by Anthony Georgieff

In a democracy, leaders and opposition must accept each other's legitimacy. In Bulgaria, they don't

Something has gone very wrong in the EU's poorest state. Because things are so complicated, in an inimitably Bulgarian way, politicians and pundits try to explain what's at the pith of the current crisis through drawing similes with civic turmoil unfolding in places the world knows more about.

This evokes nothing but Egypt, a freshly-shaved and suntanned Boyko Borisov, the former prime minister, said during a rare appearance in the Bulgarian parliament. Borisov, known mainly for his charisma and media savviness when dealing with young female reporters, is hardly an astute analyst of international affairs if his past pronouncements on anything ranging from Barak Obama to Silvio Berlusconi are to be taken seriously. Yet, he is being joined by a number of hacks who intone Egypt and Turkey in their attempts to put the Bulgarian "revolution" in context.

Nothing can be further from the truth. The problems in both Egypt and Turkey are very different from the woes of Bulgaria. The cultural, political and social traditions of both Egypt and Turkey make any comparison with Bulgaria at least farfetched, and of course the presence of a strong religious element in Egypt and Turkey precludes any further discussion about similarities for a simple reason: religion in Bulgaria plays but a token role.

If anyone was to indulge in political metonymy, they would better look beyond the Middle East and much closer at home.

What is at stake in Bulgaria six years after it joined the EU is the fate of democracy in a post-Communist society that neither has any strong democratic traditions, nor has succeeded in installing, during its difficult and at times tumultuous transition, the checks and balances necessary for a democracy to function. From this standpoint, the comparison with former Communist countries similar to Bulgaria would be more appropriate.

In fact, what has been going on here since Boyko Borisov ostentatiously resigned last February in the hope that his party, GERB, would be strong enough to win a snap election, is an almost literal repetition of what happened in Ukraine in 2004-2005, in the events billed as the "Orange Revolution."

Like in Ukraine, the massive street rallies were set off in the immediate aftermath of a ballot claimed to have been marred by massive corruption, intimidation of voters and direct electoral fraud. Like in Ukraine, the protests were concentrated in the relatively educated and well-to-do capital, with only a token support in the provinces. Like in Ukraine, what is at the heart of the protests is civil resistance and in some cases disobedience, with hundreds, sometimes thousands of protestors demonstrating daily. Like in Ukraine, the protestors demand the resignation of the elected government and a fresh ballot as soon as possible - without making any clear political demands in favour of an established political party and without any serious chance of a new party emerging in the process.

In both countries, the background is the same: a failure by a series of governments to implement reforms, thus creating a situation where bureaucracy is outdone only by corruption; and plummeting living standards especially outside the big cities.

Like in Ukraine in the sunset days of Leonid Kuchma, the situation in Bulgaria at the end of Boyko Borisov's regime was almost a textbook example of the Marxist definition of a "revolutionary situation": the masses refused to live the way they had before while the rulers were unable or unwilling to make any changes. With his authoritarian style, disregard for the law, nepotism and mafia methods, Borisov - like Kuchma in Ukraine - could only hang on to power through his excessive apparatus for repression run by his odious righthand-man, former Interior Minister Tsvetan Tsvetanov.

The similarities do not end here. In both countries the "spontaneous" protests (in Ukraine and in Bulgaria organised by a number of NGOs and grassroots organisations) were met with carefully orchestrated counterprotests. In both countries, no one could agree on the numbers of people actually participating, with the various media reporting widely diverging figures in keeping with their editors' preferences and their owners' orders. In both countries there were claims of payments being made to protestors and counterprotestors: by "foreign powers" in the case of the former and by "Communists" in the case of the latter. Significantly, in both countries the protests were spearheaded by mainly young citizens claiming allegiance to Western values while many counterprotestors had originated in the provinces and were shipped to Sofia in coaches to swell the numbers. In both countries, the intelligence and security services played a role, there was real or imaginary involvement of "foreign" forces, and in both countries the main tool used to agitate and garner support was the Internet.

In both countries leaders who lost elections claimed victory; and then refused to acknowledge their own failures, protesting the illegitimacy of their opponents instead.

Provided Ukraine, the most important former Soviet republic outside Russia, and Bulgaria, Eastern Europe's most loyal satellite of the former USSR, are so similar, it is realistic to expect that what started in Bulgaria as the "Tomato Revolution" in 2013 will end similarly to the Ukrainian Orange Revolution in 2005.

