Galery

1

Victoria Mindova

Although the words "financial difficulties" and "political instability" can define the current state of Greece and Bulgaria, the crisis in both countries remains different. While Europe is trying to find a new face through a deeper economic, social and political integrity, the countries are trying to overcome the mistakes of the past in order to ensure a better future.

Political analyst Parvan Simeonov, a director at Gallup International, presents the situation in Bulgaria to GRReporter, talking about the challenges of the country's political model, analyzing the recent developments and giving basic outlines of how the changes in Bulgaria and Greece have been influencing the social and public moods in the two neighbouring countries. The positive examples Bulgaria can draw from Greece on the eve of the extraordinary parliamentary elections are associated with the achievement of political consensus on the formation of a new government this spring.

How would you comment on the selection of the caretaker government?

The caretaker government will be distinguished from the previously existing political parties by inspiring a sense of expertise. As you know, its work is primarily procedural and its task is to appease the spirits. The Prime Minister’s biography is rather a "blue" one with a very significant "red" accent because his generic biography is associated with his father’s activities in the previous regime. This is obviously a search for consensus between the different political spaces and he has been preferred to appeal to different segments of the Bulgarian society.

The second search is obviously connected with finding a politician who appears "imported" to take lead of the government. Bulgarians who give the impression of successful people abroad and who have built their political career away from the current Bulgarian politics receive an extremely high evaluation in Bulgaria because involvement in the current local politics usually reduces the confidence in the person.

The third effect of the selection of the caretaker prime minister, a former diplomat, is that he has the full confidence of the Western partners. We could say that he has a strong back, due to which his political future seems calmer.

The main potential problem in the caretaker government is that a considerable proportion of its members belonged to the previous prime minister’s government. Two of the deputy prime ministers and the Prime Minister himself took leading positions in the previous government and in a key ministry such as that of the interior we have a minister demonstrating continuity of the previous government.

The problem with this government is rooted in the fact that it can be identified as a successor of the party Citizens for European Development of Bulgaria (GERB) and that is the accusation of its political critics so far. From now on, the tactics of the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP) and the Movement for Rights and Freedoms (MRF) to criticize the government will continue to be based on the fact that the caretaker government is the continuance of the government of GERB and the role of GERB itself will probably be more situational, as is usual for this party. Above all, we expect GERB to distinguish itself from all possible government negatives at this time to be able to tell the story of "While we were in power, there was clarity and stability, then several months of chaos followed and therefore, we are the only option for achieving stability..." This is a standard political practice.

That is why GERB will probably try to distinguish itself from the mandate of the caretaker government, whose task is not easy. MRF and BSP will do the same. Meanwhile, the situation in the streets and in the pockets of the Bulgarians will be restless too. In other words, we have a tough political environment, but it could not be otherwise bearing in mind the circumstances.

The main task of the caretaker government is to organize the elections in May. Can we expect that this will trigger other issues of national interest within two months?

First, this government’s months may be more than two. Nothing ensures us that the political parties will be able to form a government after the elections in May. Let's not forget that this will be a difficult task. Forming the government may be delayed, consensus may not be reached at all and new elections may be necessary.

Let’s make it clear. You predict that there will be a second round of elections because a government will not be formed after the vote on 12 May, don’t you?

The power is undesirable in the present situation and the entire political class is losing its legitimacy. Whatever the government formed, it will start with a very low level of public confidence. Moreover, in terms of political intolerance, which exists in Bulgaria, it will be very difficult for the recent political opponents to sit together. We expect a formula for a government of national salvation or some other programme, an expert formula of broad support to be found. This will lead to two things. The first is that there will be no clear responsibility as regards who is in power, which is highly annoying to the people in the inflamed political situation. The second is that such governments require certain political agreements, which is not well perceived too.

That is why I am saying that the formation of the next government will be difficult and we really fear that this may not happen the first time.

Do you think that no party will gain a significant advantage during the coming elections in Bulgaria?

