Once elected, President Zelensky declared his convinced intention to fight systemic corruption in Ukraine (as some predecessors) but, most of all, declared as top-priorty for his government to seize again the power on Donbas region. Ironically, one of his objective was also to restore peace between Ukraine and the Russian Federation starting with an information war to end the conflict in contested areas. Clearly, President Putin did not embrace such position. We all know well how far their contest has come.

Source: BBC 

Minsk I

The Minsk I Agreement was signed by Ukraine and the Russia-backed separatists to agree a ceasefire deal after the clashes in Crimea. Its provisions included prisoner exchanges, deliveries of humanitarian aid and the withdrawal of heavy weapons. However, the agreement quickly broke down, with violations by both sides.

Minsk II

Brokered by France and Germany, Minsk II sought to stop the conflict that began when pro-Russia separatists seized the Ukraininan regions of Donetsk and Luhansk following Russia’s 2014 annexation of the Crimean Peninsula. Also in this case the agreement was not fully implemented.

The Agreement laid down 13 points:

• Immediate, comprehensive ceasefire.
• Withdrawal of heavy weapons by both sides.
• OSCE monitoring.
• Dialogue on interim self-government for Donetsk and Luhansk, in accordance with Ukrainian law, and acknowledgement of special status by parliament.
• Pardon, amnesty for fighters.
• Exchange of hostages, prisoners.
• Humanitarian assistance.
• Resumption of socioeconomic ties, including pensions.
• Ukraine to restore control of state border.
• Withdrawal of foreign armed formations, military equipment, mercenaries.
• Constitutional reform in Ukraine including decentralisation, with specific mention of Donetsk and Luhansk.
• Elections in Donetsk and Luhansk.
• Intensify Trilateral Contact Group’s work including representatives of Russia, Ukraine and OSCE.

Sources: OSCE Al Jazeera 

After the Euromaidan protests, an interim Ukrainian government was installed and early presidential elections were scheduled for May 2014. Yanukovych resurfaced on February 28 in Rostov-na-Donu, Russia, and he delivered a defiant speech in Russian, insisting that he was still the rightful president of Ukraine. Pro-Russian protesters supporting Yanukovych’s presidency became increasingly assertive in Crimea whose airports and Parliament had been occupied by unidentified armed groups and settled Sergey Aksyonov, the leader of the Russian Unity Party, as Crimea’s prime minister. Voice and data links between Crimea and Ukraine were severed, and Russian authorities acknowledged that they had moved troops into the region to protect Russian citizens and military assets in Crimea. Aksyonov declared that he, and not the government in Kyiv, was in command of the Ukrainian police and military forces in Crimea.

On March 6 the Crimean parliament voted to secede from Ukraine and join the Russian Federation, with a public referendum which had been strongly criticized for several irregularities in the voting process, including the presence of armed men at polling stations, and for the result that was an overwhelming 97 percent in favour of joining Russia.

The move was hailed by Russia and broadly condemned in the West. The interim government in Kyiv rejected the result, and the United States and the EU imposed asset freezes and travel bans on numerous Russian officials and members of the Crimean parliament. Although, on March 18 Putin met with Aksyonov and other regional representatives and signed a treaty incorporating Crimea into the Russian Federation. Russian troops moved to occupy bases throughout the peninsula, including Ukrainian naval headquarters in Sevastopol, as Ukraine initiated the evacuation of some 25,000 military personnel and their families from Crimea. On March 21 after the ratification of the annexation treaty by the Russian parliament, Putin signed a law formally integrating Crimea into Russia. In the following months, Russia adopted several economic and military measures that respectively attacked the Ukrainian economy and the eastern Ukrainian cities of Donetsk, Luhansk, Horlivka, and Kramatorsk- which are objectives of dispute also today.

Sources: Britannica BBC 

In late November 2013, Ukrainians took to the streets in peaceful protest after then-president Viktor Yanukovych chose not to sign an agreement that would have integrated the country more closely with the European Union. The protests were more than a demand for closer EU relations; they were a rejection of injustice, systemic corruption and nepotism of the post-Soviet politics.

