How many times has Vladimir Putin broken ceasefire agreements with Ukraine?
Donald Trump 's administration has taken a Ukrainian proposal for a 30-day truce with Russia to Vladimir Putin for consideration.
After months of Mr Trump blaming Ukraine for being the obstacle to peace despite Russia's sole role as the aggressor, Washington says the ball is now in Moscow's court.
Ukraine hopes this will show that it has always been Russia that is the one in the way of peace.
But even if Mr Putin agrees to a temporary truce, which is a big if, Ukraine and Europe are clear that Russia has a long history of breaking ceasefire agreements.
Mr Putin, they say, cannot be trusted, even if Mr Trump believes the Russian leader will respect his requests.
Last month, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky handed a document to Mr Trump's Ukraine envoy detailing what he said were the 25 ceasefires Russia has violated since the start of its aggression in 2014. That document was intended to be delivered to Mr Trump.
Below, we look at some of those agreements and how exactly these previous ceasefires broke down.
The Minsk Agreements
After pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych was ousted in 2014 following the Euromaidan revolution, Mr Putin sent plainclothes Russian soldiers into the southern Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea, and then into the eastern Ukrainian regions of Luhansk and Donetsk.
Fighting quickly broke out as Russia denied involvement. Moscow claimed it was Ukrainian separatist forces.
Nonetheless, by September of that year, Ukraine, Russia and the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics (DPR and LPR) convened for the first of what would be many peace talks. They were brokered by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE).
On 5 September, the first of two agreements was signed in the Belarusian capital of Minsk.
Its provisions included prisoner exchanges, the delivery of humanitarian aid and the withdrawal of heavy weapons.
But a day later, Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council announced that Russian troops had fired at Ukrainian positions at least 10 times. The ceasefire failed to materialise into anything substantive.
By the turn of the year, fighting had intensified. Pro-Russian insurgents attacked Ukrainian positions at Debaltseve, a transport hub near the administrative line between Donetsk and Luhansk, eventually forcing a Ukrainian withdrawal by mid-February.
At that point, a second agreement was underway in Minsk, this time overseen by German chancellor Angela Merkel and French president Francois Hollande.
The agreement came into effect on 15 February but lasted only a few minutes, as Russian units fired on a Ukrainian checkpoint near Zolote in Luhansk Oblast, according to Ukraine's military.
For the next four years, Russia and Ukraine agreed to several ceasefires a year, often timed with Christmas, Easter or the harvest, around June/July.
Not a single one held for very long.
Zelensky's 2019 and 2020 attempts
It was just two months after the comedian-turned-politician Mr Zelensky assumed his role as the president of Ukraine that he found himself opposite Mr Putin for the latest round of peace talks.
Ms Merkel and the new French president Emmanuel Macron oversaw the talks.
In a written statement, the countries agreed to the release and exchange of all 'conflict-related detainees' by the end of 2019.
They also pledged to disengage military forces in three additional regions of Ukraine by the end of March 2020, without specifying which regions would be affected.
But it was a deal that was doomed to fail.
'We saw differences today,' Mr Macron admitted at the time. 'We didn't find the miracle solution, but we have advanced on it.'
The following July, another agreement was struck, one that did reduce the level of fighting but never quite stopped it completely.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Western Telegraph
26 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Trump says US will get magnets and rare earth minerals in China trade deal
In return, Mr Trump said the US will provide China 'what was agreed to', including allowing Chinese students to attend American colleges and universities. Several global brands are among dozens of companies at risk of using forced labour through their Chinese supply chains because they use critical minerals or buy minerals-based products sourced from the far-western Xinjiang region of China, an international rights group said on Wednesday. The report by the Netherlands-based Global Rights Compliance says companies including Avon, Walmart, Nescafe, Coca-Cola and paint supplier Sherwin-Williams may be linked to titanium sourced from Xinjiang, where rights groups allege the Chinese government runs coercive labour practices targeting predominantly Muslim Uyghurs and other Turkic minorities. Hotan, in western China's Xinjiang region (Andy Wong/AP) The report found 77 Chinese suppliers in the titanium, lithium, beryllium and magnesium industries operating in Xinjiang. It said the suppliers are at risk of participating in the Chinese government's 'labour transfer programmes,' in which Uyghurs are forced to work in factories as part of a long-standing campaign of assimilation and mass detention. Commercial paints, thermos cups and components for the aerospace, auto and defence industries are among products sold internationally that can trace their supply chains to minerals from Xinjiang, the report said. It said that companies must review their supply chains. 