Ukraine crisis: Minsk deal brings 'glimmer of hope' that end could be in sight

Deal struck after Vladimir Putin put unprecedented pressure on separatist leaders, but leaders warn "much work" still to be done

It was neither a comprehensive solution or a breakthrough, and Angela Merkel spoke only of a “glimmer of hope.” But after a gruelling 16 hour negotiating session in Minsk the end of the conflict in Ukraine may finally be in sight.

All sides will cease fire from midnight on Saturday night or Sunday morning under the deal agreed by Vladimir Putin and Petro Poroshenko and midwifed by Mrs Merkel and François Hollande.

The ceasefire will be followed by a withdrawal of heavy artillery and rocket systems from both sides of the lines and an exchange of prisoners.

The deal, which is based on September’s stillborn Minsk peace agreement, also lays out a road map for a lasting settlement in eastern Ukraine, including an amnesty for separatists and devolution of power from Kiev to the war-torn eastern regions.

Mrs Merkel and Mr Hollande both praised the deal as the best chance yet to end the bloodshed, but emphasised that the progress made is fragile and reversible.

“We now have a glimmer of hope, we have agreed on a comprehensive implementation of Minsk. But the concrete steps must of course be gone, and there are still major hurdles lie ahead,” said Mrs Merkel.

“I have no illusions. We have no illusions,” she said, adding that “much work” remained.

Mrs Merkel said agreement was only possible when Mr Putin pressured Alexander Zakharchenko and Igor Plotnitsky, the heads of the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics, into signing the road map negotiated by the four national leaders.

A previous ceasefire deal collapsed after Mr Zakharchenko and Mr Plotnitsky announced they wanted full independence from Ukraine and launched an offensive to conquer further territory.

Mr Putin, who was the first leader to emerge from the talks, said negotiations had dragged on because of Ukrainian refusal to speak directly to separatist leaders and disagreements over the fate of Debaltseve, a strategic railway junction where about 8,000 Ukrainian troops are trying to fight off a separatist encirclement.

“It was not the best night in my life but the morning, I think, it is good because we have managed to agree on the main things despite all the difficulties of the negotiations,” Mr Putin said.

Mr Poroshenko said he found it difficult to trust Mr Putin to keep his promises, fearing the separatists would use the two days before the ceasefire to further their gains.

“We demanded immediate ceasefire without any precondition. Unfortunately they demanded we have almost 70 hours before ceasefire was launched.

"Immediately after the deal was signed, the Russian-backed terrorists started the offensive operation,” he said.

“That is why it is vitally important for us, for all of us to keep the pressure to keep the promises about the ceasefire – about the withdrawal of the heavy weapons, about the immediate release of all the hostages, about the withdrawal of all the foreign troops and mercenaries, and the closing of the border”.

Western governments cautiously welcomed the agreement, but warned that it is now up to Mr Putin to live up to his commitments.

Speaking as he arrived for an EU leaders summit in Brussels, David Cameron said he would welcome the ceasefire “if it is genuine.”

“But what matters most of all is actually actions on the ground rather than words on a piece of paper. I think we should be very clear that [Vladimir Putin] needs to know that unless his behaviour changes the sanctions we have in place won’t be altered,” he said.

The White House said in a statement that the deal would be meaningless without “concrete steps” towards implantation, including the withdrawal of Russian troops and military equipment from the war zone.

“The true test of today’s accord will be in its full and unambiguous implementation, including the durable end of hostilities and the restoration of Ukrainian control over its border with Russia,” the statement said.

A key element of Wednesday’s deal is the withdrawal of “foreign armed groups” and military equipment, and the disarming of “illegal armed groups.

Russia continues to deny supplying weapons or troops to separatist forces, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Other potential points of disagreement include the provision that Ukraine must devolve power to the regions before it regains its control of its border with Russia and the lack for an time table for the withdrawal of foreign troops.

Critics have warned that an escalation of violence seems inevitable despite, or perhaps because, of the ceasefire.

Ukrainian officials said that more Russian tanks crossed the border even as the talks continued.

Around 50 tanks, 40 missile systems and 40 armoured vehicles crossed overnight into east Ukraine from Russia via Izvaryne border crossing into the separatist Luhansk region, a Kiev military spokesman said on Thursday.