Protests in Kyiv's Independence Square (aka Maidan) continued in 2014 and Yanukovych's governement tried to repress demonstrators with force and laws severly restricting civil society and the right to protest. Between January and February 2014 over 100 civilian protesters died, the former president Yanukovych left the country and the Ukrainian Parliament voted to oust him out and for new election that led Petro Poroshenko and pro-reform coalition government coming into power.

Euromaidan protests are crucial to understand also the conflict in Crimea.

Source: Open Society Foundations 

The presidential election of 2004 brought Ukraine to the brink of disintegration and civil war. The two candidates were the former Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, who was strongly supported by Russian President Vladimir Putin, and his opponent Viktor Yushchenko, who was running on an anticorruption and anticronyism platform. In the runoff of the election, Yanukovych was declared the winner, though Yushchenko’s supporters charged fraud and staged mass protests, aka “the Orange Revolution”. Yanukovych’s supporters in the east threatened to secede from Ukraine if the results were annulled. Nevertheless, on December 3 the Supreme Court ruled the election invalid and ordered a new runoff for December 26. Yushchenko subsequently defeated Yanukovych by garnering some 52 percent of the vote. Although Yanukovych challenged the validity of the results, Yushchenko was inaugurated on January 23, 2005.

The Orange Revolution only opened a long-lasting conflict between pro-Russia and Europeist poltical forces that culminated in the Euromaidan protests and set the ground for further clashes.

Source: Britannica 

The NUC was established by the NATO-Ukraine Charter on a Distinctive Partnership signed by Ukrainian and Allied Heads of State and Government on 9 July 1997. It is a decision-making body whose tasks are: to ensure proper implementation of the Charter’s provisions, broadly assess the development of the NATO-Ukraine relationship, survey planning for future activities, and suggest ways to improve or further develop cooperation. Then, the NUC provides a forum for consultation between the Allies and Ukraine on security issues of common concern, including defence and security sector reform, armaments, economic security, scientific, environmental cooperation, as well as the current situation of crisis.

Further information about the NATO-UA partnership

Cooperation between NATO and Ukraine has been streghtened over time and is mutually beneficial, with Ukraine actively contributing to NATO-led operations and missions. Concretely, NATO supports Ukraine with the Comprehensive Assistance Package (CAP) which is mainly focused on reforming the Ukrainian security and defence sector in order to streghten the abilty of the country to defend itself.

NATO-Ukraine partnership has palyed and is still playing a substantial role in the Ukraine crisis with Russia. During the two major Ukrainian crises with Russia, NATO demonstrated support to Ukraine. First, NATO condemned and did not recognised Russia’s illegal and illegitimate annexation of Crimea occured in 2014. Second, NATO declared the Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine as completely unjustified, unprovoked, and as a serious violation of interanational law that threaten the security Euro-Atlantic security. Additionally, NATO condemned Russia’s decision to extend recognition to the Ukrainian separatist regions.

Beyond diplomatic and moral support given to Ukraine, one must consider concrete actions operated by NATO in response to the crisis of Crimea, NATO has reinforced its support for capability development and capacity-building in Ukraine and has increased its presence in the Black Sea and stepped up maritime cooperation with Ukraine and Georgia. Currently, NATO is not willing to intervene militarly in the Russia-Ukraine conflict because: (I) it is not oblidged to defend Ukraine as long as the country is not a member, and (II), the risk of an escalation of the conflict is too high to step in. For this latest reason, NATO wants to keep the conflict into the Ukrainian borders and limited its support to Ukraine by sending battelgroups in alliance’s eastern countries (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland Slovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria and Romania) while the proposal of a no-fly-zone has been refused.

Sources: NATO BBC NPR 

Since 1919, Ukraine was a satellite republic of Moscow, but with the separatist movements spreading thourghout the whole Soviet Union during the 80s, also Ukrainian demanded its independence. On behalf of the Supreme Soviet of the country, Leonid Kravchuk (leader of the Soviet republic of Ukraine and of the communist party) declared independence from Moscow in 1991. In a referendum and presidential election, Ukrainians approved independence with 92,3% of votes and elected Kravchuk president. The durability and effectiveness of a new post-Soviet commmonwealth depended heavily on the strong pressure from nationalist forces to pursue independence. Ukraine today is a unitary Republic under a semi-presidential system.

Sources: Reuters NatGeo GlobalSecurity