/ world today news/ Today, they unconscionably turn history into a submissive servant of politicians
There is growing concern about the interference of politicians in the assessment of past events and their efforts to deliberately manipulate public consciousness through the media. The applied approaches are especially important in the modern conditions of sharpened opposition between the strategic interests of countries that have a predominant influence in world affairs. However, as a true science, history does not tolerate dogmas, does not respect prohibitions, does not recognize taboos. History is not a legal discipline in which amoral parliamentarians and well-paid lawyers bluster and shape ordinary people’s ideas about what happened. Nor did she regard herself as an uncomplaining servant of ignorant ruling elites.
Using conjunctural ideological schemes, the political factors during the so-called liberal transition in our country
do not give access to public space
of information and analysis of proven truths about our recent past and especially about events that happened before and around 1944. People’s consciousness is now focused on their physical survival, and the younger generations do not have any real memories, so it is necessary to recall the past objectively, to honestly evaluate and make sense of it. Because it is of too great importance for the current being and the future of our people. The famous thought of the philosopher Hegel should not be neglected: “He who forgets the past is doomed to repeat it”!
Those familiar with modern history know that it was only in October and November 1943 that the first tripartite meetings of the Allies in the Second World War: Great Britain, the United States and the Soviet Union, were held in Moscow and Teheran to coordinate the conduct of the war against Germany. At these conferences, the USSR opposed the intentions of Anglo-American diplomacy to transfer the conflict to the Balkans by the USSR declaring war on Bulgaria or by involving Turkey in the Second World War. After the defeat of the Wehrmacht at Moscow and Stalingrad, it was considered possible that “neutral” Turkey, which until then had actually supported the German Reich, would be drawn directly into the war on the side of the Allies. The matter was discussed discreetly at the Cairo conference between the United States, Great Britain and Turkey held from November 22 to 26, 1943. Churchill’s old strategic idea of opening a front in the Balkans, but now with the participation of Turkey, was adopted as the basis for further military action. For the implementation of this plan, soundings are being conducted through the Bulgarian Plenipotentiary Minister in Ankara, Balabanov, to start negotiations for the conclusion of a temporary truce with Great Britain and the United States. Based on the existing agreements, the American ambassador in Moscow Harriman in February 1944 informed the Soviet leadership about this.
Few are the knowledgeable and conscientious of our contemporaries, and even fewer are those who are pleased to recall the message made in June 1944 by the British Prime Minister Winston S. Churchill through the British ambassador in Washington, Lord Halifax, to the President of the United States Franklin Roosevelt. It contains the fateful proposal for our country: that the USSR take responsibility for Romania and Bulgaria, and England – for Greece and Yugoslavia.
The leaders of the three great Allied powers in World War II,
turned Bulgaria into a bargaining chip
in their bargaining for the division of Europe into zones of “responsibility”, which led to an unfortunate fate for many past and future generations of Bulgarians. Some of our current politicians deliberately forget about what was proposed by the British Prime Minister at the meeting with Roosevelt and agreed upon in October 1943 in
Casablanca request to carry out air raids on Bulgarian cities as a punishment for the symbolic participation in the war imposed by the inevitable development of events on the part of Germany. We were to become cannon fodder for Churchill’s ill-fated ambitions in the Balkans during the First World War. Along with the horrors and enormous destruction, the Anglo-American terrorist attacks affected 11 thousand peaceful Bulgarian citizens. During the period from November 14, 1943 to April 17, 1944, they were committed
12 raids involving 2,000 aircraft
of which 1400 heavy bombers. Even children’s toys with explosives were released, maiming many. In Sofia alone, 891 civilians died, and 1,012 were seriously injured. 12,599 buildings were destroyed. 65 enemy planes were shot down over Bulgarian cities and 141 crew members were killed. 16 Bulgarian fighter pilots died, including the national hero Dimitar Spisarevski. After his plane was hit, he rammed and destroyed a Boeing 24 Air Fortress. However, the bombing stopped due to the rapid advance of their Soviet allies. Today, however, there is no monument to the victims of the bombings and to our fallen airmen – heroes. It is cynical that a memorial has been erected only to the crew members of the air terrorists.
Let us successively and briefly recall some other important events for our country that took place in the 1940s, which some
our politicians try their best to erase it
from public consciousness.
