Emil StoyanovMember of the European Parliament

THE CONCEPTS OF East and West bear different geographical, historical and political context for different countries. For Bulgaria the East is associated with Russia and with the Soviet Union, and the West with Western Europe and the USA. Despite the fact that Russia’s heart is in Europe, the country includes a much Asian territory: this is often incomprehensible to Europeans (and vice versa). Although the United States is geographically far from Europe, politically and culturally the two have always been very close. Bulgaria, a medium-sized southern European country (with a population of eight million and 111,000 square kilometres of territory) has always been carefully observed by both the East and the West – though, given the country’s Orthodox Christianity and Slavic roots, perhaps more from the East.

Since Bulgaria gained independence in 1878, Bulgarian society has been divided in its opinion on whether the State and its policy should be oriented towards Russia – an Orthodox nation that helped Bulgaria gain its independence – or towards the more developed, more modern but more indifferent West. This ambiguity is embodied in the notorious confrontation between Russophiles and Russophobes which lasted until World War II and claimed many lives from both sides.

The Russophile-Russophobe conflict was severe. It ended only with the end of World War II, when the Soviet Union virtually occupied Bulgaria and the country became part of the so-called socialist camp. This state of affairs lasted the fall of the Berlin Wall and the Soviet empire in 1989. Immediately after the 1989 the old conflict flared up. Again two camps were formed: pro-Europe and pro-Russia. The former communists, their children and their supporters formed the core of the pro-Russian camp. An especially striking example is former Prime Minister and leader of the left Sergei Dimitrievich Stanishev. Stanishev has a Russian name and a Russian mother and had a Soviet passport. His father was long-tenured member of the Politburo (Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party) and a supporter of the communist dictator

Todor Jivkov. In our country everyone knows the great covert and hidden political and economic influence of Russia in Bulgaria. Even today, with Bulgaria a full member of NATO and the European Union, Russian influence persists.

On the other hand, a key advocate of a pro-Western orientation for Bulgaria was the Union of Democratic Forces. The biggest contributions in this regard came from Prime Minister Philip Dimitrov (1992 - 1993), President Petar Stoyanov (1997 - 2002) and Foreign Minister Nadezhda Mihailova (1997 - 2001). Over the years they implemented a persistent pro-Western foreign policy that led to Bulgaria’s current international position.

Russia also has significant influence in Western Europe. Deliveries of gas and other raw materials from Russia to the West constantly influence various political positions: this makes European policy towards Russia inconsistent and ambiguous. Various amusing outcomes ensue: for instance former German Prime Minister Gerhard Schröder found himself working in one of the largest Russian energy companies directly from his clerk chair. Moreover, Western Europe has had very ambiguous policies towards the Soviet Union at the end of World War II and even during the Cold War. For example, England and France were allies with the Soviet Union in the Anti-Hitler Coalition. But such was not the case for Germany and Italy. Both the West’s economic interests and its fear of Moscow’s military power should be highlighted. These are the reasons why allies

Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill agreed that Central and Eastern Europe would be in the Soviet

sphere of political influence at the 1945 Yalta Conference. According to “The Black Book of Communism”, written by French authors Stéphane Courtois, Nicolas Werth and others, tragedy ensued. The Red Army’s occupation of Central and Eastern Europe led to the deaths of about

1 million innocents without any judicial proceeding and to the seizure of property, civil rights and the rights to political or business activities for over 40 million people.

Not surprisingly, these countries were called the socialist camp. It really was a camp, and the people behind the Iron Curtain still find it to difficult understand the importance of this phrase even today. Thus, a population of around 100 million Europeans – including Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, part of Germany, Bulgaria, Romania, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Yugoslavia – fell under the iron boot of the communists. Western politicians left Easter n Europe to its fate. Prominent Western intellectuals enthusiastically supported the Bolshevik regime, driven by political naivety or more frequently by commercial interests. This is disgustingly exemplified by the 1916 “Goncourt” award-winner Henri Barbusse. For a generous commission, he wrote a book praising Stalin, Ordzhonikidze and lovely Georgia, which has just plunged into a bloodbath thanks these two communists.

 After 1989 and the end of the Cold War the Soviet empire began to collapse under the pressure of its many accumulated economic and political problems. First it lost the periphery countries in the socialist camp, including Bulgaria. Then the individual Soviet republics won their independence. This period of decay lasted for some ten years. By the end of the twentieth century the countries of Central Europe began to reintegrate into Europe and into the European Union. European elites honourably and quickly appreciated the significance of this moment and began intensive work on the accession of the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Romania and the Baltic countries to the European Union. Everybody knew that these countries were not quite prepared for this and did not meet the criteria for EU membership. Nonetheless after 4-5 years of active adaptation and harmonization of legislative and economic frameworks, they entered the European Union. Of course, we should never have underestimated the attractiveness to Western European economies of a new 100-million-strong market and a large new source of skilled labour. Western capital freely entered this new market and quickly and inexpensively conquered a large part of it. The governments of the new member states approved this process. They understood perfectly well that they were selling assets at low cost, but this was their only guarantee against Russia and was in a sense the price of EU accession.

This time Bulgaria’s turn to the West seems final. The country is a member of NATO and the European Union. However, Russia’s influence is still strong today. I would even say alarmingly strong. In the first place, the former communists (who are closely linked to Russia) are often in power for short intervals. Secondly, in Bulgaria there is much – almost criminal – Russian money influencing policy. An important example of this was the presidential election in 2001. The candidates were the acting president Petar Stoyanov, a democratic and pro-Western politician enjoying over 70 percent public support, and the pro-Russian former communist Georgi Parvanov. Only three months before the election the victory of Stoyanov appeared apparent. Then huge amounts of money poured into Parvanov’s campaign and suddenly almost all media, political scientists and polling agencies began a harshly negative campaign against Stoyanov. Five or six pseudopolitical players were assigned to slander Stoyanov. This unexpected turn of events was bankrolled by large amounts of money that, according observers, came from Russian-Soviet oligarchs Michael Chorny and Denis Ershov. Both men had been publicly banned from Bulgaria. Russia’s influence is so strong that several years ago the Russian Ambassador claimed that Bulgaria was the ‘fifth column’ of Russia in the European Union and NATO. Neither the president nor the prime minister responded to this challenge.

Hence pro-European minded Bulgarians and European institutions should be cautious: it’s not impossible that in the future efforts to turn Bulgaria away from Europe push it toward Russia (and Asia) will continue. This danger is also increased by the economic strengthening of Russia as a result of its natural resources. The political appetite of Russia is beyond doubt rising in direct proportion to commodity prices. This cannot easily be ignored – Georgia, for example, was brutally overrun. Today, the ongoing global economic crisis has worsened the position of Russia, because of a fall in energy prices. However, if the EU does not pursue an active and firm policy towards Russia, the countries from the Eastern part of the Union will always be exposed to the pernicious influence of Russian interests.

Published by eureporter in February, 2011