Rumen Radev and Iliana Yotova; archive photoPhoto: BGNES
By Daniel Smilov:
The escalation of the war by Russia and its aggressive actions on the territory of NATO countries, including Bulgaria, requires a unified Bulgarian position - and not the one that the government has, or seems to have. Radev and Yotova's "strategic uncertainty" regarding the war in Ukraine is already becoming a serious liability for Bulgaria: we are simultaneously declared an enemy by Russia, and our partners in NATO and the EU are wondering what we are doing. Or they may simply consider us the weak link, penetrated by Russian influence.
Two possible justifications
The policy of Radev and Yotova so far has two possible justifications. The first is that their "strategic uncertainty" will improve our relations with Russia. It is true that Lavrov and company praised Radev twice; it is true that Mitrofanova held a conversation with the Prime Minister of Bulgaria after the strikes in our economic maritime zone, but the fact is that the hostile actions - including the arson of Starlink antennas - have not stopped. That is, the military actions and provocations by Russia continue, escalate, and we have not been spared anything, compared to Romania, for example. It is simply closer than us.
The second possible justification is that Radev and Yotova are waiting for Ukraine to capitulate and are positioning themselves in relation to Russia as the winner. It can be assumed that this has been true for Radev since day one of the war, but still, five years have passed, and Ukraine has not capitulated. Perhaps it is time for some reassessment, although Putin's mouthpieces at home and abroad have been proclaiming Russia's victory for the hundred and twelfth time. Perhaps Trump is making a last attempt before the probable defeat of the Republicans in the midterm elections to give Putin what he promised: be it with the diesel deal (approved by Radev), or with the suspension of Starlink and intelligence information. What exactly was promised - we do not know. But it seems obvious that the American administration and Putin have promised each other things. Radev and Yotova may be hoping that they will be a Russian victory in some form, so that both of them will come out closer to the winning end of the story.
However, the whole question is what exactly Bulgaria gains from a Russian victory. Why is it good for us to have an imperial, aggressive autocracy almost on our border, for which we cannot even imagine the full picture of violence against its own citizens and the occupied population. One day this information will come to light, and then the feeling will perhaps be like the revelations about the Holocaust or Stalinist terror, although (let's hope) the scale of the crimes will be smaller. But some people clearly hope that this will be far in the future, so that they will not blush for purely age reasons.
The most absurd justification for the belittling and slander regarding the Russian attacks in the Black Sea is that there is no "categorical evidence", but logic suggests that Russia benefits from them. If we are looking for evidence that says "Russian drone sent by Putin", we will probably not find it, even if the Burgas plant completely dismantles the damaged ships. But the overall picture is clear: Russia is trying to cut off all maritime traffic to and from Ukraine in our part of the Black Sea, which in practice leads to at least hindering all shipping. This is the problem and it is indisputable - and it is not reduced to where what drone flew from. The most comical is Mitrofanova's hypothesis about a "third party" that carried out the attacks. The very fact that responsible politicians from "Progressive Bulgaria" are seriously repeating this hypothesis is a shame for Bulgarian politics.
It is time for Bulgaria to take itself seriously as a responsible state and to act in its own interest. This interest is that Ukraine does not capitulate, and that the aggressor with imperial ambitions does not get rewarded for having seriously violated all basic norms of international law.
Author Daniel SmilovPhoto: Centre for Liberal Strategies
It is also in Bulgaria's interest to be as well protected and armed as possible, so as to deter any thoughts of aggression against itself. To this end, we must fully participate in the collective initiatives of NATO and the EU for rearmament and defense. With drones, it became clear that it is much more profitable to participate in collective programs, because this way the price of the devices falls. By the same logic, we must also join the EU program with Ukraine "Freya" for ballistic missiles. Ultimately, it is clear that Russia is harassing Ukraine with its advantage in precisely this type of weapon and it is in the interest of all Europeans to eliminate this advantage. Perhaps it is understandable if Portugal does not want to participate in such a program, but for us, who are on the eastern flank, non-participation is simply irresponsible. Especially since the alternatives to supplying Bulgaria with deterrents are not indicated. We may ask Greece or Turkey to protect us, but this too has a political and economic cost that is no less than that of our participation in "Freya" or other similar collective defense initiatives.
Not only counterproductive, but also deeply immoral
But the most important thing we must agree on is that the empty and immoral chatter that someone was "for peace", but actually wanted Ukraine to capitulate by stopping aid, must really stop. Those who really want peace take measures so that the aggressor stops his attacks. The reason the war continues is because Russia believes that it benefits from violence. And if we ask someone for a "moratorium" of military actions, then these are not the EU and Ukraine: both entities have long been ready and agreed to an immediate ceasefire on the front line and subsequent negotiations.
As long as the Russian side continues to realize that the war is in its favor, it will wage it and escalate it. Since it is blocked on the front, Russia will intensify its terrorist attacks on Ukrainian cities and in the Black Sea, no matter how many calls for "peace" the Bulgarian authorities make to the EU and the Ukrainians - with the implication that they supposedly do not want the war to end. If they make sense, the demands for a moratorium should be addressed not to Brussels or Kiev, but to Moscow first and foremost: the meeting with Mitrofanova, for example, was the right place for such demands. The implication that someone else is probably to blame and responsible for the continuation of the war - Kiev or Brussels - is not only counterproductive, but also deeply immoral. And the second is still very important.
This text expresses the opinion of the author and may not coincide with the positions of the Bulgarian editorial office and the DW as a whole.
Source: www.dw.com