On Thursday, a discussion was held on the topic "The Path of the Bulgarian Left in the Face of Contemporary Challenges". Deputy leader of the party Kaloian Pargov raised the question: "Will we learn to write as the pioneers of socialism in Bulgaria - specifically, clearly and succinctly?". The discussion is an occasion to talk about the place and role of BSP in the socio-political life of the country today. Here are the main points from the interview with Kaloian Pargov: - Iliana Yotova is a possible candidate for president if she decides to run. - If the presidential campaign intensifies, it could affect the stability of the coalition. - In the past 25 years, the position of president has been dominated by a BSP candidate. - The participation of the BSP in the government is viewed ambiguously by the structures. But in the government, everyone makes compromises - we made a compromise with the euro, with our partners - that we did not sell the reactors for "Belene" and did not conclude a 10-year contract with Ukraine.   - Ninova wants to return to big politics, but through another door.   Here is the full text of the interview:   - BSP is making programs for the new times, what will it be and why haven't you made one, for example, with artificial intelligence to attract the young people? You are relying on analog methods.   - One of the participants in yesterday's discussion raised this topic. But the opinion and views of the people are fundamental, important and leading. "Artificial intelligence can produce some product, but the implementation of a political program cannot be accomplished by AI. This will be the work of people who recognize this program as their own. By the way, the discussion was very interesting, lasting more than three and a half hours. With this, we are starting a revival of ideological discussion in the party, renewing the national discussion club "Dimitar Blagoev," which we had forgotten. Our great ambition is for these discussions to not only be concentrated in Sofia, but to be held throughout the country - in every party organization. Three opinions were formed. One is that the program adopted in 2008 is still relevant. She was made with the aim of tracing the behavior of the BSP and the left after Bulgaria's entry into the EU. The second group is convinced that the 2008 program is social-liberal, not socialist. And a third group, which may be a majority, believes that there should be no rush, but rather discussion, observation of processes and monitoring of geopolitical changes that are emerging. For this group, at the moment, we are not ready to predict what would happen, especially given the development of technologies. Fear of replacing real jobs with artificial intelligence will increase, and the call of the left is to protect the working people. - Do you want to revive the party with the ideological discussion within the party structures? The ideological discussions have always had a stimulating effect on the internal party life, but it seems that in recent years, the party organizations focus more on the daily politics - what's good, what's bad, whether we are absent from the political scene, how we have succeeded or failed... We can do this in any tavern in the evening. In our country, politics is like football - a national sport, everyone comments and analyzes it to the end. - Now the BSP is in power, sharing responsibility for governance with GERB and ITN. How do the party structures perceive this? - Contradictory. It is obvious that there is tension, mainly from the point of view that we are in power with GERB, which has been our main opponent for over a decade. This turn is a big compromise, connected to several things. First, for years the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP) was in opposition and this alternative behavior did not lead the party to a leading position in power. On the contrary, in recent years there has been a decline in support for the BSP. Second, the political system collapsed - parliament has a low rating, and there is a negative attitude towards a number of institutions. This forced the BSP to seek a different approach, focusing on stabilizing the state and the need for a regular government (of course, with a series of mutual compromises), in order to breathe new life into the government. I call these endless elections a state of martial law, as the political parties functioned on different principles - a different way of working, of thinking. And this became part of our daily life. The parties did not function normally, but were constantly preparing for the next election battle. Our political behavior has long been built on that opposition to GERB. But given the situation in which Bulgaria is currently in after 8 early elections - instability, lack of money in the state, economic threats and wars around us, the low legitimacy of the political system due to the weak participation of voters - around 30%. And this makes representative democracy not so representative - to represent all layers of society and all citizens. We see that from election to election there is a categorical refusal to vote, which is worrisome and which in turn creates another debate - whether the hardcore party cores are the ones who should determine the future of Bulgaria when the rest refuse to participate. - The question is whether the voters of the BSP perceive its presence in power in the same way as the socialist ministers do - that the BSP is the social guarantee in this government. - The reception is mixed. There are people who are aware of the stakes, how important it is for the country to have a regular government. The question of statehood has always been of interest to the BSP membership. Of course - there is the desire for the BSP to be the leading party and this has been the case over the years. - Is it true that due to resistance from the structures, even the national assembly of Buzludzha is in danger of failing? - No! The BSP is the only party that can and does organize such a national assembly. The event at Buzludzha is not just political, it aims to bring together all left-wing people. It is a celebration, commemorating the anniversary of the socialist movement in Bulgaria. This year's message is eloquent - history and future. Because the Bulgarian Socialist Party is undergoing transformation. During the triple coalition, where the BSP was the leading political force, news of tensions between coalition partners constantly came out of cabinet meetings - conflicts in decision-making that we in the media called scandals. Now there is no such thing. Why? Is there complete unity and agreement, or is the desire to