National interests of the country require if not membership in NATO, then at least close cooperation with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

An attack in Nice, the attempt of coup d'etat in Turkey, seizure of a police station in Yerevan, skirmish in Alma-Ata, shooting in Munich — there is way too much tragedy for one week in July. With all that, the war in Syria and Ukraine, the escalation of violence and aggression gives a feeling of the coming apocalypse, arranged by humans.

Are we witnessing a new redivision of the world?

The EuroBelarus Information Service talked with philosopher Uladzimir Matskevich about it.

— How can we explain the rising wave of violence?

— With statistics. If we divide the number of attacks and incidents for the entire year, then, perhaps, this year will be no different from the others. It just coincided that too many tragic events occurred during one week in July. Events can push us to far-reaching conclusions, but we shouldn’t trust them: they are based on feelings.

It is unlikely that the number of attacks and tragedies of this kind will single out this year from a number of others, unless, of course, no aggravation happens in the second half of the year.

— That is, the fears that the current escalation of violence suggests a possible redivision of the world are in no way justified?

— That we cannot say. Such conclusions can be made from other phenomena.

One of the events of the last week deserves special attention — the attempt of coup d'etat in Turkey. The attack in Nice and shooting in Munich, or the murder of Pavel Sheremet in Kyiv are tragic events that cause sympathy, neurosis, and depression in the community, but they are no more than the ordinary phenomena. Last year Nemtsov was killed, this year — Sheremet; last year there were terrorist attacks in Brussels, Paris, and now — in Nice and Munich — in a series of the wave of terrorism that is not defeated yet, the causes of which are still being investigated. But neither the European Union nor any other country in the world has demonstrated the political will to unleash a full-fledged fight on terrorism.

But the Turkish revolution is not an annual event; it happens once in a decade or even in several decades. And not even the attempt of coup is important, but also its form. Previously, military coups have usually been successful — they led to the change of the regime. The current coup was poorly prepared; even the army elite, not to mention the middle and lower ranks of the Turkish army didn’t take part in it. Besides, the coup has caused strong resistance of the police and of the Turkish population. Therefore, the very form of the Turkish revolution suggests instability, nervousness of the situation in Turkey, which has long been considered a potential candidate for membership in the European Union.

But the situation with the reaction of the Erdogan government and the whole state machine is even worse. Severe repressions fell on those, who are in no way involved in the coup, but only came under suspicion, or were seen in connection with the alleged initiator of the coup, who has been living in exile for a long time. In this respect, the emerging democracies, such as Belarusan, Turkish, and those of many post-Soviet countries, are highly explosive societies where such things are possible. It’s very dangerous in today's world. Today’s Syria and the long-drawn-out conflict in Syria demonstrate the consequences of suppressing people’s discontent. As shown by recent events, Turkey stands not so far from Syria; and the repetition of the same scenario is possible in Turkey. If we take a wider perspective, we can assume that exactly the same events are possible in Ukraine, too.

Moreover, I would say that though it’s less likely, but there are conditions for a repetition of Turkish events in some countries of the European Union. So the fears that the world experiences not quite usual processes are far from baseless.

There is ample reason to suspect that all the tragic events are one way or another connected with Kremlin. And if we say that the world may be on the verge of a serious redistribution, we are forced to connect these fears with the Russian regime. It was Putin's regime that initiated the revision of borders in Europe that were established after the Second World War, thus breaking its obligations under the Budapest memorandum. It is Russia that is the epicenter of those negative trends that can cause concern around the world.

— Is Turkish scenario possible in Belarus? Lukashenka has been one of the first to support Erdogan; therefore, can he be trying Turkish events on himself?

— No one today can accurately and clearly define the reasons for Turkish revolution. For example, one of the versions suggests that Erdogan himself or his security services pushed the dissatisfied part of the Army and the Air Force to the coup attempt, without waiting for them to accumulate enough power to carry out a successful military coup.

Dictators sometimes do such actions, and they are followed by tighter dictatorship. In today's economic and political situation Lukashenka may feel that his power is unsteady, and may provoke something similar. Such a scenario is quite possible in Belarus.

If we consider real threats that are not coming from the ruling regime, the greatest threat to Belarus comes from Russia, which Lukashenka prefers to remain silent about. But some of his actions show that he is also aware of this threat.

— What Russia’s actions should cause the greatest concern?

— A continuing economic pressure and the attempt to keep the neighboring countries, primarily in the European part of the former Soviet Union, on a short economic leash, that is to prevent them from developing economically and ensuring their own economic security. But this has been a permanent factor has been for many years.

What causes anxiety from the recent events is the concentration of Russian troops close to the Belarusan border and the possible escalation of the war in Ukraine, which may require Belarusan resources. If Russia puts forward such a claim, Belarus won’t be able to refuse. If it tries to, Belarus can be occupied with the Russian troops.

— “The island of stability,” which Lukashenka allegedly builds in Belarus is a merely symbolic notion, isn’t it?

— Of course! As soon as one of the countries in Europe refuses from the emerged status quo and starts revising the existing order, it will require clear self-determination from the government of every country. In such situation no security can be guaranteed. A similar situation was observed between the World Wars I and II, when the attempts of many countries to feign neutrality and conduct non-intervention policy finally led to the direct occupation of these countries or military coups, where the new government was making the geopolitical choice.

The same rules apply now. Simulation of neutrality, an attempt to build the so-called “island of stability” is quite irresponsible, shortsighted policy, which will bring no good. Belarus’ national interests require if not membership in NATO, then at least close cooperation with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.