Written by Nikolaus von Twickel<\/p>\n
Summary<\/strong><\/p>\n The reappointment of Vladislav Surkov, thought to be Moscow\u2019s master of the separatists, failed to make headlines in the \u201cPeople\u2019s Republics\u201d. The recently revived \u201cNormandy Format\u201d talks also did not result in a new impetus for solving the conflict. And a Ukrainian politician claimed that talks about a peacekeeping mission are ongoing in a format that includes the Normandy Four and the United States.<\/p>\n Separatists silent on Surkov\u2019s reappointment<\/strong><\/p>\n Arguably the biggest news for the \u201cPeople\u2019s Republics\u201d in a long time broke on June 13, when the Kremlin announced<\/a> that Vladislav Surkov retains his post as a presidential aide in Vladimir Putin\u2019s new administration. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed<\/a> the next day that Surkov will continue to be responsible for eastern Ukraine.<\/p>\n Vladislav Surkov is widely believed to coordinate Moscow\u2019s massive influence over the Donbass separatists. Russian media reports that he would lose his job first appeared in early May, triggering speculation about changes in the separatist leadership (see Newsletter 32<\/a>).<\/p>\n Unsurprisingly, the separatists themselves, who deny being controlled from Moscow, were largely silent about the Kremlin staff decision. A search for \u201cSurkov\u201d returned zero results<\/a> on the Donetsk \u201cPeople\u2019s Republic\u2019s\u201d official site and months-old results on the official news sites of both \u201cDNR<\/a>\u201d and \u201cLNR<\/a>\u201d.<\/p>\n Only the \u201cDNR Live\u201d website, which is linked to former Donetsk separatist leader Pavel Gubarev and his \u201cSvobodny Donbass\u201d movement, published<\/a> news about Surkov.<\/p>\n Alexander Zhuchkovsky, a Russian volunteer fighter who has in the past criticized the separatist leadership, said in a Telegram<\/a> post that many in Donetsk had taken Surkov\u2019s ouster for granted and the long uncertainty had cause volatility and exaggerated expectations both \u201cPeople\u2019s Republics\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cObviously everything stays as it is \u2013 foreign policy (the Minsk agreements) and the unhealthy domestic situation in the DLNR. Sad.\u201d Zhuchkovsky wrote.<\/p>\n Ukrainian observers agreed that with Surkov changes are unlikely to occur. \u201cPutin is absolutely happy with the status quo (and not just Putin, let\u2019s be honest), the Donetsk guys can breathe easily \u2013 Zakharchenko can definitely stay until November and also Tashkent (\u201cDNR\u201d deputy \u201cPrime Minister\u201d Alexander Timofeyev) can feel at ease,\u201d Andrei Dikhtarenko, a Kiev-based journalist originally from Luhansk, wrote<\/a>.<\/p>\n The \u201cPeople\u2019s Republics\u201d are expected to hold elections in November, when their leaders\u2019 four-year terms expire. Preparations began earlier in 2018, when both \u201cLNR\u201d-leader Leonid Pasechnik and \u201cDNR\u201d-leader Alexander Zakharchenko presented programmes on how to govern over the next five years. The elections are expected to cause fresh troubles for the peace talks, because they run counter to the Minsk Agreement, which stipulates them to be held under Ukrainian law (see Newsletter 28<\/a>).<\/p>\n Both separatist leaders could easily win an election, as long as they are backed by the propaganda and security apparatus. In Donetsk however, Zakharchenko\u2019s sharpest critic, former commander Alexander Khodakovsky, disappeared from public view in early May. Instead, Gubarev seems to be waging a pre-election campaign. In an interview<\/a> published on June 18, he said that his movement was not an opposition but an alternative.<\/p>\n Normandy Four fails to bring impetus<\/strong><\/p>\n Another major event was the meeting of the Foreign Ministers of the Normandy Four format, i.e. Germany, France, Russia and Ukraine, in Berlin on June 11. The meeting was the first after a 16-month hiatus, but brought no meaningful results apart from the fact that the ministers declared their support<\/a> for the basic provisions of the Minsk agreement, i.e. a ceasefire and the withdrawal of heavy weapons.<\/p>\n However, Martin Sajdik, the envoy of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), said<\/a> two days later that he is \u201cconvinced that the activation of the Normandy Four .. will give significant political impetus to the Trilateral Contact Group talks. Sajdik was speaking after the latest \u00a0meeting of the group, which consists of Russia, Ukraine and the OSCE, on June 13 in Minsk.<\/p>\n But that impetus did not materialize at this meeting, at least according to the separatist negotiators, who participate in the talks. Both \u201cDNR<\/a>\u201d and \u201cLNR<\/a>\u201d complained, that Ukraine sent only an low-ranking \u201cexpert\u201d to the talks\u2019 political working group.<\/p>\n Secret talks for peacekeeping force<\/strong><\/p>\n The Normandy Four also agreed to continue talks about deploying a UN peacekeeping force to eastern Ukraine. However, comments from Ukraine and Russia made it clear afterwards, that a consensus is far out of reach. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin suggested in an interview<\/a> published on June 18 that the separatist rule needs to end before an international force can be deployed. „A Russian-controlled Donbass can never be part of Ukraine“ he was quoted as saying by the Interfax-Ukraine news agency.<\/p>\n Russia\u2019s Sergei Lavrov, by contrast, rejected the notion of an international mission taking political control: \u201cTurning this peacekeeping mission into some political-military Kommandatura, which takes control of the whole territory (of the \u201cDNR\u201d and \u201cLNR\u201d), fully destroys the Minsk agreements,\u201d he said in comments<\/a> posted on his ministry\u2019s website. Russia\u2019s vision for peacekeepers is a protection force for the existing OSCE Monitoring Mission that would be deployed only along the Contact Line.<\/p>\n A possible UN peacekeeping force has been the subject of four meetings between Surkov and US Special Representative Kurt Volker, the last of which took place in January.<\/p>\n Apparently, an unofficial group, comprising the Normandy Four and the United States, has been discussing the issue, at least according to former Ukrainian defence minister Anatoly Hrytsenko. The group includes experts, diplomats and politicians from the five countries, Hrytsenko said in an interview<\/a> published on June 12. He added that he was taking part for Ukraine, but did not name any other participants. The existence of such talks has not been confirmed by any other source so far.<\/p>\n The separatists have warned in the past<\/a> that they won\u2019t allow an international mission to take over control in their areas, calling<\/a> this an attempt by Ukraine to let these territories be seized by others.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Written by Nikolaus von Twickel Summary The reappointment of Vladislav Surkov, thought to be Moscow\u2019s master of the separatists, failed to make headlines in the \u201cPeople\u2019s Republics\u201d. The recently revived \u201cNormandy Format\u201d talks also did not result in a new...<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":586,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[202,210],"tags":[243],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/civicmonitoring.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1046"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/civicmonitoring.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/civicmonitoring.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/civicmonitoring.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/civicmonitoring.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1046"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/civicmonitoring.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1046\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1048,"href":"https:\/\/civicmonitoring.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1046\/revisions\/1048"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/civicmonitoring.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/586"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/civicmonitoring.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1046"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/civicmonitoring.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1046"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/civicmonitoring.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1046"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}