What is GERB almost two decades after its establishment... What is the role of Boyko Borisov today, are there dependencies that have led to an outflow of trust and electoral support, is there intra-party democracy in the party, what were the relations with the MRF. And the political repressions against GERB… Does President Rumen Radev have potential as a political player on the ground… Tsvetan Tsvetanov, chairman of the party “Republicans for Bulgaria“, speaks to FACTI.
Mr. Tsvetanov, 19 years ago you founded GERB. Boyko Borisov is a leader today, but what is GERB today – political party or one-man party?
- Unfortunately, GERB today can hardly be called a modern political party. There was collectivity, clear principles, nomination meetings for mayors, councilors and deputies, internal debate on local, regional and national topics. Today, decisions are made unilaterally without the opinion of local structures. This is a huge difference with the party we created in 2006, when I was the first chairman of GERB.
- What is Borisov without GERB and what is GERB without Borisov?
- Borisov without GERB is a politician without party and structural support, while GERB without Borisov would have a chance to reform, return to principles and restore trust.
The problem is that in recent years the party has been upgraded as completely dependent on one person, which makes it vulnerable.
It is no coincidence that the protests we saw today were directed against Borisov, not against GERB, because there are many valuable people in the party.
- Do you see a person who can succeed Borisov in GERB?
- I think that at the moment everyone who is there, are more conformists – people who turned from his opponents into zealous supporters. For example, Toma Bikov, Denitsa Sacheva, Daniel Mitov, Miroslav Borshosh, Kostadin Angelov, even Raya Nazyaran. They have never lived with the cause and with what we have opposed and limited this dependence that Borisov has built in recent years with the MRF.
- In the first parliamentary elections in 2009, GERB received the trust of over 1,600,000 Bulgarians. Today there are 600,000. Are only the obedient ones left?
- The party is governed by people who do not ask questions, because those who had character, position and expertise were gradually pushed out or left offended by the attitude and the way in which GERB has developed over the last five or six years. Decisions are made by people who had nothing to do with the party's cause.
- What is the main problem in GERB today?
- The big problem is that the party today does not have the protective mechanism of immunization that it had in 2013, when we know what the “Oresharski“ cabinet did with the powerful force of the MRF - they crushed everything in places.
Back then, GERB was a real victim of the regime run by Oresharski.
And here is the loss of over a million voters. This is no coincidence. This is a direct result of the leadership's refusal in recent years to take responsibility and listen to the criticism of the rank-and-file members and sympathizers who nevertheless remained in GERB.
- Despite this, GERB remains the leading political force?
- Yes, it is. But this is so due to the fact that the others are very weak or there is a lack of consolidation and organization in the center-right political space, which can actually create a real political format that would be the leading political force with over a million voters. If this were realized, it would be good. If there is reason and organization, a real alternative could emerge. GERB in the upcoming elections will have a much lower result than in all elections so far.
- You say that Borisov should publicly explain why in 2017 he agreed with the MRF to share governance behind the backs of his own party and our coalition partners. Did this happen only in 2017…
- In 2017, this simply became visible to society. The real dependencies and agreements of GERB with the MRF began earlier through personnel decisions and tacit agreements. This has never been discussed openly in the party, which is unacceptable for a democratic formation.
I remember the release of Mladen Marinov, Vladislav Goranov, Emil Karanikolov…
And this happened against the backdrop of internal party talks related to the MRF. And Borisov then took this step to release them, because there would already be a public announcement of these possible dependencies and he wanted to cut off some of these dependencies in order to be able to show that he was principled and responsible in his behavior towards the party.
- Were there any ministers associated with the MRF in the GERB cabinets?
- The very fact that Borisov released them means that he himself admits to such potential dependencies. We can make a reasonable assumption not only about ministers, but also about many people from the leading administrative resource in the state administration.
- Borisov has known Peevski for 20 years – a quote from the GERB leader. Why then would Peevski put you in prison in 2013?
- This is the important question. If everyone was partners, why was I hit with the full weight of the prosecution? The answer is simple. Because I refused to participate in behind-the-scenes agreements and have always defended the party, I have argued with Borisov about his mistakes, especially about abandoning the structures at the expense of dependencies on the MRF. These processes were not public, but they were known to the members and structures in the country. That is precisely why, together with the structures, we were a team and Borisov respected me. And this led to results of over 1.1 million GERB voters by 2017.
The cases against me were a form of political repression and a warning to anyone who has their own position.
We see that currently this is part of the political arguments for overthrowing political opponents, when the state machine is involved in order to repress political opponents. We saw what happened to the mayor of Varna, Blagomir Kotsev, who we can consider as one such case.
- Is there a takeover of GERB structures in places by “DPS – A new beginning“, after you say that such processes have occurred over the years?
- I am convinced that GERB will suffer great damage in the next elections, especially in the mixed regions, because Borisov made a big retreat and gave the MRF the opportunity to monopolize the votes in the localities. But this is how a situation is created that offers many opportunities, because I talk to many people. I know Turks, Pomaks, Roma, etc., who are looking for an alternative.
