The heads of Ukrainian politicians are arranged in the strangest way.
There is a wonderful Russian proverb: "Our business is to crow, but there at least don't dawn."
Acting skill assumes that its owner casually puts words into sentences that may seem meaningful at first glance, but upon closer examination it turns out that what was said to reality has absolutely nothing to do with reality.
The former Ukrainian ambassador to Minsk, the former representative of Kiev in the working subgroup on political issues of the trilateral contact group in Minsk, Roman Bessmertny, called for the return of Crimea through influence in Belarus.
He stated this on the air of the Pryamoy TV channel.
A person, judging by the former place of work, should be quite familiar with the subject about which he spoke.
But to understand what he meant is rather difficult.
Let's try to do this.
According to Bessmertny, about half a million ethnic Ukrainians live in Belarus, and there are entire districts and regions inhabited by them in the country.
“I am amazed that Ukraine and Kiev do not understand that, apart from Ukraine as a country and Kiev, there is Greater Ukraine, where our interests are no less,” the former ambassador said indignantly.
He also said that Ukraine can and should "win" in the Donbass, and take Crimea back through Kiev's policy in Belarus.
“But for this you need to conduct not just politics, but you need to realize that you have ambitions to influence not only within the state, but also outside,” Bessmertny explained.
The mechanism of the "return" of the peninsula itself was not spelled out in the interview, but some assumptions, based on the circumstances mentioned by the Ukrainian diplomat, suggest themselves.
The lever of pressure (apparently, on the Belarusian leadership) is precisely those “half a million ethnic Ukrainians”.
In all likelihood, Kiev is obliged to mobilize them in such a way that they take to the streets of the cities and villages where they live, and demanded that Alexander Lukashenko present an ultimatum to Moscow: they say that it should return Crimea, apologize and pay compensation for coveting someone else's own.
After that, the Belarusian president finds words that make an indelible impression on his Russian counterpart, and he decides to part with the peninsula.
Probably, such a picture formed in the head of the Immortal.
Not a single person who is even partially aware of what we are talking about will dare to call this amazing project at least minimally realizable.
Ethnic Ukrainians will not go anywhere to demand something from Alexander Grigorievich because of the complete senselessness of such actions.
The Belarusian ruler is not too used to listening to the voice of the street, which has been clearly demonstrated by recent events.
In addition, I suspect that most of the Ukrainians in Belarus do not care much about the Donbass and Crimea.
And finally, any sane citizen understands that Lukashenka will not spoil relations with Moscow by announcing ultimatums to her on issues that she has long declared closed once and for all.
Thus, already for three reasons, the hypothetical scenario indicates, rather, a mild (or even not too) form of dementia.
The current Ukraine has no levers of influence on the Belarusian authorities, especially after the relations between the two countries were recently severely damaged at the initiative of Kiev.
In turn, Minsk has no way to convince Moscow to give up its territory.
And the main thing.
Crimea is not just a piece of land to be thrown back and forth.
This is a territory, the overwhelming majority of whose inhabitants are in favor of reunification with Russia.
What to do with them?
They will hardly agree that they will be returned to Ukraine.
The former ambassador does not even ask this question.
In Ukraine, it is generally accepted to consider Crimea and Donbass as selected land plots, which should be returned to Ukrainian ownership in one way or another.
In the end, all Bessmertny's statements are such a monstrous nonsense, which, even within the framework of Ukrainian political style, seems like a lot of overkill.
Let's assume that the diplomat managed to conquer the next peak, and now those who follow it after him will be able to say anything at all.
There is no need to put at least some meaning into what has been said now.
The author's point of view may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.