<em>Comment Arnaud Dubien, Director of the Franco-Russian analytical center of the French-Russian Observatory</em> The fact of the negotiations and reach agreements in the form of two signed documents is a positive signal, a step toward de-escalation of the conflict. Pays attention to what agony it was given. However, the documents signed and accompanying them with facts, events and speeches of a number of individuals raise questions and concerns. First, there is no prescribed solutions for the problem in today's point - Debaltsevo. Apparently, before the entry into force of the cease-fire (midnight February 15), one should expect the most fierce battles in Debaltsevo, and in other places. If the result of this will be 200-300 killed on either side, it will frustrate the process. And this development is, unfortunately, very likely. Also in accordance with the Minsk written agreements, the three most problematic issues in local elections, control of borders and constitutional reform - stretched in time before the end of the year. It is clear that these three issues are interconnected. But it speaks to a lack of full trust, and that each party is afraid to make the first step and lose face. Not signed the document and the fixing of foreign status of Ukraine in the form of its neutral status, and this served as the source of global conflict around this country. The other day during a press conference Francois Hollande said that he did not see Ukraine in NATO, and it sounded to Russia as the promise of France to veto such a possible solution, as in 2008 in Bucharest. Include in the signed documents and frankly contradictory positions. One example of this. In article 10 it is assumed disarmament of all illegal armed groups - that is, as I understand, we are talking about the militia, when in the penultimate note to the document for the establishment of a people's militia units according to the decision of local councils - that is, de facto, this may be the legalization of same militias that hardly ready to lay down their arms. It is difficult to assume that we are talking about the fact that Kyiv will send your troops! The contradictory wording of the signed documents reflects the fact that all had to make concessions. And we should expect that now all signatories (Poroshenko, militias and even Putin) inside, among their own people will have to prove that they won. Now about who and what the assignment went. Poroshenko "won" in that document there is no word "federalization of Ukraine" isn't "neutral status" and repeatedly refers to the "territorial integrity". Most likely, there will be liberation of the Ukrainian pilots Savchenko. At Poroshenko weak position in Kiev, and he needs these characters in order to save face. Militia "got" the resumption of the functioning of all state mechanisms, payment of pensions, allowances and so on, that is, removed an economic blockade. That won Putin? Recognition from Hollande and Merkel, its image can be improved, and this in turn opens the way for the normalization of relations between Europe and Russia - I do not say "the West", as the US stand apart. It is not excluded - although not mentioned - what if will be executed agreements in relations between Brussels and Moscow will be positive dynamics, and in the spring once again on the agenda to get the issue of lifting sanctions. In such a scenario very negative expectations, which are clearly seen among economic players will not come true, and may occur defrost investment projects. And it will positively affect the entire economy of Russia. The allocation of Ukraine of new loans (the news of what appeared at the same time) the IMF and the establishment of the cease-fire gives her the opportunity to avoid disaster in the short term. But the strategic objectives of economic development, building relationships in the triangle of the EU-Ukraine-Russia" is not resolved. My attention was attracted also the wording of the second document is about "commitment to the idea of humanitarian and economic space from the Atlantic to the Pacific ocean. That is, spelled out the idea of a "greater Europe". It seems to me that this seemingly unremarkable formulation hides the main divisions within the Western elites: those who like Hollande and Merkel, despite the situation around Ukraine committed to this idea, and those who want to isolate Russia from the Ukraine and the rest of Europe. This struggle between the two concepts has long been in the West, and will go on: whether to involve Russia into European processes or push it farther to the North and East. www.obsfr.ru