Meanwhile, correspondents in Eastern Ukraine witnessed heavy weaponry heading in the direction of Debaltseve on Thursday, suggesting separatist forces are preparing a last push to finish off the beleaguered Ukrainian garrison there before the ceasefire.

By Roland Oliphant

Относительно «Минских договоренностей»

Д. Тимчук:

Подписанный в Минске документ под названием «Комплекс мероприятий по выполнению Минских соглашений» - блестящий. Если только мы решили распрощаться с Донбассом как неотъемлемой частью Украины.

Прежде всего, в самом ходе переговоров и «принуждении» террористов к миру все изначально поставлено с ног на голову. То есть – ЕС и Киев как-то упустили такой базовый момент, что речь идет о внешней агрессии России против Украины. В то время, как без признания РФ ответственной за события на Донбассе все попытки «мирного урегулирования конфликта» смысла не имеют. Не надо делать вид (как это сделано в подписанном в Минске документе), что «ДНР» и «ЛНР» - самостоятельные игроки. Они таковыми никогда не были и не будут. И никакой ответственности за свои слова и, тем более, за предоставляемые «гарантии» не несут. (Басни европейцев про то, что Путин теперь будет нести «персональную ответственность за срыв договоренностей» - это сказки Венского леса).

Соответственно, договоренности об «отводе тяжелых вооружений» - это сценарий расширения зоны контроля террористических организаций. Ибо они совершенно прогнозировано никаких договоренностей соблюдать не будут. Тогда как Киев связал себя по рукам и ногам, взяв на себя обязательства.

Фактическая легитимизация террористических организаций, поголовная амнистия и проведение «местных выборов» на Донбассе под дулами автоматов боевиков и российских военнослужащих (и только после этого установление контроля над границей с РФ) – это и вовсе высший пилотаж. Больше похоже на неудачный троллинг.

Особенно умилительно выглядит аббревиатура ОБСЕ во многих пунктах. Вероятно, авторы документа сочли, что присутствие и «контроль» со стороны этой организации дает какие-то гарантии неангажированности и объективности? Честно говоря, Всемирная лига сексуальных реформ здесь выглядела бы уместнее.

Впрочем, до всех этих моментов (местные выборы, децентрализация, легитимизация террористов под видом «народной милиции» и пр.) еще надо дожить. Что сомнительно, поскольку чудеса начнутся уже на стадии упомянутого отвода вооружений и прекращения огня. Садясь играть в карты с прожженными шулерами, не стоит надеяться на честные правила игры.

Россия переходит на бесконтактную войну, и устаревшее вооружение делает украинскую армию уязвимой – военный эксперт

Директор Центра исследований армии, конверсии и разоружения Валентин Бадрак рассказал НВ, как модернизировать украинские вооруженные силы и какое им нужно оружие

- Насколько украинская армия в ее нынешнем состоянии может противостоять сепаратистам и российской армии?

- Украинская армия сейчас оснащена оружием третьего поколения. Что касается противотанковых средств, то это тоже преимущественно ПТУРы [противотанковая управляемая ракета] старого поколения, которые неэффективно даже срабатывают.

В тоже время, у нас есть КБ Луч, которое разработало целую линейку высокоточных средств поражения, в том числе и противотанковых систем различного базирования – и автономного, и для стрельбы через канал ствола танков, бронетранспортеров и даже для вертолета.

Проблема в том, что есть такое понятие, как цикл производства вооружения. Невозможно тотчас получить несколько сотен комплексов, которые разрабатывает КБ Луч. Для производства партии нужно три-пять месяцев, в зависимости от количества заказываемых единиц.

Но это только часть проблемы. До сих пор не утвержден гособоронзаказ. Это прямой недостаток работы правительства. Это ставит под угрозу сроки поставки не только противотанковых украинских систем, а и других систем в армию. И создает угрозу, что силы обороны Украины, с вооруженными силами как их ядром, вынуждены опять оперировать вооружениями третьего поколения и находится в неравных условиях с российской террористической группировкой.

Эту ситуацию нужно менять. Было бы правильно, если бы президент как Верховный главнокомандующий взял бы под личный контроль и наблюдение вопрос поставок новой техники. Именно новой, я подчеркиваю. Потому что всего за прошлый год было отремонтировано 18 тысяч единиц вооружений и военной техники. В основном, речь идет об артиллерийских системах, бронетехнике. Это оружие делает наши войска уязвимыми, потому что оно предназначено для контактной войны. А Россия поступательно переходит на бесконтактную войну.