stay in power simply prevailing? - I will say something that is very characteristic of the BSP. It is a highly self-critical, self-punishing party - in the genetic code of this party, it is embedded to be more critical of its own, rather than of others. This is often useful, but it also hinders. The triple coalition was the first of its kind complex coalition, then it became clear that no one can govern alone - consensus is needed. The triple coalition was very successful both economically and politically, and as for the scandals - from the distance of time, I can say that the reason for most of them was precisely this reflex of self-flagellation. Obviously, these lessons have been learned and currently there is some "discipline" being followed, but not for the sake of maintaining power at all costs. The Eurozone was a compromise that the BSP made because we were in favor of joining it, but when the time comes and we are ready. And, the European institutions said it was time with the convergence report. - Joining the Eurozone is first and foremost a big geopolitical step. - Yes, the BSP is a European party. BSP Prime Minister - Jean Videnov, applied for EU membership, BSP Prime Minister - Sergey Stanishev, joined the country to the EU in 2007. And even then, the accession to the Eurozone was included in the accession treaty. Our partners also made compromises. You know the battle of BSP for nuclear energy. BSP is firmly in favor of keeping the reactors for "Belene" and not selling them to Ukraine, as the topic of Ukraine and the war is important for our voters. This is a compromise that GERB and ITN made against us. As well as another one, also related to Ukraine - not allowing a 10-year agreement to be concluded with Kiev. So every party in the government is making compromises. The parliament recently adopted a declaration condemning the war in Ukraine. BSP voted against it together with "Renaissance" and "Greatness". There are compromises, but there are also red lines that cannot be crossed. - So, you have trust in the coalition? - Let's say, we are aware that we need to stabilize and restart the processes in the country. The issue with the money in the state must be resolved, and for that we need stability and calm conversation. Because we cannot continue to sustain this standard only with loans and European funds. - But Korneliya Ninova seems to constantly throw stones in the lake of this peace. She is very active on social media. - She is defending herself - that's what she has always done. But the dynamics in the country and on an international level are such that even within five years, no comparisons can be made - what was before, what is now. As a country and as an economy, we are strongly dependent on what happens in the world. - Is Ninova causing electoral damage to the BSP, is she hindering the party? - I cannot say that she is hindering. Rather, she wants to return to high politics, but through a different door. - Ninova has created the impression in society not only of an authoritarian, but also of an authoritative leader - a leader whose word carries weight. Has the current leadership been able to impose its authority in the party, does their word carry weight? - The current leadership's goal is to bring back the collective beginning in the party and this is not easy, due to the eight years of habits and reflexes acquired under Kornelia Ninova. She has her strong sides, which were stimulating and influential for the BSP up to a certain point. But, obviously what she did not understand is that BSP is a complex party - it has communists, socialists, social democrats. This is a complex alloy that cannot be called homogenous and cannot be turned into an amorphous mass. Even Lilov, Lukanov, and Parvanov have not attempted it - they were aware of what would happen. They directed and traced the processes in the party, but they didn't try to grab them so roughly. This was one of Ninova's mistakes. Sociologists and political scientists were invited to the "Positano" debate on Thursday. There was an interesting proposal for a tactical behavior of the BSP - to improve its relationship with Rumen Radev, but not at the expense of its relationship with the coalition partner - GERB. A difficult task. - What alienated BSP supporters from Ninova was precisely the war with President Radev. What are the current relations between BSP and President Radev, who constantly attacks the government in which BSP is participating? - There is no direct confrontation. A communication channel is maintained, there is no explicit boycott - not to participate in events where Radev is present. Of course, the disagreement on the topic of the euro referendum has created the impression of some cooling of relations, of contradictions. It is completely normal to have different positions sometimes, as the President is an independent institution, not part of a political party. However, in this disagreement, we have not shown the sharpness that we see Nenova displaying towards him today.She claims that there is a triumvirate - Borisov, Radev, Peevski, who determine today's political life. I don't perceive it that way, but people are used to personalizing their perception of good and bad. Let's imagine that tomorrow these three disappear. New candidates will definitely appear, one of them will be good, the other – bad. - Aren't the relations with Radev going to get more complicated, considering that presidential elections are coming up next year? How will the Bulgarian Socialist Party play in these presidential elections? - The discussion about the presidential campaign will start in the fall. Right now, there are different opinions and assumptions about who our candidate for president should be. Of course, the name of Iliana Yotova is leading. The question is about our ally. The situation is complicated. Considering the sharpness and contradictions in today's political process, there will be many candidates. I cannot say what the president will do. For years, there has been talk of a presidential party, but it is not clear if it will take any steps in this direction before the end of its term or after. Iliana Yotova herself, we see, has constructed her behavior as a potential participant in the presidential race. Something that I personally admire and support. But in the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP) we will start discussing this issue in the autumn, as it is also related to the present coalition government. GERB will certainly have its own candidate - we see references to PP-DB in the right wing to have a joint candidate. Nationalist parties, especially "Vazrazhdane", will also