Victor Shishkin, former Judge of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, states that from the legal perspective Minsk agreements fake and wonder why foreigners talk about Minsk Agreements as an international agreement.
I will continue to speak about Minsk Agreements. As you know I call them ‘Fixed’ Agree-ments on different websites, such as Facebook. So can any agreements be possible? Of course. But agreements on what? If warlords agree to cease fire for two days to pick up injured soldiers and kill them, swap captives or take some other actions, then it can be. Such thing happened all the time during wars, during or the Great Patriotic War or World War II, as it’s called in our country. Even our soldiers tried to make agreements with Ger-mans. But why in our country foreigners talk about Minsk Agreements as an international agreement? Why do they think that it is an international agreement? They come here and make us perform some duties peculiar to international agreements. Our Ukrainian law about international agreement says how that should be performed and where the status of the international agreement comes from. Why Merkel, Victoria or somebody else make us do something that is not within the terms of the international agreement?
I have a protocol according to the consultations of the third party group and full range of measures on performance of Minsk Agreement. If this Agreement involves three parties, than why do I see five signatures here? Zakharchenko, Plotnitskiy (I don’t know who’s that), ambassador …, second President of Ukraine (I’ve never heard about such status, who’s second President of Ukraine? Show me where I can see such title?) and ambassador of Russian Federation Zurabov (who is he here? He is en-forcer from Donbass).
Now let’s read the text. «Draw out illegal military outfits, military equipment and troops from the territory of Ukraine. What illegal military outfits? If they are Russian military outfits, then they are legal. They were formed legally. But they are occupants on the territory of our country. Than they should be called occupational forces of Russian Empire. If we are talking about LPR and DPR, I can’t call them military outfits. Someone told that we have to enter into negotiations with them. Well , I want to see how President Roosevelt entered into negotiations with … in 1944 about liberation of Paris. Nobody entered into negotiation with them. Half of them were shoot and other half were strung up. I ask all media sources to stop calling them separatists. Separatist rises flag of his country. And those military outfits are not separatists. Word ‘separatist’ is positive in my view. They are collaborators, betrayers, who invited occupational military forces to our territory. We should specify notions, we do not have the separating line. And do not call us uncontrolled zone, because there is no uncontrolled zone in Ukraine, but there is an occupied zone.
Next paragraph says: «evacuation of heavy equipment of both parties». What do they mean by ‘both parties’? If they mean our country, than there are three parties, including their party.
I mean that all documents should be written in simple, legitimate language, clear to everyone.
And one more thing, Petro Poroshenko is behind all this. By the way, who signed this agreement as the so-called second President? Who in this studio read Poroshenko’s ap-pointment of Kuchma? Well, if you do, then recall second clause. It says: «Kuchma acts as a public service. Public service! So Ukraine should bare international responsibilities as a public service? That is nonsense.
Mr. Poroshenko speculates on lies. He lied to you, lied to Savchenko when he said that she will be free in 2015. He always lies, even here. He forces PMs vote for changes to the Constitution, manipulates with these agreements. So according to him if we do not vote for changes, we’ll violate Minsk Agreements. But there is nothing in this protocol about changes to the Constitution.
Let’s read Clause 11, it says: «to adopt a new constitution until the end of 2015». New constitution is not changes. I don’t know what he says to Merkel, … and others. Maybe they don’t know nothing about that. I don’t know how Clause 11 was trans-lated to them.
So it was just a shallow analysis, but if I had 1 or 2 hours, I would analyze every word.