No, the russian mentality implies that what was taken with blood, will be given back with blood. Russia had payed for Crimea with hundreds of thousands of soldiers over XVIII-XX centuries. Will anybody raise the stake to pay similar price for Crimea?
By the way, my grandfather, commander of the mortar battery, had been wounded in Crimea in 1944. So I feel personal satisfaction from returning Crimea back to Russia.
I've posted the same thing, in terms of Russian attitude and mentality. It was dismissed then so your perspective will be dismissed now.
As for BBC reporter: he serves Britain's interests which don't coincide with creating the unbiased picture in international affairs. Information technology is simple. While you have, let's say, 80% of supporting Russia, the reporter will talk mainly with 20% of opposite views, and mention about the prevailing majority by the way. The same was with Crimean Tatars, the reporter will talk only with pro-Ukrainian men ignoring the others (Tatars are divided roughly 50 by 50, but nobody knows the accurate numbers).
Rules of game are well known and not going to be changed soon. It's OK when you realize the game
I will have to agree with moby. The BBC may have a British perspective, because its reporters are usually British, raised in their culture, attending their schools, but it doesn't represent British interests, whatever you mean by that.