Elections in Donbass: The Devil Is in the Details

Overshadowed in recent weeks by the Russian military intervention in Syria, the Ukrainian crisis has entered a decisive phase. The cease-fire in effect since September 1 has been respected, and a new agreement on the withdrawal of weaponry of less than 100mm caliber was signed and has begun to be implemented.

Especially, the “Normandy format” summit which was held on October 2 in Paris led to a new momentum in the political part of Minsk agreements. Local elections in the Donbass territories controlled by pro-Russian separatists are now at the center of negotiations: this issue is indeed the key to the crisis, since it determines the next steps, i.e. granting a special status for these territories, returning the control of the Ukrainian-Russian border to Kiev and lifting the European sectoral sanctions against Russia.

Before October 2, extreme positions were taken on the issue of local elections in Donbass. The Ukrainian authorities had prohibited any ballot, while the separatists had unilaterally decided to hold votes on October 18 and November 1. The European Union reacted strongly, calling on Russia to put pressure on its protégés and suggesting that if elections were to be held, it could lead to a new wave of sanctions. Blowing hot and cold, Moscow had expressed its “understanding” vis-à-vis the separatist approach, tirelessly stressing the need for a direct dialogue between Kiev, Lugansk and Donetsk.

In the end, the compromise that is emerging is rather favorable to Russian interests. Certainly, Lugansk and Donetsk have acceded to demands of the Kremlin and will not hold votes on October 18 and November 1. Vladimir Putin inexpensively proved his good will to François Hollande and Angela Merkel. Overall, the meetings in Paris confirm the impressions that prevailed in late September in the chancelleries and among informed observers. It is indeed the “Morel Plan”, named after the French diplomat who is driving the OSCE subgroup on political issues in Minsk, which served as a basis for discussion. But this plan, parts of which were leaked in the Ukrainian media, is generally unfavorable to Kiev - just as the Minsk agreements it is supposed to enforce. The pill is bitter for P. Poroshenko. There will be a special status for Donbass and an amnesty for the rebel leaders (even though the Ukrainian president repeatedly denied it in public); and albeit the elections in the territories controlled by the rebels will take place “in accordance with Ukrainian law” and the letter of the Minsk agreements, the ad hoc text to be adopted by the Rada confirms the specificity of Donbass compared with the rest of the country.

However, several questions and potential obstacles remain. The first concerns President Poroshenko’s ability to have the Rada vote an ad hoc electoral law as well as a constitutional reform ratifying the de facto autonomy of Donbass (a 2/3 majority is required). The riots that took place on August 31 in front of the Parliament and the reluctance of the political and media elite in Kiev leave little space for optimism. In addition, the terms of the elections in Donbass are not clear: among the pending issues, the possibility for Ukrainian parties to participate (can one, other than in purely theoretical terms, imagine that Svoboda or the Radical Party will campaign in Donetsk?) and the voting of displaced persons (one million in Ukraine) and refugees (as many in Russia?). Moreover, Kiev insists that the Ukrainian press should be able to work freely in separatist-controlled territories and require prior disarmament of the pro-Russian groups. This last point will result in new battles of interpretation: annotations to Minsk agreements provide the creation of a “People's Police”, which one can think will recycle most of the rebels. The withdrawal of foreign troops will be difficult to carry out, since it would require checking identity papers of all armed men in Donbass.

At this stage, discussions are taking place within the framework of the OSCE political subgroup in Minsk. Confronted by a barrage of fire coming from most political and media forces in Kiev, P. Poroshenko is attempting to minimize the extent of the concessions to be made and to empty the “Morel Plan” of its substance. Ukraine is seeking to change the sequence defined in the Minsk agreements (elections, special status, regaining control of the border). The dominant feeling in Kiev is that it is better not to hold elections in the Donbass than to hold elections that would legitimize “anti-Ukrainian” forces and pave the way for the lifting of sanctions.

In this context, France and Germany’s positions will be decisive. Now both countries seem determined to move ahead and hold elections (even should they be “imperfect”) in the Donbass. A certain “tired of Ukraine” mood is spreading across Europe, while other major challenges (Syria, migrants) have arisen lately. The question is: what game will the United States play? According to well-informed sources in Paris, at the end of September, President Hollande’s diplomatic adviser Jacques Audibert called Susan Rice, Obama's adviser for national security, to complain about Victoria Nuland’s behavior. According to the Élysée, the No. 2 of the U.S. State Department “is setting people against Minsk-2 in Kiev”.
Views expressed are of individual Members and Contributors, rather than the Club's, unless explicitly stated otherwise.