Will it?

The answer is a qualified yes.

The Bulgarian "revolution," just like the Ukrainian one, will shake things up a bit and will show to the political leaders that their arbitrary actions will no longer be tolerated by a small, but vocal minority. However, it will probably fall short of spawning an overhaul of the political system as such, which is what the protestors in both Bulgaria and Ukraine wanted.

Many people now think that against the background of the absurdities of Plamen Oresharski's appointments, Boyko Borisov's excesses pale. Yet the danger of Borisov coming back with a vengeance has not passed completely.

The best Bulgaria can hope for in the aftermath of Borisov's authoritarianism and during the impasse of Plamen Oresharski's "oligarchy" is a period of what one political scientist termed "creative instability." Five to 10 years of volatility, uncertainty and possibly further plummeting incomes and living standards is the legacy of Boyko Borisov that Plamen Oresharski appears unable to handle. If the Bulgarians are lucky, that period will generate new political powers and a new culture of politics. If they are not, the comparison with Ukraine's Orange Revolution will be complete.


    Commenting on

    Vagabond Media Ltd requires you to submit a valid email to comment on to secure that you are not a bot or a spammer. Learn more on how the company manages your personal information on our Privacy Policy. By filling the comment form you declare that you will not use for the purpose of violating the laws of the Republic of Bulgaria. When commenting on please observe some simple rules. You must avoid sexually explicit language and racist, vulgar, religiously intolerant or obscene comments aiming to insult Vagabond Media Ltd, other companies, countries, nationalities, confessions or authors of postings and/or other comments. Do not post spam. Write in English. Unsolicited commercial messages, obscene postings and personal attacks will be removed without notice. The comments will be moderated and may take some time to appear on

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Restricted HTML

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a href hreflang> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote cite> <code> <ul type> <ol start type> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <h2 id> <h3 id> <h4 id> <h5 id> <h6 id>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.

Discover More

In spite of the protestations of the ruling "fixture" between PP-DB (Changes Continued of Kiril Petkov and Asen Vasilev and Democratic Bulgaria of Gen Atanas Atanasov and Hristo Ivanov) and Boyko Borisov's GERB about the "top national pri

While Bulgarians left, right and centre are quibbling over the fate of a pile of stones crowned by some sculpted Red Army soldiers in central Sofia, the state prosecution service quietly terminated a case started by Vasil Bozhkov, one of this country's weal

Polling agencies got it wrong again

Colourful and gilt-domed, looking like a toy, the St Nicholas the Miracle-Worker church in central Sofia is known to Bulgarians simply as the Russian Church.

Notwithstanding the amendments to the Constitution proposed by Nikolay Denkov's "fixture" (the word he uses to describe the government), several bits of legislation put forward by the rulers and quickly voted into law have raised eyebrows and prompted a sig

А crudely-cut cartoon circulating on social media shows Former Foreign Minister Solomon Pasi, who is Jewish, being held by two Nazi-clad soldiers. The text (in Bulgarian) reads: "If you don't want Russian gas, we will give you some of ours."

In 2013, when the Inland Revenue agency started a probe into alleged wrongdoing by then President Rosen Plevneliev, he famously excused himself: I am not a Martian. Plevneliev had been a minister for Boyko Borisov.

Three years after the event, the massive street protests that blocked the traffic in Central Sofia in the course of months, in 2020, seem to have achieved their original aims.
If anyone believed that the CC-DB, or Changes Continued-Democratic Bulgaria alliance, who lost the April election and are now the second largest party in the Bulgarian National Assembly, were serious in their declared and oft-repeated pledges they wanted to

Despite the massive and apparently rather expensive advertising campaign, which involved TV, print, outdoor and plenty of Facebook, the Changes Continued-Democratic Bulgaria (CC-DB) alliance lost the 2 April election.
Whenever developed democracies hold a general election, at stake – usually – are pressing issues of the day. Oil, terrorism, immigration. Nuclear weapons. Abortion rights. Inflation. Climate change. The cost of living...

It was called by President Rumen Radev, who is now the de facto ruler of this country, acting through the caretaker governments he appoints, because the previous election, in October 2022, failed to produce any kind of political alignment that could form a