A STEP TOWARDS PEACE IN THE DONBASS

The latest summit of the Normandy Four, which took place in Paris on 2 October involving the presidents of Ukraine, Russia and France and the German chancellor, has given hope for a peaceful settlement to the Ukrainian crisis. Although the meeting did not end with the signing of any agreement or joint declaration, the talks at the Elysee Palace were marked by the achievement of very important understandings.

One of the substantial outcomes of the meeting between the Ukrainian, Russian, French and German leaders - Petro Poroshenko, Vladimir Putin, Francois Hollande and Angela Merkel - was agreement on the question of the withdrawal of heavy artillery, tanks and mortars from the contact line of Ukrainian troops and Donbass separatists. According to the agreement, this process will be monitored by the OSCE over 41 days. Official Kiev describes this point as a success in itself, because monitoring the withdrawal of weapons by the OSCE will enable Ukraine, its Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin believes, to gain access to the territory of the whole of the Donbass, "to indirectly monitor the situation and gradually force out the Russian mercenaries and military equipment and militant troops". On the strength of this, Klimkin hopes that "we in the Normandy process really are in a different reality".

However, another extremely important aspect of a settlement, linked with the election procedure in the Donbass and the status of the rebel area, found the Ukrainian side much less enthusiastic. The participants in the Paris meeting agreed on the need to postpone the elections in the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic, which had earlier been envisaged for 18 October. French President Hollande said that "these elections cannot be held until certain arrangements are made".

What necessary arrangements was Hollande referring to? By all accounts, he was talking about a final agreement on questions of holding elections on the territory of the so-called "people's republics" of Donetsk and Luhansk based on Ukrainian legislation, and also the designation of a "special status" to the Donbass by Kiev. A situation arose at the talks whereby Moscow must give its consent to the implementation of the first point, and Kiev the second point. There is no other alternative when it comes to the possibility of reaching a long-term settlement to the armed conflict in south-east Ukraine. It is no wonder that German Chancellor Angela Merkel spoke about reaching an understanding within the framework of the Normandy format on the adoption of laws on elections in the Donbass and about special status.

However, there is as yet no complete confidence that the agreements on these key questions will be implemented. The DPR and the LPR may, of course, postpone the elections, but the separatist formations can only hold them on the basis of Ukrainian law by granting "special status" to the Donbass. Accordingly, Kiev needs to take a crucially important step in this direction which, however, may have undesirable consequences for President Poroshenko himself. The point is that the very idea of "special status" for the Donbass is not to the liking of many political forces in Ukraine. It was conflict over this question that led to the recent bloody clashes in the centre of Kiev, resulting in the death of four members of the National Guard.

Immediately after the latest Normandy Four summit, political forces who disagree with granting "special status" to the Donbass and who regard this move as unacceptable from the point of view of Ukraine's unity and sovereignty, made it clear they were prepared to counter the agreements reached at the Elysee Palace. For example, the Samopomoch [Self-Help] party, whose leaders spoke about the impossibility of holding elections and resolving other political issues "until control is restored over the occupied territories and the state border", has already condemned the planned draft bill on "special status". And Oleh Lyashko, leader of the Radical Party, demanded that President Poroshenko explain why the government "is deceiving its own people". He expressed anger that not only Moscow, but Paris, Berlin and Washington, too, are dictating conditions to Kiev.

So, the question of Donbass' status could once again destabilize the situation in Ukraine. Local political analysts are confident that right-wing forces are now trying to open a new offensive on President Poroshenko's positions, which have already been weakened of late. It is not known how the Ukrainian leader, who has no interest in an exacerbation of the domestic political situation, which is seriously weakening Kiev's positions, including at the negotiations on a settlement in the south-east of the country, intends to find a way out of this situation. Experts say it is not impossible that Poroshenko might submit to parliament an option of the draft bill on the Donbass' special status different to that discussed in Paris. For example, a new document could provide for Kiev restoring control on the border with Russia or certain aspects of the electoral procedure, which could be turned down by the separatist formations. Such a development of events, of course, would only stymie what was achieved in Paris and the whole range of measures to settle the Ukrainian crisis as set out in the Minsk agreements.

As it happens, the deadline for the implementation of the latter has been planned for the end of this year. But bearing in mind the improbability of the conditions of the agreement being fulfilled in the next couple of months, the validity of the Minsk documents could be extended to 2016. However, in any event, perhaps the main outcome of the Paris summit of the Normandy Four is that it confirmed the lack of an alternative to the Minsk agreements. This is clear, even despite Petro Poroshenko's statement that "the end of war will come when the last bit of Ukrainian soil has been liberated".

When assessing the current situation in the Ukrainian conflict, one should start, first and foremost, from the evident cessation of hostilities in the Donbass - a fact that was registered at the meeting of the Normandy Four. Other questions regarding the specifics of a political settlement could be resolved during future negotiations.

However, it is difficult not to agree with the German chancellor that it will be possible to speak about success in the process of a settlement to the Ukrainian crisis only after the implementation of the agreements by all parties in the conflict. And there is another factor which will inevitably impact on a defusing of the situation in Ukraine. Basically, the Paris meeting clearly showed that the conflict in the Donbass has taken a back seat in the catalogue of priority interests of Europe and the West in general. The Syrian conflict, in which Russia has become directly involved, has swept to the front of the world stage. Europe itself has been faced with a far more acute problem - the mass migration of people from the war-struck countries of the Middle East. Perhaps, a certain reduction in attention to the conflict in the Donbass in this context might prompt the countries involved towards a final clarification of a formula for a Ukrainian settlement.