'Mineral mining and processing in (Xinjiang) rely in part on the state's forced labour programmes for Uyghurs and other Turkic people in the region,' the report said. The report came as China and the United States, the world's two largest economies, said that they have agreed on a framework to get their trade negotiations back on track after a series of disputes that threatened to derail them. The two sides on Tuesday wrapped up two days of talks in London that appeared to focus on finding a way to resolve disputes over mineral and technology exports that had shaken a fragile truce on trade reached in Geneva last month. Asked about the report, the Chinese Foreign Ministry said that 'no-one has ever been forcibly transferred in China's Xinjiang under work programmes'. 'The so-called allegation of forced labour in China's Xinjiang region is nothing but a lie concocted by certain anti-China forces. We urge the relevant organisation to stop interfering in China's internal affairs and undermining Xinjiang's prosperity and stability under the guise of human rights,' ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said. The named companies did not immediately comment on the report. A UN report from 2022 found China may have committed crimes against humanity in Xinjiang, where more than one million Uyghurs are estimated to have been arbitrarily detained as part of measures that the Chinese government said were intended to target terrorism and separatism. The Chinese government has rejected the UN claims and defended its actions in Xinjiang as fighting terror and ensuring stability. In 2021, then-US president Joe Biden signed a law to block imports from the Xinjiang region unless businesses can prove the items were made without forced labour. The law initially targeted solar products, tomatoes, cotton and apparel, but the US government recently added new sectors for enforcement, including aluminium and seafood. Many of China's major minerals corporations have invested in the exploration and mining of lithium, a key component for electric vehicle batteries, in Xinjiang, Global Rights Compliance said. Xinjiang is also China's top source of beryllium, a mineral used for aerospace, defence and telecommunications, its report said. A recent report by the International Energy Agency said that the world's sources of critical minerals are increasingly concentrated in a few countries, notably China, which is also a leading refining and processing base for lithium, cobalt, graphite and other minerals.
Scottish Sun
40 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
Historic end to world's biggest trade war as Trump reaches deal with China and touts ‘excellent' outcome for US
DON DEAL Historic end to world's biggest trade war as Trump reaches deal with China and touts 'excellent' outcome for US DONALD Trump has declared an end to the trade war with China as he announced the two countries are honing in on a final deal. The president said his relationship with China's President Xi Jinping is "excellent" after months of tit for tat tariff drama. 2 President Donald Trump has said America struck a trade deal with China Credit: Reuters 2 Trump said his relationship with President of China Xi Jinping is 'excellent' Credit: Getty In a Truth Social post on Wednesday, Trump said, "Our deal with China is done, subject to final approval with President Xi and me. "Full magnet, and any necessary rare earths, will be supplied, up front, by China. "Likewise, we will provide to China what was agreed to, including Chinese students using our colleges and universities (which has always been good with me!) "We are getting a total of 55% tariffs, China is getting 10%. Relationship is excellent!" Heated talks started to cool down after Trump announced that he had a "very good" phone call with Xi Jinping last week. The president said that he and Melania were invited to the rival nation and that he extended a reciprocal invitation to Jinping and his wife. "We both accepted, so I will be going there with the first lady at a certain point," Trump told reporters. Trump forced the world into an overnight scramble when he announced sweeping 10% tariffs on nearly every country in the world. He doubled down the pressure when he revealed his plans to charge massive reciprocal tariffs that were said to match taxes that American manufacturers have been paying out. China was one of the hardest hit, as the world's largest manufacturer relies on American consumers to buy electronics, toys, and tons of other goods. Xi Jinping was quick to announce revenge tariffs that led to Trump threatening a bruising 145% fee. More to follow... For the latest news on this story, keep checking back at The U.S. Sun, your go-to destination for the best celebrity news, sports news, real-life stories, jaw-dropping pictures, and must-see videos. Like us on Facebook at TheSunUS and follow us on X at @TheUSSun
Daily Mail
42 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
'British mothers must accept their sons have to die to defend Finland, or there is no NATO': Chilling warning as Putin looks to test if Europe will stand up to his forces