Обстрелы со стороны сепаратистов – действуют в отношении украинской армии на поражение и не позволяют также эффективно отвечать. Получается, что украинская армия компенсирует это высоким боевым духом, мужеством, героизмом, жизнями солдат. Это нужно победить, чтобы уравнять в потенциале техническую возможность [украинской армии с силами сепаратистов].

Все это вынуждает военно-политическое руководство просить западные государства, чтобы они поставили нам высокоточные системы. В будущем я бы не исключал наращивание стратегической компоненты за счет военно-технического сотрудничества. За счет того, чтобы путем получения технологий и комплектующих осуществлялось импортозамещение тех систем и комплектующих, которые поставляла Российская Федерация.

Мы всегда приводим в пример высокоточный артиллерийского боеприпаса Квітник [украинский комплекс управляемого артиллерийского вооружения], который был принят на вооружение несколько лет назад. Великолепное оружие, но из-за того, что никто не занимается вопросом импортозамещения и организации серийного производства, такой боеприпас серийно не производится и не поставляется для наших артиллерийских подразделений. Что, конечно же, является примером не совсем правильного подхода к обеспечению армии современными вооружениями.

И таких примеров достаточно много. Касаются они систем разведки и связи – то есть серьезных радаров, касаются модернизации вертолетов, что очень важно сейчас, касаются обыкновенных боеприпасов и модернизации артиллерийских систем.

Только в прошлом году было потеряно в ходе войны более чем 1.240 единиц техники. Поэтому нужно наращивание оружейных возможностей. Это напрямую связанно с потенциалом и морально-боевым духом наших войск.

- Ряд экспертов и политиков в частных беседах озвучивают мнение, что у нас через полгода закончатся артиллерийские снаряды. Мы ведь используем еще то, что лежит на складах со времен Советской армии. Насколько это соответствует действительности?

- Есть проблемы боеприпасов и проблемы стволов [для артиллерийских орудий], но оборонный бюджет, который выделен, и те оперативные действия, которые сегодня предпринимают, позволяют говорить, что это не перерастет в проблему. Все будет сделано, я не вижу никаких проблем.

Я вижу проблему в стратегической компоненте. Невозможно надеется, что наша армия будет два-три года стоять, сдерживать натиск, и не иметь ничего стратегического, что будет служить фактором сдерживания. Что может служить фактором сдерживания? Это такое оружие, которое обеспечит настолько гигантские потери противника, что противник откажется от агрессии. И поставки тех же Javelin – это только часть ситуации.

Я бы, конечно, настаивал на том, чтобы в будущем в Украине оказались американские системы ПВО Patriot, чтобы сделать невозможным авиационное нападение на Украину. Потому что, абсолютно не исключено, что в какой-то момент времени Путин начнет применять авиацию – или закамуфлировано или наплевательски относясь к позиции Запада, потому что тот до сих пор адекватно не ответил на агрессию.

Массовые поставки летального оружия обозначали бы, что поставщик является стратегическим союзником Украины, а значит противником России. Эта позиция для нас принципиально важна. Она является символом и психологическим фактором, и это даже более важно, чем характеристики того высокоточного оружия, которое мы можем получить.

Пока только Соединенные Штаты рассматривают возможность поставок серьезных вооружений для Украины. Европа на это не пойдет, будем говорить прямо. Но в отношениях с Европой Украина должна использовать рычаги военно-технического сотрудничества, то есть налаживать совместное производство, говорить про модернизацию вертолетов. Это все возможно с получением западных технологий, в том числе европейских. С разными союзниками и партнерами на международной арене нужно по-разному работать и разные возможности использовать.

Obama and Merkel stage show of unity in Ukraine crisis

Barack Obama and Angela Merkel pursue diplomatic solution to Russian "aggression" - but US keeps option of sending lethal weapons to Kiev

Barack Obama and Angela Merkel staged a show of unity over the Ukraine crisis on Monday, suggesting a diplomatic answer to Russian “aggression” in Ukraine was still possible despite insistent calls to send weapons into the warzone.

The American president and the German chancellor insisted that joint US-European resolve was strong after days of arguments over whether America should send advanced weapons to Kiev.

But Mr Obama left a door open, saying that supplying “lethal defensive weapons” to boost Ukrainian government forces was “one of those options that’s being examined” and that while he had yet to make a decision, he would be consulting with “other allies” besides Mrs Merkel.

