The exchange of prisoners between Kiev and Moscow according to the “35 by 35” formula met with a generally benevolent (for various reasons) reaction from both sides. And since it has not been observed for a long time - at least in Russian-Ukrainian relations, at least in international relations - in general, something a little like positive, it was natural that the politicians who at least slightly shifted the peace process from the point of complete freezing, the public will want to encourage.
Well, the method of promotion is known - the Nobel Peace Prize. Moreover, there were and are much more controversial proposals to give the "Nobel". Recently, there was a desire on the network to crown the blogger Yu.A. with laurels Dudya for a film about Beslan, and in 1995 they said that they should give the Nobel Peace Prize to Sh.S. Basayev and V.S. Chernomyrdin for Budennovsk. Against this background, during the September exchange of prisoners, God himself ordered, if not to award, then at least raise this topic. The public request was obvious.
And he was satisfied, but in a somewhat strange way. A bold political scientist S.A. made a proposal in his broadcast. Belkovsky: “I have no reason to rush to Vladimir Alexandrovich Zelensky, but I want to say the following. All in all, what he did deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. I urge Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, to nominate Vladimir Alexandrovich Zelensky for this year's Nobel Peace Prize. Because Mikhail Sergeyevich has such a right and - maybe I will say something politically incorrect now - there are not so many years left until Mikhail Sergeyevich can exercise this right. It's time to do it. ”
The inconvenience is that the political scientist has a strong reputation as a trickster (in Russian, an evil joker), and his radio program would be appropriate to call "Satyric at the microphone." Hype is meaningless and merciless. Whereas it would be more appropriate for a formally respected authority and person to turn to a figure with a not so unambiguous reputation.
However, if we ignore S.A.'s rich track record Belkovsky (the hip joints of E.M. Primakov, co-authored with S.L. Dorenko, the denunciation of Hodor the villain, and then the writing of appeals of Hodor the virtue from places of deprivation of liberty etc.), then his current appeal looks relatively decent. Moreover, at the already quite indecent level of the Nobel Committee. When the 16-year-old schoolgirl Greta Tunberg, suffering from Asperger syndrome, was nominated for the 2019 prize, then V.A. Zelensky looks a much more suitable nominee. Unlike the unfortunate girl, he is at least mentally full.
Of course, the idea to use M.S. as a nomenclator Gorbachev is not very successful. It would be more decent to let the last general secretary live quietly.
And so - why not. “Peacekeepers” are a long-standing specialty of the Nobel Committee. 1926 - Briand and Stresemann, 1973 - Kissinger and Le Duc Tho, 1978 - Sadat and Begin, 1994 - Arafat, Perez and Rabin. It fits into the paradigm.
True, before the awards were for two, because tango is dancing together. Whereas, according to the current proposal, it turns out that Zelensky danced alone and released the people in Russian places of deprivation of liberty alone. Obviously, according to S.A. Belkovsky, it was so that V.A. Zelensky telegraphed to the Federal Penitentiary Service: “Release such and such!” - after which the Russian jailers immediately took the visor. Otherwise, it is impossible to explain the absence of V.V. Putin. Of course, from the point of view of the Ekhov audience, even hinting at it is unacceptable haraam, but, on the other hand, there are also laws of the premium genre.
Although, of course, the exchange prize itself is already a genre innovation. In 1962, the Soviet agent Abel was exchanged for the U-2 Powers pilot on the Glienicki Bridge in Berlin. However, the idea of giving a joint “Nobel” to Kennedy and Khrushchev for such a breakthrough did not arise. As well as in 1976, when they exchanged a bully for Luis Corvalan. And then the topic of the Nobel Prize was not raised, although L.I. Brezhnev, perhaps it would be nice. But if our humane age requires - why not. Everything is better than unhealthy ecologists. But, of course, then there should be two nominees.
The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.