Ukraine's former foreign minister has starkly warned that British mothers must accept their sons have to die defending Europe, otherwise there is no NATO. Dmytro Kuleba, who was in office between March 2020 and September 2024, told Metro that Vladimir Putin 's goal was to 'expose' the 'falsehood' of the NATO alliance, which has a mutual assistance clause that compels its members to fight for each other in the event of an attack of another member. He said: 'Putin may invade NATO territory soon – so now what? Is NATO going to send a division to fight back?' 'Many people believe that the real test for NATO is whether the US is going to fight for Europe. 'The real test will be whether British mothers will actually accept that their sons have to die for Finland or Estonia or Poland. If they don't, there is no NATO.' The chilling warning comes after Germany 's spy chief warned that Putin is plotting to attack a NATO territory to test the bloc's mutual assistance clause. 'This is is how World War II started. 'Why fight for Danzig [now the city of Gdańsk]? Let's give it to Hitler, it is just a city in Poland. Why should we die for it?' That was the question asked by western European nations [at the time]. 'And this is exactly the question that Putin is going to pose to NATO. Europe is already spending money on weapons, but it has to do so much faster. 'But the real question is, who is going to tell the voters that the threat of the war is real?' Kubela said his warning comes from personal experience, telling Metro that as Minister of Foreign Affairs during Russia's invasion, he made the mistake of believing that Russia would withdraw after losing 'like 10,000, 20,000 soldiers.' But as Russia nears the point of having one million soldiers killed or wounded in Ukraine since war broke out in February 2022, he pleaded with British citizens not to underestimate Putin. He said: 'People in Britain or any other country can listen to what I'm saying or they can decide that I am a warmongering Ukrainian who is trying to pull them into my war. 'I am perfectly fine with any choice they make. What I can say, what I can urge them, is not to repeat our mistakes. 'The biggest mistake Ukraine made was that we did not believe that this can happen to us on this scale. We, in Ukraine, also believed that it is not going to happen to us because Putin would never dare to do it. 'So this is the mistake that people are making. I look around in Europe and I just see the same pattern happening. The same pattern of behaviour. 'Do you think that if Ukraine was able to attack airfields in Russia, 1,000 miles away from Ukraine, Russia is not able to attack any piece of infrastructure in any European country? That would be a very, very big mistake to think so.' Earlier, Bruno Kahl, the outgoing head of Germany's federal intelligence service (BND), said in a rare interview that it has 'concrete' evidence that Russia no longer believes NATO's Article 5 will be honoured. This is the clause which guarantees that if one member is attacked, all others will come to its aid. He told the German podcast Table Briefings: 'We see that NATO is supposed to be tested in its mutual assistance promise. There are people in Moscow who don't believe that NATO article 5 still works.' He said: 'We are very sure, and we have intelligence evidence to back this up, that [Russia's full-scale invasion of] Ukraine is only one step on Russia's path towards the west.' But Kahl was quick to say: 'This doesn't mean that we expect large tank battalions to roll from the east to the west.' He added that Russia didn't need to do this, as they could simply send 'little green men to Estonia to protect supposedly oppressed Russian minorities.' Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea involved occupation of buildings and offices by Russian soldiers in unmarked uniforms and civilian clothes, who came to be known as the 'little green men' when Moscow initially denied their identity. Kahl, who is set to become Germany's ambassador to the Vatican, did not specify which officials in Moscow were thinking along these lines. He said that Moscow's ultimate aim was to push NATO back to its 1990s borders, 'kick out' the US from Europe and aggressively expand its influence. 'We need to nip this in the bud', he said. Key to NATO cooperation, he pointed out, was the US and its enormous army. Kahl said his contacts with U.S. counterparts had left him convinced they took the Russian threat seriously. 'They take it as seriously as us, thank God,' he said. It comes after NATO boss Mark Rutte warned that Britons should start learning Russian if the UK doesn't ramp up defence spending. Mark Rutte issued the chilling message while in London for talks with PM Sir Keir Starmer, ahead of a NATO summit later this month. NATO allies are expected to be asked at the gathering to agree a commitment on allocating 3.5 per cent of GDP to core defence spending by the 2030s. A further 1.5 per cent of GDP would be required for 'defence-related expenditure' under Mr Rutte's plan to strengthen the alliance. It follows pressure from US President Donald Trump on European members of NATO to hike their military budgets. There are questions about how the UK would fund such an huge increase - roughly equivalent to an extra £30billion annually. Britain allocated 2.33 per cent of GDP to defence last year, and Sir Keir has only committed to reaching 2.5 per cent by April 2027. The Labour Government has an 'ambition' of increasing that to 3 per cent in the next parliament - likely to run to 2034. Speaking at Chatham House on Monday, Mr Rutte was asked if he believed Chancellor Rachel Reeves should raise taxes to meet NATO's commitments. The NATO secretary-general replied: 'It's not up to me to decide, of course, how countries pay the bill. 'Look, if you do not do this, if you would not go to the 5 per cent, including the 3.5 per cent core defence spending, you could still have the NHS... the pension system etc., but you had better learn to speak Russian.' Mr Rutte would not reveal the deadline for when he hopes NATO allies will spend 5 per cent of GDP on defence. Asked about a deadline, he told reporters: 'I have a clear view on when we should achieve that. 'I keep that to myself, because we are having these consultations now with allies, and these discussions are ongoing. 'We will in the end agree on a date when we have to be there.'
