Theoretical explanations for the Minsk II: Power, preferences, and interactions examined

Why do countries sign but not implement peace agreements? The Minsk II intended to solve the Ukrainian Crisis, but implementation has been slow and violations of the cease-fire occur routinely. I selected three theories to examine the Minsk II: realism, liberalism, and constructivism. I utilized the concepts of military power, preferences of the leaders signing, and time and type of meetings to try and determine why the leaders of Ukraine, Russia, Germany, France, and the separatists in Eastern Ukraine, signed the agreement but did not implement it. I found strong evidence to suggest that the preferences of only key implementers matter, and some evidence to suggest that meeting in-person and conducting exhaustive negotiations are more productive than phone-calls.

Name thesis:degree_name

M.A.

Level thesis:degree_level

Thesis

Discipline thesis:degree_discipline

European Union Studies

Grantor

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Year dc:date

2018

Author dc:creator

• Brown, Katherine

Contributors dc:contributor

• Kourtikakis, Konstantinos
• Larive, Maxime
• Leff, Carol

• Ukraine
• Ukrainian Crisis
• International Relations
• Russia
• European Union
• Separatists
• Peace Agreements
• Implementation
• Treaties
• Treaty
• Minsk II
• Minsk Accords

Statement dc:rights

• Copyright 2018 Katherine Brown

Language dc:language

en

Handle dc:identifier

http://hdl.handle.net/2142/101591

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/101591