The president’s team was also considering “whether there are additional things we can do to help Ukraine bolster its defences in the face of Russian aggression,” he added.

The two leaders met in Washington ahead of a summit planned for Wednesday in Minsk, Belarus, when Mrs Merkel and François Hollande, France’s president, will join the leaders of Russia and Ukraine in an attempt to thrash out a peace deal.

Pro-Russian rebels have been fighting government forces in the eastern Donbas region of Ukraine since last April, in a grinding conflict that has claimed more than 5,300 lives.

Kiev and Nato say that Russia has sent tanks, artillery and thousands of men into the battle across its border with Ukraine, allowing the separatists to carve out a de facto independent state centred on their stronghold of Donetsk.

Hawks in Washington insist the only way to rebuff Russia is to provide Kiev with “defensive weapons” such as Javelin anti-tank missiles, but Germany, France and Britain have spoken against the move.

Mrs Merkel said: “We continue to pursue a diplomatic solution although we have suffered a lot of setbacks; these days we will see if all sides are ready and willing to come to a negotiated settlement.”

The German leader said it was vital to “stand up for the interests of the European peaceful order”.

“We stand up for the same principles of inviolability of territorial integrity,” she added. “If we give up this principal of territorial integrity of countries then we will not be able to maintain the peaceful order of Europe that we’ve been able to achieve.

“This is not just any old point, it’s an essential, crucial point and we have to stand by it. And Russia has violated the territorial integrity of Ukraine.”

Mr Obama said the international community should “ratchet up the costs” to Russia for its “violation of the core principle of sovereignty”, indicating that fresh sanctions against Moscow could be on the horizon.

Washington’s preference was for a “strong, prosperous, vibrant, confident Russia”, the US leader said. “We are not looking for Russia to fail and (be) weakened,” he added. However, “in the face of this aggression and these bad decisions, you know, we can’t simply try to talk them out of it.

“We have to show them that the world is unified and imposing a cost for this aggression.”

Any peace deal will have to tackle a minefield of issues, including the location of a ceasefire line, the status of the rebel regions, monitoring of the Ukraine-Russia border and the possible presence of international peacekeepers.

Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, indicated in a newspaper interview on Monday that he would work towards a resolution in Minsk but he railed against Washington’s alleged role in the conflict.

The hostilities had “emerged in response to the attempts of the USA and its western allies who considered themselves 'winners’ of the Cold War to impose their will everywhere,” he said.

Mrs Merkel’s shuttle diplomacy may have smoothed some feathers in Washington but there is still division within the EU about how to tackle Russia if peace talks fail.

A Pro-Russian separatist fighter jumps from an armoured vehicle in Uglegorsk (AFP)

On Monday the EU delayed placing asset freezes and travel bans on 19 more individuals, including five Russians, for their actions linked to eastern Ukraine so as not to antagonise Russia ahead of the talks.

The restrictions will be reviewed after the Minsk summit. Austria and Cyprus are leading an anti-sanctions camp that includes the Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Luxembourg, Slovakia, and Slovenia.

While all eyes were on the Obama-Merkel meeting in Washington, another set of talks was under way behind closed doors in Berlin. Senior diplomats from Russia, Ukraine, Germany met to iron out the details of a new ceasefire agreement.

If they cannot reach agreement on certain unspecified key points, Mr Putin has warned the Minsk summit may not even take place on Wednesday.

“I hope that the outstanding issues can be gradually resolved,” said Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Germany’s foreign minister, on the sidelines of talks in Brussels.

Mr Steinmeier conceded that if the current peace initiative fails, a military option would be back on the table.

“Everyone is of course clear that if the current efforts do not succeed, then the conflict will escalate militarily in a next stage,” he said. “Then the question of supplying arms will certainly be discussed here in Europe.”

By Tom Parfitt, David Lawler, Justin Huggler and Bruno Waterfield

Ukraine crisis: Do not try to scare Putin, warns Merkel

Sending arms to Ukraine will not scare Vladimir Putin, warns Angela Merkel while Francois Hollande warns it could lead to war

French President Francois Hollande (R) gestures as he speaks with Russian President Vladimir Putin (C) and German Chancellor Angela Merkel during a meeting at the Kremlin in Moscow

Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, championed last chance efforts to end the Ukraine conflict while warning success was far from certain as Kiev said rebels were massing for a new offensive.

