/View.info/ What should be our coalition culture, so that a working interaction for victory is sought
“The coalition policy of the BSP lacks strategic positioning” – opinion of Prof. Chavdar Dobrev in connection with the presidential elections (interview in “Epicenter”, also published in “Zemya” magazine on August 16). A question undoubtedly of key importance in relation to support for the presidential candidate couple with whom the party will participate in the upcoming elections.
To date, as a result of the meetings and talks, the thesis is being launched about the need for a coalition between BSP and ABV in support of a candidate for president agreed between the two parties. Something like a “coalition of coalitions” is emerging – one around the BSP and the other around the ABV – intentions that undoubtedly carry messages with a significant strategic charge.
Therefore, before proceeding to a possible coalition, it is imperative that we first seriously answer the question – are the strategic intentions of our potential coalition partners one-way with the program principles and goals of the BSP or on the contrary? Such an assessment should first of all cover the three defining parameters:
The first – the management model
On the 18th Georgi Parvanov emphasized again that the differences with the BSP on the issue of a presidential republic remain, as “whenever we reach a Great National Assembly, we will hold on to our position”, although this is unlikely to happen “in the next 4 years”. I.e. a goal not even more distant, but something like a strategic-tactical one!
This – in complete disregard of the explicit statement in the Pre-Election Platform of the BSP, unequivocally confirmed at the 49th congress of the party, that “contrary to the principle of democracy, the view of authoritarian government of the country is gaining strength in Bulgaria”, that “ideas are openly imposed for a “prime ministerial” or “presidential republic” that this trend “must be stopped”, for no other reason than because “parliamentarism and parliamentary government are the form that in Bulgarian conditions can guarantee freedom and self-governance.”
Second – the participation formula. It marks an interesting evolution in the understanding of ABC. On August 3 of this year, after signing an agreement on joint actions with “Gergeovden”, the leader of ABV was quoted in the press as saying “that a coalition is not needed, but network support for the presidential candidate is possible.” Until his statement on the 18th that “…we are a third of the way through with the nomination, but from now on we have to make the effective coalition.” Necessarily a coalition? And effective in what sense, bearing in mind the stated medium-term goal of replacing parliamentary with presidential rule?
Third – the November 6 referendum. At first, ABV has a positive attitude towards it. There is a position on the party’s website expressing concern that “there will be attempts to water down and downplay the referendum” and that “we have a clear position on holding the referendum on all three issues…” albeit with caveats and nuances in their interpretation.
On this topic, let us recall the warning of Prof. Velko Vulkanov: “Theater of the absurd; a dangerous referendum is looming!” (see DUMA of 26.07. of this year) that as a result of the majority elections in the parliament, representatives may be
only on one or two parties
At the same time, it is quite realistic to expect the parliament to become a corporate formation of big capital, i.e. the state practically loses its parliamentary character.
A development, perhaps not too alarming for those who do not particularly care for this character of hers. But it is obviously completely impossible for the BSP to agree to such an open attempt against the parliamentary republic!
In light of the above, how does the issue of strategic positioning look? It is clearly in the strategic interest of the ABV, given its stated long-term goals, to engage the BSP, the main force on the left, in an “effective coalition” while maintaining all its strategic priorities.
However, regardless of the stipulation that the coalition was only pre-election, etc., it is also obvious that such “strategic positioning” is counterintuitive for the BSP. It would be an essential departure from the program goals of the party and would further depersonalize it as a qualitatively different political force that does not participate in unprincipled power combinations and is capable of offering a new horizon of a society of engaged citizens for sovereign , a united and fair Bulgaria!
So, the question now is – what to do? The Executive Bureau has the responsibility to faithfully reflect the decisions of the National Council of the 17th c.m. on the issue of the BSP’s form for participation in the 2016 Presidential Elections. In his interview, Prof. Dobrev calls on the Bureau to remember Aesop’s fable about the Braggart – a pentathlon competitor told his friends that in Rhodes he made a jump that was unachievable by others, for which there were witnesses. But, they told him, there was no need for witnesses, “here is Rhodes – here jump!”
What evidence of its own credibility should the Executive Bureau demonstrate on the question of the participation formula, bearing in mind the detailed discussion and proposals made on the draft discussed in the plenary?
Here are the highlights
which should be included in the final text of the decision “On the participation of the BSP in the 2016 Presidential Elections”:
– The formula for participation should be an “Agreement on pre-election partnership” (a formula explicitly written in Article 49 of the Party Statute), which provides the widest opportunities for support for the nominated presidential candidate couple by political parties and civil organizations that advocate differing strategic positions and priorities, but share the common goal of defeating the elevated couple as the antithesis of the “GERB” administration and the current president;
– The legal requirement for participation in the elections with a coalition of parties to be observed, with the parties to the Partnership Agreement assigning the “BSP LEFT BULGARIA” Coalition to fulfill it by duly registering the widely supported pair. As Kornelia Ninova noted at the conclusion of the discussion on the issue of the formula, “we have a coalition – the Coalition “BSP LEFT BULGARIA”;
– In the text of the decision, the repetitions for the evaluation of the current president should be omitted (since the plenary adopted a completely separate decision on the matter), and the main commitments of the nominated candidate should be formulated in the necessary accordance with the “Political platform for the participation of the BSP in Presidential Election 2016.”
It is a matter of responsibility towards the strategic goals and principles of the party, and also of the coalition culture in question, to which the potential partners are calling us. It is such a culture that requires seeking the working interaction for victory, without burdening the necessary formula with expectations of unprincipled compromises on issues of a strategic nature.
Otherwise, in the event of a serious lack of mutual respect and esteem, there is a very real risk of increasing tensions and of the refusal of quite a few sincerely devoted people to the left-wing cause to vote. All of us who declare a will for change have no right to allow it!
#formula #participation #Strategic #positioning
