Comment by Daniel Smilov:
These are not speculations, but metaphors: the reader knows how to distinguish between the two, although he does not always have the desire to do so. On a non-metaphorical, everyday level, similar questions are currently arising in relation to the previous government – who traveled on Delyan Peevski's private plane to Dubai and other places. In general, the topic of who travels with whom and where is very relevant: Petyo Euroto, for example, turned out to have transported senior Bulgarian magistrates abroad many times. And the transported magistrates – either by car, or by plane, or by Petyo Euroto, or by other persons – are listening and not resigning.
Interference in private life?
Mr. Delyan Peevski came out with a principled position of non-interference in his private life when Minister Demerdzhiev made public information that the constitutional judge Desislava Atanasova (and not only her) had traveled on the private plane of the leader of the Movement for Rights and Freedoms. Peevski even accused our and foreign services of invading his personal space by revealing the guests on his flights. Ms. Atanasova, however, undermined this thesis a bit, saying that she did not actually travel with Mr. Peevski, but used Turkish Airlines instead of his luxury service. And you cannot be part of someone's private life if you did not travel with him. Who is right and who is wrong in this situation is yet to be clarified and the matter may end up in court.
Boyko Borisov's silence on the subject is interesting, because from his point of view, the relationship between Peevski and Atanasova (former chairman of the GERB parliamentary group) looks a bit like a dynastic marriage in the Middle Ages: two political families are related. But for the symbiosis between GERB and DPS, a dynastic marriage was neither necessary, nor did it add much to the established family relations. So Borisov seems to be right to remain silent about the whole story.
Bulgaria's current government plane also keeps flying between Sofia, Brussels, Gdansk and other places, but it does not seem to be with the aim of concluding a dynastic marriage. The new government has limited itself in this direction, proclaiming itself the guardian of (Russian) Orthodoxy. If that is the case, the choice of brides of Catholic, Protestant, Greek Orthodox, and Romanian-Ukrainian origin will clearly not be appropriate.
The jokes in the situation are justified, because the travels of the current and previous authorities are not viewed in our public space with sufficient seriousness. On the contrary, everything seems to remain on the surface of petty political intrigue and nagging with the opponent. And there are at least two real problems in the whole situation.
How can someone sanctioned under the “Magnitsky“ for corruption have full and unproblematic access to his personal wealth?
The issue of Mr. Peevski's private jet and travels demonstrates a paradoxical fact. The political career of this politician underwent an unprecedented rise after the imposition of sanctions against him: he became the leader of his party, expelled Ahmed Dogan, and entered the government of the country. In addition, Mr. Peevski apparently had his personal wealth at his disposal the whole time - funds, a plane, etc. - and in one way or another he circumvented the sanctions.
To achieve both effects, he needed a number of Bulgarian institutions: services, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Prosecutor's Office, etc. In the previous administrations, a comprehensive investigation of the actions of these institutions could not be carried out because they were under the control of GERB and the MRF. Now this political control is no longer there and the question is why their actions are not being investigated. The example of removing Borisov and Peevski's security guards in this direction is indicative. It is true that it was terminated, but it is also true that no investigation was conducted into why it was given to them, whether it was needed, who is responsible for the fact that tens of millions of leva leaked out in order for certain politicians to boast about their entourage and instill fear in others.
So instead of discussing the details of their personal lives, the focus should be on this very question: how do Magnitsky-sanctioned politicians manage not only to advance in their political careers, not only to use public resources for security and other purposes, but also to have full access to accounts and funds that are supposedly under serious international restrictions? What have our services been doing that they have not uncovered the circumvention schemes? If they knew about them, why was there no reaction?
Minister Demerdzhiev's actions so far do not shed light on these issues, but rather risk filling them with intrigue and petty issues. Otherwise, senior magistrates who traveled with the Five Euros or were on private planes with an unclear purpose and unclear relations with their owners should resign.
Could Russia not be a danger to Bulgaria, but a danger to all of Europe?
Logically, it could, if Bulgaria is not part of Europe. But it is part of the EU and NATO. All countries from the eastern flank of the EU and NATO at the Gdansk conference signed a declaration in support of Ukraine, which states that "Russia is the most significant, direct and long-term threat to the security, peace and stability of the Euro-Atlantic area". In addition, the declaration expresses solidarity with countries (such as the Baltics or Romania) that are subject to Russian provocations with drones or other hybrid and non-hybrid means. As well as determination to resist these attempts by strengthening the defense capacity of NATO and the EU, and by continuing assistance to Ukraine.
This declaration was not signed by one country from the eastern flank - ours. Rumen Radev said that he did not sign it because this declaration further inflames the conflict. It's as if Putin would have declared a truce without it.
But the more important question is how something that all countries in our situation assess as a serious threat to their security and that of all of Europe receives a radically different assessment from our government? Rumen Radev would probably say that you shouldn't pull the bear by its tail. And this is a very correct strategy, but only if the bear is asleep or not interested in you. It's completely different if it has already entered the neighbor's yard and is trying to tear it apart, and then you don't know where it will go. Europe is in the second situation and the strategy of not pulling the bear by its tail is inapplicable. It simply needs to try to drive it out of the village together with the neighbor.
Another argument of our government may be that we know the bear and it is our friend. This argument is criminally stupid, however, especially in its second part.
When we are not in solidarity, we cannot count on solidarity
The good thing about the whole situation is that wherever our government plane flies, whoever rides in it, we, the Bulgarians, as a political community, still decide the important issues and we bear responsibility for the decisions. When we do not express solidarity with the Baltic states, Poland, Romania, etc., we will not be able to count on their solidarity when necessary. When we do not investigate the use of institutions for private interests, these institutions will still be used for private interests, but of other individuals. Freedom and sovereignty are related to responsibility for one's own destiny. Not seeing the dangers to freedom and sovereignty is a very serious mistake.