We witnessed the third consecutive unsuccessful vote of no confidence against the government of Prime Minister Rosen Zhelyazkov a few days ago. This time it was initiated by the third largest parliamentary group - – – – – – – – failure in the sphere of fiscal policy.– Despite the heated debates in the plenary hall, the result was not encouraging for the opposition -– the vote gathered only 54 votes, out of a total of 240, from – Passive support through abstention also came from "We continue the change – Democratic Bulgaria" and from the few remaining MPs from "Alliance for Rights and Freedoms".
An interesting twist – even before the third vote of no confidence was voted on, a new, fourth vote against the government of Rosen Zhelyazkov had already been submitted to the parliament. It was initiated by the "Majesty" party and the motive for it was "the failure of the state in the field of the environment and water".
And although we have accepted the political dramas and skirmishes in the National Assembly as something normal, the debate and vote on the third vote of no confidence took place on the eve of a key date – July 8, when the European Parliament is to vote definitively on whether Bulgaria will become part of the eurozone on January 1, 2026. Could such an attempt to overthrow the government affect Europe's final decision and what signal does it send there?
Rather not, political scientist Assoc. Prof. Tatyana Burudzhieva, a lecturer at Sofia University and a member of the "Gallup International" agency team, commented to Radio Bulgaria.
"In Europe, of course, everything that happens in our country is taken into account. However, my impression is that the situation is much different from, for example, our admission to Schengen. While it was a Bulgarian national priority and for a long time there were countries that, for one reason or another, postponed Bulgaria's membership in Schengen, now Europe is rather the main factor expressing a desire for Bulgaria to become part of the eurozone. Of course, the moods in Bulgaria are taken into account, but there is no case in Europe, unfortunately, when these moods of the population have been reflected in such strategic decisions," she said.
And she gave an example – in Italy 10 years ago, a referendum was held against the privatization of state water resources, in which over 80% of those eligible to vote participated, and over 70% of them were against privatization. Ultimately, however, at the moment the opinion of the Italians is being ignored and that is exactly what is being done.
Burudzhieva summarized – ultimately, the vote in question has an effect exactly in the opposite direction to that desired by the opposition, i.e. it manages to show the government as even more cohesive.
"In votes of no confidence, the opposition must have its own clear strategy, and not simply chase quantity and intensity. For me, the problem is that the vote of no confidence is becoming something other than its essence – it should show the alternative. Unfortunately, this vote did not show either alternative policies or a guarantee that the opposition has an alternative for governance without corruption. These votes of no confidence turn against the opposition itself, because, on the one hand, they resemble a census of the opposition, on the other hand – the fact that no alternative can be shown only demonstrates that the government is stable. And this will probably be the conclusion that the countries in Europe will draw – that despite the tensions, the government is functioning in a sufficiently stable situation."
And does its constant use, often with the very clear understanding that it will not be successful, devalue the very meaning of such an important procedure in parliamentary democracy as the vote of no confidence?
"The vote of no confidence is an extremely important instrument that shows that democracy can only consist of an opportunity given to the other, who - even if a minority, even if in opposition - to express their positions, policies and views on the governance of the country. This is crucial for a democracy to function. Therefore, I categorically call on politicians to refrain from assessing what one or another instrument of democracy is. The fact that the opposition cannot use it in the most effective way does not mean that the vote of no confidence is a waste of time. "This only means that people who express such positions have nothing to do with either democracy or parliamentarism," the political scientist emphasized.
And while the third vote of no confidence could hardly threaten the adoption of the single European currency in Bulgaria from January 1, 2026, the real danger for this is quite different - in the failure to prepare an adequate update of the state budget in the fall. That is, if the new data then again do not show fiscal stability, warns Tatyana Burudzhieva, Bulgaria may face a delay in the date regardless of the decision already made by Brussels.