There could be a party with a strong advantage but we will know with greater certainty when the first sociological data after the outbreak of protests are released. Even if one of the parties has a serious advantage, the party itself will not be willing to be in power in this situation. Primarily because it will be practically impossible for a party to come out and say, "We have won and so, we will govern." People are now intolerant to any party whatsoever. Whoever wins these elections should forget the idea of ruling alone. Power will have to be negotiated rather than imposed after these elections.

Basically, there are two types of democracies when it comes to elections. Majorities win in the first one and the other one applies a formula for negotiating the power in order for all interests in society to be represented. I think Bulgaria will have to move to the second option after the elections. It is actually very difficult for this to be applied in our country, because it requires a lot of effort and agreements, which is not easy.

It is hard to believe that a week of protests, no matter how violent they were, were the main reason for Boyko Borisov to resign. Why did Borisov leave office?

Borisov's resignation was in unison with his style of ruling - infinite flexibility in relieving from political responsibilities. This was the trademark of GERB’s ruling. Whenever there was slightly more energy accumulated in the street or in any other form, the institutions accepted it immediately and satisfied the demands, and the opinions of the government changed. In other words, the government did not impose its will, did not show a plan and ruled in an inert manner.

The main charge against them was that they had concentrated too much power. I think the main charge against them is that they did not use that power constructively. At first, they received great public confidence, which they failed to invest in the implementation of clear strategic and consistent actions. They decided not to proceed with the unpopular measures but the country needs a lot of unpopular measures. Anyone who starts implementing unpopular measures loses confidence. These rulers decided to keep at all cost the vote of confidence as a kind of deposit, from which to gain an interest.

Would you give an example of unpopular measures, which Bulgaria needs immediately and which will improve the long-term situation in the country?

First, the health care system of Bulgaria is very unsatisfactory for its citizens and inefficient from a social and economic point of view. The country has very serious problems with state dependent sectors related to social policy. Bulgaria has a huge problem with marginalized and isolated communities that have no chance in the labour market nor opportunities for personal development. There is a huge problem with the administration as well.

These are sectors in which painful measures should have been taken to optimize them, which always lead to the loss of confidence. Boyko Borisov decided to keep the confidence and to postpone the difficult things. By postponing the difficult things, you always get to things that are even more difficult. At one point, the Bulgarians went out into the streets because of utility bills. Some days later, they had not only specific personal or social demands but also general political demands, which expressed their intolerance to the entire political class or the existing political model. Borisov was seen as a defendant as regards this act, as a major culprit, as a ruler. This made him cede power.

This may be perceived as a very responsible political action driven by deep democratism - "the people do not want me, so I am ceding power." In fact, his action was more a kind of abdication because his commitment as a ruler was different. In other words, Borisov decided to save what had been left of his own party and political authority and made a politically correct move, which was incorrect towards the state. This statement is not an assessment. It is a pure observation of the way in which GERB was ruling.

What did Borisov achieve with his resignation? – He got on the last train and kept what had been left of his political authority so as to be able to start his political campaign. My forecast is that a significant part of the Bulgarians again would recognize Borisov as the opponent of the established party elite despite the riots. Rhetorically, the campaign will be divided into two - all former governors and Borisov. Therefore, the number of Bulgarians who will vote for Borisov again will not be small.

If we are to joke bitterly, we could say that the Bulgarians systemically vote anti-systematically. We choose the new out of habit rather than choosing the experience or expertise. The Bulgarians do not look for the other alternative; they seek the new / previously unfound alternative. They do not look for the opposition of a team but for the next team that will take over the game. This is how Borisov came to power. The attitudes against all parties that are prevailing at present are those that gave him the power the first time. In 2001, Simeon Saxe-Coburg’s party came on the wings of the idea of ​​ "sending away all who were in power before us." In 2005, Volen Siderov was waiting for his turn on the bench. In 2009, it was Borisov’s turn.

Now, there are no alternative options of political "saviours" and a serious political vacuum is going to appear in Bulgaria. It is twice as frightening because the demands of protesters are full of national and social pathos. When the issues of national community and the issues of social justice and solidarity cross, it results in extreme events historically. This historical vacuum must find a way to let off steam somewhere, because even if the people have calmed down for the time being, their number in the streets will be much higher when they face the next difficulty. People have seen their power in the last protests. They have realized that their number is great and that they can bring about a change.

