• Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Europe logoCarnegie lettermark logo
EUNATO
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Gwendolyn Sasse"
  ],
  "type": "commentary",
  "blog": "Strategic Europe",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Europe"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Europe’s Eastern Neighborhood"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Russia",
    "Europe",
    "Eastern Europe",
    "Ukraine",
    "Western Europe",
    "France",
    "Germany"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Foreign Policy",
    "Security",
    "EU"
  ]
}
Strategic Europe logo

Source: Getty

Commentary
Strategic Europe

What Hope for Ukraine and the Normandy Four Summit?

Putin holds all the cards to maintain political leverage through a persistent low-intensity war in the Donbas.

Link Copied
By Gwendolyn Sasse
Published on Nov 19, 2019
Strategic Europe

Blog

Strategic Europe

Strategic Europe offers insightful analysis, fresh commentary, and concrete policy recommendations from some of Europe’s keenest international affairs observers.

Learn More

The first meeting in over three years of the heads of state and government of the so-called Normandy Four is set to take place on December 9 in Paris.

This four-way negotiation format (France, Germany, Russia, and Ukraine) brought about the Minsk I and II agreements of 2014 and 2015 aimed at ending the war in eastern Ukraine. While the nitty-gritty of the actual implementation of Minsk II is being handled—as yet by and large unsuccessfully—by a number of working groups that convene regularly in Minsk and include representatives of the non-government-controlled areas in Ukraine, the Normandy format frames the negotiations and provides a communication channel to the rest of the world.

Each high-level meeting in the Normandy format marks an internationally visible political commitment to the negotiations; herein lies the significance of the upcoming Paris summit, which is unlikely to deliver a major breakthrough.

The election of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy had renewed the momentum to seek a solution to the war through negotiations. Zelenskiy’s popularity is dependent on showing resolve and results in the war-torn Donbas region. He changed the tone and direction of the Ukrainian government’s approach, reached out to Russian President Vladimir Putin, and showed willingness to revisit the so-called Steinmeier formula on the sequencing of a special status and local elections for the non-government-controlled areas.

A ceasefire brokered with Zelenskiy’s involvement lasted longer than previous ones, an exchange of high-profile prisoners took place, and a partial troop withdrawal was agreed and implemented. Last week, the OSCE confirmed that it had received notification from the Ukrainian government and the two Russia-backed “people’s republics” in Donbas of the completion of a troop pullback near the frontline village of Petrivske, following two other similar disengagements. This step cleared the way for the meeting on December 9.

The fact that the summit is held in Paris fits French President Emmanuel Macron’s wish to present himself as the driving force of European foreign policy. German Chancellor Angela Merkel will remain much more critical of the idea of Western reengagement launched by Macron ahead of the last G7 meeting.

While it is unlikely that the summit will provide a clear path toward a special status or local elections for the non-government-controlled territories, all four negotiators should keep in mind that the residents based in the non-government-controlled territories still voice a preference for staying within the Ukrainian state.

According to a ZOiS survey from 2019 (face-to-face interviews in the government-controlled part of Donbas and telephone interviews in the non-government-controlled part), about 55 percent of respondents in the non-government-controlled areas prefer to remain part of the Ukrainian state (31 percent with a special status within Ukraine, and about 24 percent without). In the government-controlled Donbas, about 65 percent envisage the non-government-controlled territories returning to Ukraine without any special status, while 31 percent consider a special status necessary.

The upcoming Normandy summit will help increase local knowledge of the ongoing peace negotiations. Opinion poll data show that the local population in the Kyiv-controlled part of Donbas is significantly less aware of the Minsk agreements than three years ago.

In the ZOiS survey from March 2019, 40 percent of the respondents in the government-controlled Donbas said they did not know anything about the Minsk II agreement. In 2016, only 19 percent said so. A further 35 percent in 2019 stated they knew “very little” about the agreement. By comparison, the residents in the non-government-controlled areas felt more informed: here, only 13 percent said they knew nothing about Minsk II, while 24 percent said they knew “very little.”

The negotiators should also keep in mind the close people-to-people links across the frontline, both in terms of physical crossings of the contact line (predominantly from the non-government-controlled area to the government-controlled area) and communication with friends and relatives. In the ZOiS survey, about 54 percent of the respondents in the non-government-controlled areas reported having friends or relatives in the government-controlled Donbas, while about a third of the respondents in the government-controlled Donbas referred to such deep links in the opposite direction.

Putin holds all the cards to maintain political leverage through a persistent low-intensity war in the Donbas. Nevertheless, the Normandy summit will be a test of Russia’s interest in eventually ending a costly war that is becoming harder to justify domestically. The summit also puts Zelenskiy’s presidency to a test at a time when his popularity has begun to fall and his handling of the Donbas issue has given rise to anti-government protests.

Despite that expectations should be limited, it is important to acknowledge the signaling function the meeting on December 9 will have.

It renews the commitment to the negotiation format to which there is still no alternative. It also reminds the world of the importance of the war in the Donbas, a critical issue in the tense relations between Russia and the West that tends to be sidelined by other events. And, last but not least, any small improvements the talks can bring for people living in the war zone are well worth the long-overdue effort.

Gwendolyn Sasse is a nonresident senior fellow at Carnegie Europe and director of the Centre for East European and International Studies (ZOiS) in Berlin.

About the Author

Gwendolyn Sasse
Gwendolyn Sasse

Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe

Gwendolyn Sasse is a nonresident senior fellow at Carnegie Europe. Her research focuses on Eastern Europe, with a particular focus on Ukrainian politics and society, EU enlargement, and comparative democratization.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    Ukraine: Between a Rock and a Hard Place
      • Gwendolyn Sasse

      Gwendolyn Sasse

  • Commentary
    The Power of Language on War and Peace
      • Gwendolyn Sasse

      Gwendolyn Sasse

Gwendolyn Sasse
Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe
Gwendolyn Sasse
Foreign PolicySecurityEURussiaEuropeEastern EuropeUkraineWestern EuropeFranceGermany

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Strategic Europe

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Was it Right to Boycott Eurovision?

    Five countries staged the biggest political boycott in Eurovision history over Israel’s participation. With the FIFA World Cup and other sporting or cultural touchstones on the horizon, are boycotts effective?

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz, ed.

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Trump Turns NATO into a Tool of Coercion

    The full list of humiliations Europe has endured since Donald Trump returned to the White House makes for grim reading. But Washington’s adversarial approach to its allies undermines its own power base.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    How the EU Can Become Energy Independent

    The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has triggered a global energy crisis, but Europe is stuck in reaction mode. Without more strategic foresight, the EU will remain dependent on fossil fuels and will never be truly secure.

      Milo McBride, Pauline Gerard

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Is it Worth it for Europeans to Placate Trump?

    After spending much of 2025 trying to placate Donald Trump, some European leaders are starting to change posture. But is even a hostile Washington still so important to Europe that the U.S. president’s outbursts are worth putting up with?

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz, ed.

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Europeans Are Quiet Quitting the United States

    European leaders have now not only lost faith in Donald Trump’s U.S. presidency, but also in America’s hegemony as a whole. But short-term challenges make an immediate divorce unwise.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
Carnegie Europe logo, white
Rue du Congrès, 151000 Brussels, Belgium
  • Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Gender Equality Plan
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.