have their own candidates. I expect MEC to legitimize itself through participation in the presidential elections. We will have a variety of candidates and therefore BSP is closely following the process. By the way, consider the voting on the statement about Ukraine in the context of what we are talking about - there was a coalition between GERB, DPS-NOVO NACHALO, and PP-DB. - This is a division along the geopolitical line. - Yes, geopolitics will be leading, it is at the basis of every division between left and right. - Iliyana Yotova's participation in the presidential race, however, could also be a stepping stone towards Rumen Radev's future political party. In BSP, how do you view this? How do you view such a party? It would at least be your competitor. - I would like to remind you that ten years ago, Iliyana Yotova became a candidate for vice president with the condition that Rumen Radev would uphold the interests of BSP and she would be uncompromising if those interests were violated. We are counting on this - "a word given, a stone thrown". Yotova herself maintains relationships with the leadership of BSP and she has not distanced herself from us. - Former prime minister Ivan Kostov spoke about a joint candidacy between GERB and PP-DB. - The first one to speak was Boyko Borisov. Ivan Kostov brought up the topic. - How will this affect the current coalition? - There is a danger that if the presidential race intensifies, it will affect the stability of the coalition. This is one of the delicate moments in a joint government - when partners clash or escalate their conflicts, creating an inability to continue governing together. This is one of the problems on the horizon for this government - how such a situation will be handled. From the current perspective, I can say that a lot of time will pass before the fall of 2026. There are also external factors that influence - such as situations, events... The world has not yet escaped the danger of war. So what do we do?! - In other words, BSP does not have a decision, will it act intuitively and reactively, is that so? - Again I say - BSP is carefully observing. This process will begin - not so visibly for you, the media, but at some point it will become public. Whoever the candidate for president is, a broad support outside of BSP will be sought for their election. - So if you don't find this broad support, you won't support Iliana Yotova, is that right? - Again I say - for me Iliana Yotova is the first nomination, the first potential candidate that needs to be considered. But in order for Iliana Yotova to become president, there needs to be a broader support than just from BSP and the left. Yotova's candidacy has potential, but it also needs allies in order to succeed. - Who is included in this broad support? - Rumen Radev with his authority. - GERB and PP-DB, obviously, are not entering. Will DPS-NEW BEGINNING enter? At one point, Parvanov won with the support of DPS. - In the voting the other day for Ukraine, we saw which line was forming. And DPS sided with Parvanov, but in the second round. Many things change in the second round. - Will the support of BSP and Radev be enough for Yotova? - No, because gradually every president starts to lose trust. This is a fundamental truth. In order for a new president to be elected, political entities on their side are needed, not just civic organizations. Structuring a party is not an easy job. Keep in mind that the president's rating is institutional. Parvanov, with this high rating he had, formed ABC and received 4% in 2014. Presidential elections are a very complex puzzle. Borisov says something, Kostov plays the mirror game. "We need to play this game with President Radev. There is another perspective on things - those who are against Radev's unborn project would wait for the regular parliamentary elections, which are a year and a half after the president leaves "Dondukov" 2 - in the fall of 2028. That is a long time, during which Radev's institutional rating will have disappeared. What is beneficial for BSP - to let the electoral threat "Radev" slip away or to climb on the back of the most popular political figure in Bulgaria? BSP has between 6 and 8% electoral trust and that does not satisfy us. We want to fight, once again, for the presidential institution - in the last 25 years it has been dominated by BSP-backed and supported candidates." One of our key tasks is to play out this situation, it's part of BSP's preservation. - Who is BSP's main opponent in the presidential elections? - The other candidates - let's see who they are. - The name of Prime Minister Rosen Zhelyazkov has already been mentioned. How do you view his candidacy, considering that he is the head of a government in which you participate and jointly manage? - That's why I say that the presidential election is related to stability. - Will the potential lack of support lead to the explosion of the cabinet? BSP was in a similar situation during the election of the ombudsman - you proposed Maya Manolova, then half of the group voted for GERB's candidate. - The election of the ombudsman is a parliamentary procedure within the existing National Assembly and depends on the representation within it. The presidential election is national and all voters participate in it, if they choose to vote. In the presidential race, each candidate has an equal start and can seek and find wider support than that of the political subject or initiative committee that nominated them. - But can they seek your support? - What if we reach the second round?! - I'll ask the question in a different way - what is more important for the BSP - for the government to have a four-year term and ensure stability in which left-wing policies can be implemented, or to win the presidential election at the risk of damaging relations with GERB? - Presidential elections, as they may or may not have a major impact on parliamentary life. Yes, they can be used as a reason for a restart, but they are majoritarian and not a party measure. The personality of the candidates is very important in them. That's why I say again - the process is still ahead. It's possible that not only GERB, but also ITN will have a candidate. It's also important what the topics of the presidential campaign will be. It's already clear that one of them is about peace and war. - Here Kostadin Kostadinov is a serious opponent. - Yes, he will focus on the anti-European card, which will not make him a president. Despite the fact that now 60% say they are against the euro. But it should not be forgotten that in the majority, people are not against Europe, they are against what is happening now.