/ world today news/ Dr. Nikolay Mihailov, specialist in psychiatry, Master of Theology; teacher at NATFIZ and New Bulgarian University; deputy in the 40th National Assembly, in an interview with “Trud”
– Dr. Mihailov, how does the political season look to you after the first 9 months of Boyko Borisov’s second term and before the local elections? What are the most important takeaways and what do we expect to be born in the fall? Is the urge to end the previous government and expectations of change from the protests justified?
– Borisov’s second mandate is an effect of the protests and their evolution from civil radicalism to political opportunism. This is disappointing, and perhaps inevitable. The idea of an alliance with Borisov was dormant in the bowels of the protest from the very beginning, but the decision came after moral torment. Those who claimed that the alliance with Borisov is not a problem, but a solution, won. The “power” consideration prevailed. Thus, from a rebellion against the oligarchy in general, the protests degraded to a rebellion against the “red trash” in particular. The prime minister was brought back into the game as an “anti-communist” stand-in and reformist baggage mule. Not long ago, Borisov stated that without him the protests would be “nothing”. As of today, that sounds entirely plausible. The watchword of this season is reform, and the ratio between its pronouncement and its implementation is the mystery of what lies ahead.
– “Historical compromise” – the conclusion is Radan Kanev’s, and the occasion – the suffered constitutional reform, which remained half-whole and supported by the DPS. What is historical, who made the compromises and who will pay for them? Do you have an explanation as to why the BSP isolated itself from the attempted compromise on judicial reform and lost or gained from it?
– There is a “compromise”, but the qualification “historical” is a strong exaggeration. The words were spoken under great emotional pressure and should not be interpreted but excused. Consent for reform was extracted under external pressure, reform is a directive. The compromise minimizes damages, mainly for the prosecution and traffic police. The reformers sacrifice its radical version in the name of a minimal, but only possible one. The suspicion is that compromise is capitulation. Coffee with Mestan irritates right-wing sensibilities and poisons life with suspicions of collaborationism. After all, not everyone suffers, there are also satisfied ones. The BSP has room for maneuver in September.
– Has the role of the DPS changed since the beginning of the mandate – it started with requests from both the RB and partially from the GERB to limit the influence of the movement, but the DPS participated in key votes, is part of “thematic majorities” – the laws for the banks after the bankruptcy of KTB, the election of a new governor of the BNB, of its deputy governors, made possible thanks to DPS, the constitutional reform, albeit modified?
– The isolation of DPS is a utopia, a rhetorical exercise. The DPS has real power at the levels of the state hierarchy. No one can overcome the party fixation of the Turkish ethnicity, nor its strategic importance on the Balkan map. DPS does not tolerate encroachments against the party-corporate interest. They immediately develop heart-rending rhetoric, become anxious guarantors of Euro-Atlantic values. Borisov has respect for the DPS, for the political instinct of the leaders. DPS is indispensable for intermediate negotiations and behind-the-scenes support. They are masters of “historical compromises”. Like our boy Radan.
– What is the purpose and who is the proactive party in search of these floating majorities? And what’s the stake?
– The force fields of real politics do not coincide with party boundaries and have nothing to do with the declared principles. Real politics is an oligarchic game, secret power. See KTB. Robbery without consequences. Iskrov out, the sub-managers in. Tsvetan Vassilev quarantined. Four billion unknown where. Political forces on the beach. Against such a background, judicial reform seems child’s play. The domestic political narrative has nothing to do with the official one. This should be kept in mind and it should be used.
– The key word is reform, but you yourself said a few months ago that the reforms will not happen – why and do you still have this feeling?
– I do not object to the reform, but to the euphoria. The euphoric reform will not take place. My belief is that without risk, sacrifice and civil pressure, nothing can change. It doesn’t work with “players”. Reform begins with a blow of the law on an untouchable and with the echo of that blow. It will have to be believed that an act of justice is possible in Bulgaria. The independence of the judiciary is constitutionally guaranteed but publicly unproven. Reform within the conceivable field of the constitution is a joy to the reforming mind, but the question is how to get it down to earth. It must be remembered that the judicial system is governed by two “constitutions” – the official one and the “Zlatanov notebook”. If the actors with initials from this notebook are doing judicial reform today, then this should be called suspicious, not to say perverse. If they split the SJC in two, which in itself seems preferable, it will not change the habits, nor the way of reacting – to direct or indirect political pressure. Otherwise, it would be different. I remind you that power beats and money seduces. It is my belief that this risk cannot be eliminated by placing “our people” in the place of the bad guys, which is up in the air. This personnel amendment solves the issue only of “our people” and serves the illusion that society is divided into “beautiful and intelligent” and leftists and Turks. I suspect it’s more complicated.
