruble today, which weakened 0.5 % against the dollar today, the article reads. Despite the behavior of the ruble, Russian stock and bonds climbed after the new Minsk agreement was made public, another article on Bloomberg reads. If the new deal holds, there will be a reduced risk of anti-Russian sanctions, which would lead the markets to continue to react positively to the change in Ukraine, the article reads.
"Ukraine peace deal looks fragile in the extreme," British newspaper the Guardian believes. "In the short term, the Franco-German duo appears to have stopped the fighting – for now, at least – prevented further escalation, headed off US pressure to supply arms to Kiev, and dragged the recalcitrant Putin back onboard. Europe can breathe a brief sigh of relief. But the Minsk achievement looks fragile in the extreme. It is still very much in the making, the second beginning of a long, fraught process. Unseen calamities could suddenly unravel all the leaders’ work. Merkel was candid. The deal provided a “glimmer of hope” and no more, she said. When Hollande stressed there was still much work to do, he never spoke a truer word," Simon Tisdall, the author of the article writes.
"This is a make-or-break moment for Ukraine," another article in the Guardian reads. According to the article, reaching a political settlement in Ukraine will be the most difficult task, since Kiev wants to have its south-eastern territories. "The people of Ukraine need Putin to do all he can to persuade the rebels that the deal is in their interests, and for the west to do nothing that gives Putin an excuse not to do so," it reads. In the end, the ceasefire agreement will depend on Putin's influence on the rebels, which "has not always been as strong as it might appear on the surface." At the same time, "Putin needs to be encouraged to drop his military support for the rebels rather than feeling compelled to continue it in the face of a western-armed Ukrainian offensive," the article reads. "If cool thinking does not prevail, on all sides, the consequences for Europe could be cataclysmic," it concludes.
"In Ukraine, it's Putin's Game," American newspaper the New York Times writes. According to the article, Putin "held the decisive cards" at the meeting with the leaders of Ukraine, Germany and France in Minsk. While not showing Russia's real intentions in the conflict, Putin was openly informed about the plans of the West. By being honest with Putin, "the West assisted Russia’s tactical maneuvering by making it clear what it wanted while Mr. Putin constantly keeps everyone guessing," the article quotes Fiona Hilla, the director of the Center on the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution. "The gap between Europe’s dogged diplomacy and Mr. Putin’s approach to Ukraine, which mixes regular calls for peace with stealthy supplies of Russian weapons and even soldiers to the separatists, has left Moscow and Brussels 'playing entirely different games'," the article quotes another political expert as saying. However, despite all of this, the article admits that Europe "has strong reasons to reject the idea of arming Ukraine."
American magazine Time offers an interesting perspective on the conflict in an article "China Is the Big Winner in the Conflict Between Russia and the West." According to the article, "As Russia turns East, China will drive a harder bargain in their commercial relations while taking care to ensure that relations with America and Europe continue to expand. The tactics of playing both sides will work very well for China."