- Which regions are you talking about?
- For the mixed regions - Kardzhali, Haskovo, Targovishte, Razgrad, Shumen, Silistra, etc. These are regions in which I have many acquaintances and friends who do not approve of what is happening with GERB. I think that people in these settlements can surprise many of the political formations, including DPS and GERB, if they see an alternative in other political formations that can protect their interests.
- Which party is stronger today - GERB or “DPS - New Beginning“?
- Borisov gave DPS the opportunity to build power resources, but without being a participant in power. And DPS is using this opportunity well. DPS is the better organized party today.
GERB is the bigger one, but when the leader betrays his own people at the expense of another party, it loses combat capability, motivation and becomes dependent.
This is the sad truth about the state of Bulgarian politics. And that is why perhaps Borisov and Peevski have considered GERB and DPS as connected vessels, looking at the two parties through the results of the last parliamentary elections, which formed about 920 thousand votes, and they believe that this is something they are entitled to and will always receive. But I think that these are quantities that can always be variable, and sometimes with a very negative sign.
- From "we will “squeeze until January 1st, so that the ATMs can start issuing euros“, to the resignation of the “Zhelyazkov“ cabinet 24 hours later. Is there any surprise for you in Boyko Borisov's behavior…
- No. This is a well-known model - sharp turns, contradictory messages and decisions under external pressure. This is not leadership, but management in a panic mode, without strategy and consistency. An example of this is the budget that was submitted to parliament, withdrawn by the government and submitted again. When the legislator started looking at the second budget that entered parliament, protests broke out. Then Borisov immediately distanced himself and said that he does not support anything from now on and will be in opposition.
Do you think this is a statesman? Does he have a responsibility to the governance of the country?
Because until the appointment, conduct and election of the new members of parliament, after the recent changes to the Constitution, we have an acting parliament and an executive branch that governs until the election of the caretaker cabinet appointed by the president. Everyone is in their function to carry out what is in the Constitution. How can you not support anything?
- Can anyone in GERB, even from Borisov's closest circle, tell him anything to the contrary? You know the people around him…
- I'm thinking about the answer to this question... No, there are no more people left who can say anything to Borisov, because they are mainly thinking about their positions. There is no one to oppose Borisov from the people around him. But, look, there are people left around Borisov who perform, but do not bear direct political responsibility. Examples of this can be Raya Nazaryan, Kostadin Angelov and all those I listed a moment ago. And this is because they have never been in opposition mode and have always been in this GERB wave when the party was in power.
They never went through the repressive period of 2013-2017 together with the rank-and-file members and sympathizers.
All people with character and their own opinion simply left because they were either betrayed or offended.
I can give examples: Ognyan Tsenkov, former mayor of Vidin; Vladislav Nikolov, who built GERB in Pleven, former deputy; Dzhema Grozdanova, long-time deputy and chairwoman of the foreign affairs committee, and many others. These people had the self-confidence to stand up for a principled position, to conduct a constructive dialogue with their political opponents and to defend the interest of the state. And by the way, this is the biggest personnel collapse of GERB in the last five or six years.
- We are going to elections, that's clear. How do you view the behavior of President Rumen Radev. What potential does he have on the political field?
- President Radev has a high personal rating and serious potential to present himself as an alternative. As a head of state, he has always been corrective, but on the political scene he will be in a completely different role - as a political player. In recent years, the parliament has made many changes to the Constitution and laws to limit his presidential powers, but not of the presidential institution, but of President Radev specifically. This is how they turned him into a victim in the eyes of society and this will certainly be used in one of his future campaigns, if he enters the political field.
- Being president is one thing, being a politician is another. Do you see Rumen Radev as a politician? - These are exactly the differences, that it is one thing to be a corrective - in the role of head of state, and another thing to be a political player. Rumen Radev will use the opportunity to present during his campaign, if there is one, that he is the only one who was not in collaboration with Peevski's government. All the others who will be on the political field have supported each other or have been in some joint government actions, even parliamentary majorities - such as, for example, the changes to the Constitution, together with the MRF. Radev can use this skillfully. Another question is what the result of such a campaign of his will be. It all depends on the people who will be with him, on the leaders he will present in the multi-mandate electoral districts, and on the trust and will of the people. It is clear that people are looking for alternatives and, if we assume that everything is evil, they will look for the lesser evil and try to recognize those who have not been bound in recent years.
- And if you had to summarize the existence of the parliament, how would you characterize it…
- A parliament without real power. Real decisions are made outside the plenary hall, and the people's representatives are often reduced to extras. This undermines trust in democracy. What we have observed in recent months and years - their statements from the podium, insulting attacks on political opponents, does not build the authority of the parliament, but terribly destroys trust in it. Even their appearance and behavior degrade the institution in which they represent the people, because they are elected. This in itself answers many questions about the state of parliamentary democracy.