– The stability of the coalition GERB – RB – PF – ABV seems doubtful – ABV regularly “plays” with the opposition, GERB and RB blame each other – the latest was for the mutilation of the referendum. Could the end of this political season lead to a new crisis at the beginning of the next one, and what does that depend on?
– The reform bloc cannot complete this mandate by the method of historical compromises. At some stage they will have to announce that they are in the way. It won’t go without vuvuzelas. On the other hand, they are strongly tempted to stay in power – for its sake and to complete the “reforms”. The reformist vision of the future implies a partnership with GERB and DPS from behind the scenes. This scheme was experimented with the constitutional amendment project. ABV is complexly positioned in management, but with composure and something akin to competence. The pension reform is a fact. PF scares unconvincingly and recites hearsay. “Attack” absent.
– When it comes to the referendum – how do you assess the rejection of two of the questions asked by President Plevneliev – whether some of the deputies should be elected by majority vote and whether mandatory voting should be introduced? The questions did not pass with a clear vote against by the reformers and a “secret”, strangely explained by the technique, vote by GERB. The majority blames the president, the president was not convincing and made a mistake himself, there was a “deal” with the opposition – what is more true and what is not?
– The idea of the referendum arose in the midst of the protests, “on a drunken head”: do you want to elect whoever you want, do you want to drown the votes of the DPS in the mandatory vote of the Bulgarians, and the votes of the BSP – in the e-vote of the emigrants. An idea to solve the Bulgarian political question with cunning and procedural violence, called the voice of the people, is a demagogic idea. In the end, everyone, with the president at the head, traded in the official failure of this ridiculous undertaking. They supported an electronic voting referendum with a “broken” electronic system. Absurdity lurks everywhere. The president seems enamored with the idea of a second term, and this cannot happen without GERB and DPS. And without the voter’s stupidity, but it is easily doable.
– The litmus for the end of the Oresharski cabinet, apart from the protests, were the results of the European elections. How will the local elections in the fall affect the current government and which of the parties in parliament faces what risks?
– A strong score for GERB and a weak score for partners would stabilize management. The obvious will become clear: Boyko Borisov and all the others are on the field. Because the stakes are high, local elections are fought over votes and interpretations. Finally, they announce the supported candidates for party victory. Local elections are impossible without shashma and false impressions. But the stakes are high. If GERB wins more local government, and BSP loses the one it has, it will become clear that the left is a landslide, and GERB is a highway, as the prime minister would say. There will be peace in the government, because they have no alternative.
– Is there a difference between the image of Boyko Borisov as prime minister in his first and second term? It is as if the experience is to see a well-intentioned Borisov, ready to compromise and seek consensus. Is this image convincing?
– After he received an ecclesiastical order, good-naturedness and additional intelligence descended upon him. There are new nuances in his way of self-perception, nothing strained, a slight monarchical fatigue. Many European leaders were kissed by the Prime Minister, and he himself was also kissed. And from Mogherini, I think. Boyko Borisov is an erotic accomplished leader, with great achievements in touch politics. He loves, they love him, he loves himself. There was no such thing. His image is not convincing, but over-convincing. Borisov is a triumph of popular taste, it was requested by a “referendum”.
– While the media is talking about politics, do we forget to react to terrible things that are happening – hate crimes – tension in Roma neighborhoods, fighting over people because of the “supposition” that they are of another ethnic origin, tension because of refugees in our country , children beat babies… What is happening and do we have the strength to resist?
– The human being lives in competition with his kind for prestige and possessions. Violence springs from the drama of unfulfilled desire, from competitive failure. Liberal civilization democratizes happiness as a human right. There is an incredible rise in expectations. Huge masses of immigrants are invading Europe with the idea of getting a part of what the European man has and is. Both are subdued by the secular religion of success, by the utopia of individual fulfillment. The global competition for happiness on a consumptive model, in an environment of traumatic inequality, breeds violence. Terrorism is an extreme variant of dealing with the scandal of inequality, a “psychotic” way out of the situation of loss and humiliation. Such is the global background. What is frightening in the Bulgarian news are the precedents of “naive”, recreational violence. The way out? One of the greatest anthropologists of our time, René Girard, when asked whether politics can save us, answered: “Politics cannot save us. We are beyond politics.” “Then what” – they ask? His answer is, “Pray.”
#Nikolay #Mihailov #Reform #happen #players