BSP seems to be the constant in the left wing in the Bulgarian political life. On the other hand, GERB has appeared and already succeeded in taking the power and now, it has ceded it. MRF is floating in the political space and sticking to whatever it can. Why doesn’t Bulgaria have a united right wing? What has happened to the Union of Democratic Forces (UDF)?

The traditional Bulgarian right wing did its historical job. It achieved its task, which was for Bulgaria to move from the former regime to the liberal democracy, to join NATO and the European Union. Good or bad, the system of liberal democracy in our country works. Nothing of the agenda of what we call right wing in Bulgaria has remained unfulfilled. So, the right wing did its job.

On the one hand, you are talking about a political vacuum and, on the other hand, Bulgaria does not have a united right wing. Couldn’t one be an answer to the other?

Yes it could but I think that what is being sought in Bulgaria today, the drive and the demands of the people in the street are rather left winged. We are in a situation in which all the new political projects called themselves rather right wing. I think for the first time now that the monopoly of BSP on the political left wing has been shaken. Whether we define the protests as left or right wing, they themselves carry the energy of social discontent, the energy of people who have suffered losses due to the social stratification. By any logic, the protests should have brought the wind to the sails of BSP, but it has not happened. They do not recognize the socialists as their political representatives and this time people are saying, "All parties are bad."

Let's go back to your original question about the right wing. It has its economic benchmarks as well. In Bulgaria, the class that would vote for the right wing is not so large as regards the established economic benchmarks. Beyond that, BSP is constant, unlike the right wing, because the former is the successor of the communist party. However, the right wing in its liberal trends has always been a more individualistic political trend, i.e. social cohesion and organizational unity are not the most important things. A number of circumstances have accumulated due to which the Bulgarian party system does not look like left and right wings. From the outset, politics in Bulgaria has had a solid left wing and alternating non-left opponents. For the first time, energy has been accumulated and conditions have been created for a new left wing that is not the left wing which is the successor of the Bulgarian Communist Party (BCP) but stems from the results of the Bulgarian transition.

Bulgaria needs to pass tough measures, as you said earlier. I am asking you about the right wing because major changes are underway in Europe at present along with the turmoil in Bulgaria. There is a split as regards the degree of solidarity between the states of the union and the needs of fiscal humility in order to master the economic crisis. Rightwing forces are pushing for more reforms and less support whereas the left wing is pressing for more solidarity and not so strict fiscal austerity measures. Where is the balance?

At one time, there really was a dilemma in the European Union, which was like left and right, namely whether to tighten the belts or use the crisis to stimulate growth. It seems that a Solomon’s formula has been found to satisfy them both. I think the turning point was the elections in France. Europe is currently responding to the crisis by applying measures in both directions - savings are being made where necessary and incentives for growth are being offered where possible.

In Bulgaria, at present, none of the existing parties has an adequate answer to the question of what to do. I am even afraid that there will be a populist left shift that will quickly satisfy some specific demands of the protesters. There are promises of a forceful increase in salaries and pensions by introducing the respective legislation, despite the fact that there is nowhere to get the money for that. The spirits of the times in our country are not accidental and it is no coincidence that the Prime Minister himself (Borisov) was heard saying, "Our next programme should be more realistic."

Protests in Bulgaria continue for the time being. The government has already fallen. Why are the people protesting right now? Can you identify the boundaries and parameters of the demands of the protesters?

I would like to emphasize first of all that it is perfectly normal for the protests to be burdened with so many demands at one point that they will distort or change shape. Moreover, it is quite natural for the protest leaders themselves not to feel comfortable in their new public role because some of them were by chance on the shore and when the great political tsunami came, they found themselves on the crest of the wave.

The demands are primarily political. In an effort to change everything and completely so, the people are turning to the constitution, the Grand National Assembly, the change of the electoral system into a majority system, etc. It is completely wrong to assume that a change in the constitution will solve the issues that have driven the people into the streets.

