Our position was in defense of the national interest, said Foreign Minister Velislava Petrova in response to a question from the parliamentary control regarding the removal of Iskander Mahmudov from the 21st package of EU sanctions against the aggressive actions of the Russian Federation.
The question asked by MPs Hristo Gadzhev and Georg Georgiev from GERB-SDF is on whose proposal and in defense of what state interest Bulgaria requested that Mahmudov be removed from the sanctions list.
Velislava Petrova: No one signed anything in Kiev
„Bulgaria's position on the sanctions is formed on the basis of opinions of competent authorities and its sole purpose is to protect the Bulgarian interest”, explained Petrova. According to her, a meeting was held on the Coordination Mechanism for the Implementation of Sanctions and a decision was made to make the procedure as formal as possible.
„Regarding the proposal that the introduction of restrictions against Iskander Makhmudov as the owner of the company „Transmashholding” could affect Bulgarian economic interests in view of Bulgaria's use of derogations from EU sanctions for the Russian company „Metrovagonmash” - it is interesting that it was during the GERB government that a derogation was requested for this company”, explained Petrova.
„Apparently, then we thought that there was a risk to Bulgarian interests. It is difficult to understand why you do not think so now”, she added.
Hristo Gadzhev asked which is the competent institution that proposed that Mahmudov be removed from the list. “For a derogation that you requested, you ask why we and the relevant specific department have requested to maintain it, because there is a risk for Bulgarian citizens”, the minister replied.
A question to the Foreign Minister regarding the sanctions package was also asked by MPs Bozhidar Bozhanov from the Bulgarian Democratic Party and Nikolay Denkov from the Bulgarian People's Party. They asked whether, within the framework of the preliminary discussions of the 21st EU sanctions package, Bulgaria had requested the exclusion of additional individuals beyond those publicly announced, such as the Minister of Sports of the Russian Federation or "Togliattihimbank", and if so, on what grounds was their exclusion requested and what was the selection process.
The process for deciding on sanctions does not involve the Council for European Affairs; a procedure must be followed, in which there are opinions of all competent institutions and ministries, Petrova said. She explained that indeed, during the negotiations, Bulgaria had raised considerations regarding the proposal to impose measures against the Minister of Sports of Russia – Mikhail Degtyarev. The arguments given by Bulgaria were the absence of a specific contribution of the person to the military actions against Ukraine, as well as the fact that such a measure cannot contribute to stopping the war, Petrova explained.
Bulgaria has also expressed a reserved position regarding the proposal to include "Togliattichimbank" in the sanctions lists, arguing that the proposal refers to a regional commercial bank owned by one of the largest ammonia producers in the world and part of the "Uralchim" group. For its part, "Uralchim" is a leading producer of mineral fertilizers - a raw material that is not subject to sanctions, Petrova said.
According to the minister, Bulgaria continues to import it, including from Russia and other EU member states. Given the high prices and the unstable situation on the international fertilizer markets at the moment in connection with the conflict in the Middle East, any limitation of the possibilities along this line could have a negative effect, Petrova explained. Bulgaria subsequently withdrew its considerations on these two proposals in order to achieve a consensus in the EU, the Foreign Minister specified.
„The competent institutions have expressed a position in which they ask the Bulgarian government to express reservations, but in the presence of a consensus - to support the sanctions, and this is based on the extent to which we consider it a risk and whether there are other alternatives. In principle, we have a reserve, but the risk for Bulgaria is not so great, so that we can support it if there is a consensus”, she said.
“The fact that small quantities are imported from a distant Russian company does not sound to me like a convincing argument not to impose sanctions on the bank that finances an element of the group that supports the production of ammunition with which Ukrainian citizens are killed”, said Bozhidar Bozhanov. “I think there is no need to speculate about the quantities. You can request information from the Ministry of Economy”, Petrova replied.