As fresh fighting in eastern Ukraine saw five civilians and five government soldiers reported killed in 24 hours Merkel insisted that sending more weapons would not resolve the conflict.

"I can't conceive of a situation where better armaments for the Ukrainian army would so impress President Putin that he believes he will militarily lose," Merkel told the Munich Security Conference.

The German leader came to Munich from overnight Moscow talks she and French President Francois Hollande held with Russian President Vladimir Putin to thrash out new peace proposals.

"It is uncertain whether it will lead to success, but from my point of view and that of the French president it is definitely worth trying," she said of the Franco-German initiative.

Hollande for his part said the stakes could not be higher and the new peace plan was "one of the last chances" to halt the 10-month-old conflict.

"If we fail to find a lasting peace agreement, we know the scenario perfectly well - it has a name, it is called war," he said.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said he believed the new proposals could help end the conflict, all the while charging the United States and the European Union with having escalated the conflict at every turn.

"These talks will continue as you know; we believe there is every possibility that we will reach a result and agree the recommendations that will allow the sides to really untie this knot of a conflict," Lavrov told an MSC panel.

In that case, Russia would be ready to guarantee the outcome, he added.

Sergei Lavrov

Far from the diplomatic corridors, fighting raged in the east of the former Soviet satellite state, where some 5,400 people have been killed since the start of the conflict in April, according to the United Nations.

Rebels are "accumulating forces for further offensive operations on Debaltseve and Mariupol," Ukrainian defence official Volodymyr Polyovyi told journalists.

The separatists were sending fresh tanks, armoured personnel carriers as well as multiple launch rocket systems to the Debaltseve region and Granitne, around 35 kilometres (20 miles) northeast of Mariupol, Polyovyi said.

Debaltseve - mid-way between rebel centres Donetsk and Lugansk - has been the focus of fierce fighting for over a week as insurgent fighters try to encircle government troops holding the strategic railway hub.

Separatist fighters in January fired rockets at the strategic government-held port city of Mariupol, whose capture could open up a land bridge from Russia to Crimea.

Missile fire on Saturday hit Debaltseve a day after a brief truce allowed hundreds of civilians to flee, government officials said.

Amnesty International said earlier this week that most of the town's former population of 25,000 had fled, but that around 7,000 civilians remain behind.

An AFP journalist in the main rebel city of Donetsk said that the sounds of heavy explosion could be heard around the city Saturday.

Recent gains by the increasingly well-armed pro-Russian rebels have driven growing calls to take the gloves off and supply weapons to Kiev as western sanctions have failed to change Russia's mind.

Merkel rejected this idea as dangerously unrealistic and stressed that "I am of the firm conviction that there is no military solution to the conflict."

US Senator Lindsey Graham, member of the Senate Armed Services committee, said good US ally Merkel was "making a big mistake."

The chancellor "can't see how arming people who are willing to fight and die for their freedom makes things better. I do," Graham said.

"I think it will increase the cost of the Russian intervention. I think it will let people in the world know, who struggle for their freedom, that we're not just all talk."

Merkel was due later Saturday to meet US Secretary of State John Kerry, Lavrov, Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko and US Vice President Joe Biden as the tempo of diplomatic activity on the crisis picks up.

No details of the Moscow talks were released but the new plan appears to be based on the failed September Minsk ceasefire and peace accords which the West says Moscow never lived up to despite signing them.

"Work is under way to prepare the text of a possible joint document to implement the Minsk agreements," Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, describing the Moscow talks as "substantial and constructive."

By AFP

'No doubt' America will give us weapons, says Ukraine, amid fears of 'catastrophic' escalation

Some 224 killed in past three weeks, as Ukraine's president says he is in "no doubt" the US will provide weapons for fight against Russian-backed separatists

An elderly Ukrainian man is helped by a Ukrainian Army soldier and a citizen during a evacuation of civilians in Debaltseve, in the Donetsk region

Ukraine's president said yesterday there was "no doubt" the US would provide weapons for its fight against Russian-backed separatists, as a UN report warned the escalation in deadly clashes would be "catastrophic" for civilians.

A recent surge in fighting has seen the civilian death toll in eastern Ukraine rise by 224 in the past three weeks, bringing the total killed in the conflict to over 5,350, according to the UN.