These issues are more economic and procedural decisions cannot change them but the people's desire to change the political model is clear. The people do not understand that they will give even more power to the parties with the majority of their demands. For example, the introduction of the majority electoral system could strengthen a bi-party model. Lowering the threshold would allow any not so nice and friendly individuals to come to power. These are some of the demands. The others are related to the revision of the main monopolies in the country - electricity, water, heating, telecommunications companies. They have even started talking about a media monopoly in Bulgaria, etc. These are clearly consumer and social demands, which have been rejected.

The third group of demands are demands against the local authority. At present, the local governments in many cities in Bulgaria have united with the big local business, the city of Varna being a typical example of this. Many of the protests will turn towards demands for the resignation of local mayors. Of course, there are other groups of demands that are difficult to systemize but they vary from a call to change the whole system to an absolute specification of local issues. Do not forget that we have four cases of people who have burned themselves to death since the beginning of the protests.

How do you explain the phenomenon of Bulgarian citizens burning themselves to death in recent weeks?

For moral and human reasons, I feel very uncomfortable that such incidents have become the object of political analysis and I would not like to discuss them.

I see but I'd like you to tell us whether these acts of extreme protest relate to the general wave of discontent in the country in your opinion or if they are an unfortunate coincidence of personal drama during the national unrest.

You see, the feeling of impasse is common. In the case of Plamen Goranov from the city of Varna - he has become a symbol. As far as I know, he burned himself to death with a poster in the city of Varna. The man in Radnevo burned himself to death because he was unable to pay his debts and support his family. I think that the case in the city of Veliko Turnovo was the same ... but it is incorrect to comment on these things.

These are not coincidences. Their personal drama has been evolving against the very state of the country. The act of Plamen Goranov in particular probably carried the concept of a political demonstration. With his face, the protests have begun creating their folklore, developing their own system of values ​​and authorities.

How much have the media catalysed this in your opinion?

Initially, it could be said that the media catalyzed this process mainly as an anonymous political action and impersonality. In such a moment, impersonality is a sign of authenticity. In this situation, the media were looking for two things - clear demands and clear leaders. Where these two things were not present, they were created not only by the media but also by all other types of social and political analysis, including me as well. Each random poster could present a formal demand. Anyone with a megaphone became the leader.

To what extent has the Greek crisis affected Bulgaria?

According to a survey we carried out a year ago, many Bulgarians were worried about the development of the Greek problem in Bulgaria. The two main factors were the proximity of Greece and the significance of the developments in our southern neighbour.

Greece often uses the name of Bulgaria as synonymous of very bad developments. In Bulgaria, on the other hand, one could often hear the words, "Let’s tighten the belts in order not to become like Greece."

In fact, Greece has become the bogeyman of every politician who should introduce austerity measures. Greece is used as an example to others of what might happen if such measures are not adopted in time.

The opinion that the standard of living in Greece has not significantly dropped in comparison with the period before the crisis is widespread among the households in Bulgaria. The majority of people are convinced that the apparent standard of Greeks in crisis remains significantly better than that of the Bulgarians.

Other influences that Greece has had on Bulgaria are the example of achieving political consensus in times of political and financial crisis. Now, a government of national salvation is operating in Greece and Bulgarian parties can take it as an example. Last but not least, Greece has become a symbol of civic activism. Comments like, "The Greeks are fighting and we Bulgarians suffer too much" can be heard too often in Bulgaria. It is highly controversial whether the Greek model is successful, but the fact is that it often serves as an example.

The majority of people in Bulgaria who went out into the streets to protest had followed the Greek model. Now, another big part of the same protesters is starting to fear that the political tensions and chaos have gone too far. A more moderate and more sceptical stance is evolving at present. People will start to look for safer alternatives. The pathos and desire for a revolt are decreasing; the temperature of the protests is falling too. Very soon, the protesting and the other Bulgarians will be afraid of the political instability in the country and will be thinking of the Greek example, this time in a different light. Despite the high civic activity, the situation in the Mediterranean country remains dangerous and it does not look attractive when viewed more clearly.