Kiev has rejected a serious proposal to ban the shelling of civilian homes and public utilities in the Donbass. Kiev did not agree with the proposal to ban civilian shelling in the Donbass, Russian representative at the Minsk talks Boris Gryzlov said. The idea also included a ban on sabotage and intelligence areas in the parties to the conflict. The proposal was supported by the OSCE, Moscow, the DPR and the LPR, but Ukraine opposed it, RIA Novosti confirms.
After reading the news, a number of questions arise: Does Ukraine, officially, actually refuse to comply with the Minsk agreements? How will it look in the eyes of the West, refusing to stop shelling civilians? Or does it not care? We will try to answer the questions that have arisen.
Kiev’s demonstrative refusal to impose a ban, at least formal and declarative, on the shelling of civilian objects and on activities in the territory of the DPR and LPR – in fact, this is a rejection of the Minsk agreements. If Ukraine bypasses the agreement not only with the republics of Donbass and Russia, but also with the OSCE representative, it is difficult to interpret this scandalous solution as otherwise. Ukraine would not have followed such a scandalous way unless it were afraid of the wrathful reaction of the West. It can not be allowed – so Kiev moves contrary to the opinion of the OSCE in the Minsk Group. In the world of postmodernism, only official information is published, published by tabloids and “correct” media.
I am compelled to address a part to criticism and the Russian establishment, the journalistic and expert community. Unfortunately, Russia still does not work well with anti-mainstream media of Western countries, such as Fort-Russ, and even relatively objective mainstream media. And yet despite such a biased stance from the West, I still must judge things by the outcome of Kiev’s decision. It would seem that someone is preventing Kiev from stopping its continuation of the shelling of civilian objects and conducting a terrorist war in the Donbass; and this even after hypocritically refuting accusations of terrorism?
I can suggest this: in Ukraine, the presidential election campaign and the Poroshenko candidacy (he ranks 5th or 6th in the rating of potential candidates) has started to show their muscularity and decisiveness. Especially since there are a lot of questions to him from the military and the “patriots”. These categories of the Ukrainian electorate openly hate President Poroshenko because the unpopular Minsk agreements are associated with his name. And also the fact that Poroshenko and his entourage do business in the Donbass conflict zone anyhow. True, most of these “patriots” do not understand that “Minsk-1” and then “Minsk-2” saved the Ukrainian army from complete destruction, and Ukraine from the loss of other regions as a result.
It appears there will be a counteroffensive from the militia of the DPR and LPR. But illusions prevail over many in Russia. The Minsk agreements are not feasible a priori. Their fulfillment would lead to a new (Nazi) Maidan in Ukraine. Russia also shares another dangerous illusion. Russian media outlets show the results of opinion polls in Ukraine, that 60 percent of citizens of this country are ready to vote for the candidate of the party of peace who will end the war in Donbass.
This is a dangerous delusion! Even if supporters of the party of peace will not be 60, but 90 percent – the voice of an elite war-fixated minority will overpower the majority vote. The possibilities, even purely hypothetical, of a more peaceful position of Ukraine, in my opinion, are zero. Even if the Ukrainian representative in the Minsk Group voted for stopping the shelling of civilian objects in the Donbass from the side of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the shelling would not cease. The experience of the “bread” and “school truce” (cessation of shelling so civilians can go to market, and for the beginning of children’s/student’s classes in the Fall) violated even in the first hours allows us to make such an unequivocal conclusion. But, as mentioned above, Ukraine went for a deliberate and demonstrative violation of the conditional cease-fire regime. I repeat, this is done on a political basis, more precisely, on election motives. The closer the election day of the President of Ukraine (tentatively, May 2019), the more tense the situation will be in the Donbass and in the border zone of Ukraine and Russia.