Washington signalled this week that it may now be prepared to arm Ukraine government troops in the conflict, an unprecedented intervention which would raise the threat of a proxy war between it and Moscow.

"I have no doubt that a decision on the possible delivery of arms to Ukraine will be approved both by the United States and by our other partners," Petro Poroshenko, Ukraine's president, said yesterday.

"We have to have the means to defend ourselves," he told journalists in the eastern city of Kharkiv.

John Kerry, the US secretary of state, arrives in Ukraine tomorrow in a show of support for the country's pro-Western leadership.

President Barack Obama's administration had previously ruled out sending weapons to Ukraine's government but the failure of economic sanctions to force Moscow to halt alleged military support for the separatists has prompted a second look at the option.

Washington has so far provided non-lethal assistance to Ukraine, including flak jackets, medical supplies, radios and night-vision goggles.

Intense fighting remains focused around the battleground town of Debaltseve, a strategic railway hub between the rebel strongholds Donetsk and Lugansk where separatists are fighting to encircle Ukrainian forces.

At least 19 civilians and five government troops were killed in fighting with pro-Russian rebels over 24 hours yesterday.

By Andrew Marszal

US 'considers arming Ukrainian army' as fighting continues in the east

Fears of proxy war between US and Russia in Ukraine deepen after report that Washington could provide arms to Kiev

Ukrainian soldiers in an armoured vehicle near the city of Artemivsk, in the Donetsk region

The spectre of a deepening proxy war in Ukraine involving both Russiaand the United States has raised its head after reports that the White House is considering supplying weapons to Kiev.

Washington has so far refused to supply weapons to the pro-Western Ukrainian government but reports suggest that a growing number of President Barack Obama's advisors are now warming to the idea.

According to the New York Times, General Philip Breedlove, Nato's military commander, supports providing arms and equipment to Ukraine’s hard-pressed forces, which are struggling to quell an uprising led by Russian-backed separatists.

Other senior officials including John Kerry, the US secretary of state, are also said to be open shifting American policy and beginning to send weapons to Kiev.

It is not clear if the growing number of hawks will be able to sway Mr Obama, who has so far been reluctant to escalate the standoff with Russia beyond economic sanctions.

While the US and European sanctions have taken a toll on Russia's economy they have not succeeded in convincing Vladimir Putin to end his intervention in eastern Ukraine.

Instead, Russian troops and tanks have continued to pour over the border in support of separatists fighting against the Ukrainian government and a ceasefire agreement between the two sides has collapsed into full-scale fighting.

Around 5,000 people have been killed since the armed conflict broke out in the spring of 2014, according to the UN. Around 50 people died over the weekend.

A spokeswoman for the State Department did not deny that the US was considering sending weapons but said no decision had been made.

"I don't think anybody wants to get into a proxy war with Russia and that is not our objective here. Our objective is to change the behaviour of Russia," she said.

A group of well-respected former US officials and academics released a new report on Monday arguing that the ongoing fighting in Ukraine shows the need for Washington to begin arming Kiev's forces.

"The West needs to bolster deterrence in Ukraine by raising the risks and costs to Russia of any renewed major offensive," the report says.

Its authors include James Stavridis, Gen Breedlove's predecessor as Nato's military commander, and Michele Flournoy, a former Pentagon official who would be in the running to become US defence secretary if Hillary Clinton wins the next election.

The report calls for America to give the Ukrainians anti-tank weapons for use against Russian armoured vehicles. Most of Kiev's anti-tank stockpile is left over from the Soviet era and around 70 per cent of the weapons are reportedly unusable.

If the White House followed the group's recommendations it would likely to lead to Russian troops being killed by American-supplied weapons and significantly raise the stakes of the West's standoff with Moscow.

"No one in our group made this recommendation lightly," said Steven Pifer, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and one of the report's authors. "But Russia has been escalating because they see potential gains and very little cost. If you take away the so-called cheap military options there's a chance you can steer the Russians towards a real negotiation."

Mr Pifer told The Telegraph that if the US began supplying arms other Nato allies like Britain, Canada and Poland might follow suit.

Britain has so far supplied non-lethal support to the Ukrainians and a Foreign Office spokesman indicated that the UK was unlikely to begin sending arms. “We are clear that there cannot be a military solution to this crisis," he said.

Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, categorically ruled out her country sending arms, saying: "It is my firm belief that this conflict cannot be solved militarily."

By Tom Parfitt