30421 | 8 Sept. 2025 | 20:10

The biggest crisis is the crisis of trust towards political parties and political leadership. We still see very low levels of political participation, comments political scientist

 The start of the post-vacation political life has reignited the clashes between the president and the executive authority. It was the word of the head of state on the Day of Unification that served as the culmination, when Rumen Radev declared that "140 years later, Bulgarians are once again complaining about the derelicts." Quickly, the puzzle of who exactly the term "derelicts" is referring to was surrounded by speculation and raised the question: Is Rumen Radev an alternative or has the presidential race already begun?

 The guest on the show "Bulgaria, Europe and the world in focus" on Radio "Focus" is Associate Professor Milen Lyubenov.

 Tsone Sabcheva

 - Prof. Lyubenov, has the political season started or is it the presidential campaign?

 - It's too early for the presidential campaign, the elections will be in a year. So this is rather part of the whole rhetoric that we have observed in the last few months. I don't see anything particularly different in the words of the President. He is positioning himself as an opposition to the current administration and preparing his party's project.

 - But what is the content of this rhetoric that we observe in the President, as well as in the left or right opposition, and even in the majority? What is its meaning?

 - The political polarization is increasing, but the political polarization in the country has been quite high in the last few years. So from this point of view, I also don't see any significant change. The party fragmentation is preserved - we see this in sociological studies. If there is something different that has the potential and charge to cause turmoil in the executive power, it is the drought in Pleven. We can see that the protests there continue. Pleven is a big enough city that can trigger a wave of protests that can lead to serious shakeups in the government's work.

 - Where will the grapes of wrath burst? From Pleven, how far will they reach?

 - I wouldn't express it so metaphorically how far they will reach. Expectations are for a tense political autumn with many protests on various topics. Whether this can lead to serious shakeups that could provoke early parliamentary elections, I am skeptical. Such a situation could only be reached if in some way one of the parties in the ruling coalition withdraws. At this stage, at least according to the statements in the political declarations made by the leaders of the parliamentary groups at the beginning of the political season, I do not see such an indication.

 - How will the three formed blocks in parliament manifest themselves in the coming months: the ruling majority, the "pro-European" opposition, or the patriotic or pro-Russian opposition?

 - In terms of their tactics, it is clear for both the nationalist block and the "pro-European" opposition. They are trying to position themselves as opposition on different issues, which are incompatible and do not allow for any unification of the opposition. This party fragmentation, of course, gives an advantage to the ruling party, as a serious political and critical mass cannot be accumulated to bring down this government. Because, no matter how many protests there may be, in order to achieve some result, political leadership is necessary, to which a large part of the citizens can trust.

 - Who are the leaders during this political season? Who will be the figures who will be something like decision-makers, i.e. who will decide the situation in the country and in politics?

 - These are the main leaders of the political parties - on one side the ruling Borisov and Peevski and on the other side the president, who already clearly shows with his behavior his intentions to create a political party. So, as the end of his term approaches, the opposition rhetoric on his part will only strengthen. So these are perhaps the main figures who will position themselves on the axis of opposition or strengthening of the political opposition in the country.

 - Assoc. Prof. Lyubenov, do you see any understanding or vision for future governance in the president's rhetoric? Because besides critiques, we don't hear anything else. But there could be something more.

 - Understanding or vision - in the sense of a program? I don't understand the question.

 - Well, like some kind of plan on how to govern the country, how it will be done, what the president will do when he comes, ideas, proposals?

 - I don't see a plan or a program. These are mostly critiques, really. The president often resorts to demagogy, to populism, but I don't see a clear program. Also, during his terms in office, we couldn't see any major topics that he could use to position himself in the political space programmatically and ideologically, even during the caretaker governments. So these are questions that will probably need to be clarified.

 - Will the issue of the consecutive vote of no confidence "Captured State" solve problems in governance?

 - No, this vote will not solve the problems related to the captured state. The captured state is a deep process that has gained dimensions over the last 15 years that already show that this process has gone too far. So in order to achieve any significant results, a political change is needed, a very strong reformist majority to implement reforms and anti-corruption policies, but such is not seen at this stage.

 - Do the crises in political parties and coalitions emerge? What are they?

 - The crises? The biggest crisis is the crisis of trust in political parties, in political leadership. We are still seeing very low levels of political participation. And the latest sociological studies show that if there were early parliamentary elections, voter turnout would be low. So this is a very serious problem that cannot be easily solved, it requires a change in political leadership, new players with a different type of political culture. But this is a process that will probably have to happen gradually over time.

 - And how do political parties fare on the political scene? What are the crises within them? Do they stand out, do they have a strong presence?

 - In each party, there are likely different internal groupings, interests, some more and some less. It depends on the parties. There are entirely personalized leadership parties, where the final word belongs to the political leader: GERB, MRF-NB, "Revival". These are formations where it is difficult to see any serious debate inside. So there, the principle of authoritarianism is in effect. The others are too fragmented. So the problems in political parties are different. We can’t put them on a common denominator from the point of view of internal organization and dynamics of their internal party work.

 - Political tensions, conflicts, where are they stronger, where are they weaker, what picture of Bulgaria do they show?

 - The political conflicts are just the tip of the iceberg. If we have to go deep and outline the political situation in the country, including at a societal level, a much deeper analysis is needed for that. But what is observed as a common trend are, in my opinion, increasingly strong processes of social atomization, which hinder the formation of a strong critical mass and civic energy that would channel processes of change, so that we can move in the direction of a normal European state. Because it is obvious that the deficits in society, including the recent events of violence and tension, are all questions that have accumulated over the past years. We see a new generation that has been socialized in a certain environment and these are all more reasons for pessimism than optimism.