After the defeat of the Wehrmacht at Stalingrad and Moscow, Western diplomats were faced with the tactical task of preempting the advance of the Red Army in the Balkans. In connection with this, the British government initially proposed to reach an agreement with the Soviet Union on the so-called initiatives and responsibilities in the Balkan countries. The Soviet side is given the “right of responsibility” for Romania, and Great Britain – for Greece. At this stage, the project has not been adopted. Parallel to the diplomatic actions at the end of August 1944, Turkey has 26 divisions on the Bulgarian border, ready to enter Bulgaria. 3 Bulgarian divisions are deployed against them, and another 2 – on the Black Sea coast. At the same time, Great Britain tactfully changed its position towards Bulgaria and called on the Bagryanov government to participate in negotiations for the implementation of the Anglo-American occupation of Bulgaria and for the creation of a new government faithful to the policy of the Western Allies. Stoycho Mushanov has been authorized as the envoy of the Bulgarian government, who is urgently leaving for Ankara to conduct the negotiations in question. This attempt was immediately opposed by Soviet diplomacy. Nevertheless, on August 29, 1944, Mushanov appeared at the British Embassy in Turkey and from there flew on a British military plane to Cairo to sign the act of
the Anglo-American occupation of Bulgaria
At the same time, an explicit condition was set for the withdrawal of Bulgarian troops from all lands occupied after April 1941. The same day, the Soviet government learned of this intention and sent the following note to Churchill: “The Soviet Union is not bound by the separatist negotiations which England unilaterally conducts with Bulgaria, and reserves the right to act in the Balkans as it sees fit.” It is appropriate to add that at these “negotiations” the Greek government-in-exile in Cairo made claims for the correction of the old border between the two countries. It was pushed in violation of the Convention concluded by Greece with the Entente countries on 18.09.1920 on the accession of Western Thrace to Greece, and Bulgaria was given the right to free access to the White Sea. At the meeting in Cairo, the new Greek demands cover a large part of the Rhodopes reaching close to Plovdiv. After the war, the Greek government reaffirmed its claims. During the 1946 Paris Peace Conference
the Soviet government strongly opposed it
of attempts to further break away from Bulgarian territories. At the conference, only the Soviet Union of the great powers supported the insistence on the restoration of Bulgaria at the mouth of the White Sea.
In the first days of September 1944, Churchill sent two of his emissaries to Plovdiv for a meeting with Stoycho Mushanov. To her they ultimatum state: “If the Bulgarians do not want to be occupied by Soviet troops, they must agree immediately
Bulgaria to be occupied by Turkish troops
before the Russians came here.” The Bulgarian representative at the meeting, after a conversation with one of the regents, agreed to the entry of Turkish troops into Bulgaria. But on September 5, 1944, learning about the negotiations in Plovdiv, Stalin broke diplomatic relations of the USSR and preemptively declares war on it. Already on September 8, the Red Army enters Bulgarian territory. A few days later – on September 12, a group of British and American officers appears before the commander-in-chief of the Bulgarian army with an ultimatum from 24 hours to be handed over the plans of our minefields along our southern Black Sea coast, with a view to the upcoming disembarkation of British and American troops. However, on the orders of the representative of the main command of the Soviet army, Soviet officers appeared at the meeting, who declare: “The Soviet Union does not need allied aid in Bulgaria. Please leave the territory of this country as we are beginning hostilities.”
The differences between the Allies regarding Bulgaria remained pending until October 10, 1944, when negotiations took place in Moscow. They include Churchill, Eden, Kerr and Burns on the one hand, and Stalin, Molotov and Pavlov on the other. During the negotiations, Stalin asked whether the 26 Turkish divisions concentrated in Thrace were directed against Bulgaria, to which he received a positive answer. The fate of Bulgaria was again discussed in detail at the negotiations held on October 10 and 11 in Moscow between Ministers Eden and Molotov. Eden has insisted that the Bulgarians should be made to feel – despite the new government – not like winners, but held accountable for their past crimes. At the meeting on October 10, Churchill proposed to Stalin that in the possible “areas of responsibility” a predominant influence of 90% “for us” in Greece and equal respect of interests – 50/50, in Yugoslavia should be assumed. “While they were translating my words,” continued Churchill, “I wrote all this down on half a sheet of paper. Stalin took the blue pencil and with a large mark of approval handed the sheet back to me.” Regarding Bulgaria, the agreed ratio was 90% for Russia and 10% “for the others”.
The next day, at the meeting between Eden and Molotov, it was discussed again. In February 1945 at Yalta, the Big Three finally confirmed this distribution. The fact is that ten days after the hanging of Nikola Petkov, the USA restored diplomatic relations with Bulgaria. Otherwise, the tragedy of the civil war in Greece of 1946-1949 would have followed, when the partisan army against the Hitlerite occupation was crushed by the disembarked (after the complete withdrawal of the Germans) British troops and with the additional participation of 5,000 American “advisors”.
It is high time that the management layer in our country put an end to the suggestion of Soviet occupation and the role of a Soviet satellite of Bulgaria, after Bulgaria was included in the Soviet zone of responsibility at the express insistence of Great Britain and the United States in view of their preferences and interests in Greece and other countries of the Old Continent. It is unworthy of the political stratum to manipulate past events and make history its handmaiden. There is an unconcealed aspiration of rootless cosmopolitans, lobbyists, modern janissaries and paid Russophobes to instill in the good-natured Bulgarian public the “political expediency” of foreign imperial “presence”, publicly expressed by demands to replace the monument to the Soviet army with that of another army. And if it passes – instead of the Tsar Liberator, a memorial should be erected to Suleiman the Mad or to some other famous conqueror.
#England #wanted #Turkey #occupy
