Veselin Stoynev's comment:
GERB and PP-DB clearly realize that even after the elections on October 27, the only possible government is one based on the two formations. And they once again demonstrate that they cannot approach each other as equal partners. Boyko Borisov, whose party did not suffer electoral damage from the dissolution of the previous government of the “assembly“, but once again failed to form its own, again proposed a gentleman's agreement for a joint cabinet after the elections.
PP-DB, which lost half of its voters mainly because of the “assembly“ or its failure, responded with a gentleman's letter (sent only on behalf of the PP) as a prerequisite for talks. With it, GERB is proposed that the parliament, even before it goes into a pre-election vacation, adopt three laws, on which depends whether we will receive 10 billion leva from the EU under the Recovery and Resilience Plan. Moreover, they were introduced in previous parliaments, and their progress now depends mainly on GERB, since the heads of key parliamentary committees and the Speaker of the National Assembly are from this party.
Three laws as a prerequisite for cooperation
One law is for the protection of people who file signals about corruption, and GERB insisted that these signals should not concern the time of its governments. The other law is for the bankruptcy of individuals, which was adopted on first reading, but met resistance from interested debt collectors. The third decision is the rules for selecting members of the Anti-Corruption Commission, which were also agreed with the European Commission. Regardless of whether and how much money we will release with these three acts, they are necessary for our country because they create conditions for a fairer order and more development.
However, if the PP really wanted to approach constructively, they should have invited GERB to a conversation to resolve these three issues, and not address it through the media as an ultimatum. GERB also responded in writing to the media, because they were against the hasty legislation (which is dragging on in several parliaments) and this type of political behavior. By insisting that the PP had the opportunity to provide these 10 billion, GERB even got out that the “Petkov” cabinet had a full majority in parliament for a year and a half, while in fact it has only been in power for 6 months. And they arrogantly sent them their governing program as a basis for governing after the elections.
The leader of DSB Atanas Atanasov, on the other hand, made softer requests to GERB, stating that it was imperative for PP-DB and GERB to find a way to each other, that the three laws could also be adopted by the new parliament, if there was not enough time in this one, and that the PP's idea of an equally distant non-partisan prime minister was originally DSB's - to form a technical, supra-party government.
From „Yes, Bulgaria“ while they steadfastly insist that GERB must shine and break away from its dependencies on Delyan Peevski in order to have an anti-corruption majority and joint governance in some form.
Gambling hope that the election results will solve the crisis
In such a situation, even the expectation that the election results themselves will lead to a resolution of the political crisis is a completely gambling hope. Because whoever comes first, as GERB has already proven, will not be able to govern alone, and voter turnout will most likely be even lower, because it is offered by the same, but in a worse version of mutual blockade.
The main question facing the country, which is painfully visible now equally well from abroad and by Bulgarian voters, is whether it is at all manageable. And the main political forces, which are the only ones who can solve it, are increasingly unable to do so. All that remains is for them to find an external reason for the "assembly", as the war against Ukraine and the endless official administrations of President Radev were the previous time.
Such an event could be the removal of the "Peevski" factor, but this seems impossible and insufficient only politically - even if his formation does not enter parliament, the dense web of dependencies remains, and it is unlikely that a prosecutor will be found who can begin to unravel it.
Another factor, God forbid, is that the war directly affects Bulgaria - then there would no longer be any obstacles even for an all-party government, but this is too high a price to pay for a way out of the political crisis.
A parliamentary official government with unclear political responsibility
The threat factor of new elections after the October ones will probably lead to some kind of caretaker government of the parliament with unclear political responsibility, a loose majority and a short time horizon, which will only postpone the crisis. And create the final conditions for a radical change in the political system and the emergence of an alternative.
The mutual blockade between GERB and PP-DB is a zero-sum game for both formations, whose sure outcome is already set. The election campaign that they will lead, regardless of what messages for the future of Bulgaria, will be grotesque, because it will not be able to convincingly answer the only important question - will there be stable government and will there be government at all. And the effects of ungovernability will begin to be felt by everyone next year - investors are already fleeing the country, and new ones do not even think about coming.