© Julia Lazarova
– And that means that a big change has already happened.
The analysis was republished by “Deutsche Welle.”
The first day of the 45th parliament showed that the majority against GERB is not just an opposition to a model of government – it could also be its operational alternative. Borissov must have hoped that from the very beginning this majority would disintegrate due to the obvious ideological contradictions in it. However, it managed to easily elect Iva Miteva from “There is such a people” (ITN) – a qualified and competent lawyer. Which was definitely a good start.
But more importantly, the prophets of the short life of the new majority underestimate the coincidence in the strategic priorities of four of the parties in this majority: ITN, BSP, “Democratic Bulgaria” (DB) and “Stand up! Mutri, out!” (ISMV).
The points of contact
ITN made the shortest speech at the opening of the meeting. And Toshko Yordanov de facto left the door open for two future options. The first is his party’s attempt to carry out a government mandate within this parliament. The second is going to the polls in the current electoral system with improvements such as remote and fully machine voting. To these changes was added a proposal to reduce the state subsidy to BGN 1 per vote.
The elimination (for now) of the request for majority elections, which was the big surprise for many, has only one goal: not to trap ITN to vote together with GERB and against its possible partners. This move demonstrates that even after any new elections, ITN will most likely look for management options with DB and ISMV.
Cornelia Ninova from the BSP said that she would also give a chance to a government of the “protest parties”, as long as it is consistent in eliminating the defects of the “Borisov model”. From an economic point of view, times are for the first time in decades Keynesian. With the help of the EU, the country is preparing to get out of the crisis caused by the coronavirus through massive billions of injections into the economy. From this point of view, the priorities of any new government would be within the general economic logic shared by the socialists. This happy strategic coincidence, plus the desire to keep GERB in opposition, also explains the parliamentary behavior of the BSP.
“Democratic Bulgaria”, represented by Hristo Ivanov, made the most detailed and meaningful statement regarding the strategic priorities. She was also the first to make it clear the issue of the removal of the heads of the prosecution and KPKONPI, as well as the abolition of the specialized prosecution and court. In economic terms, the DB is traditionally conservative and adheres to fiscal discipline. But accumulating reserves in good times is precisely in order to be able to support the economy in times of crisis like the current one. So the DB also offers packages of measures – direct aid and tax relief, which will give a strong restart to business initiative in post-crisis times. Adding the desire of the DB and all of the new majority to speed up vaccination, the field for a common management platform is expanding.
The IMI, the smallest formation in the new majority, also has overlapping interests and would support a common government. And the most important issue on which the four parties would have differences is, in fact, rather extra-parliamentary – their attitude to the nomination of Rumen Radev for a second term. Here, the DB will obviously disagree with the other three parties and will most likely nominate its own right-wing candidate. The sooner they do, the sooner they will stop speculating on the subject.
Yes, a strategic alignment of interests does not guarantee a successful mandate to form a government. Both the people and the specific policies around which a government would be formed will be important. But there is a possibility – both as votes and as political logic – for such a move.
In this context, GERB continues to behave inadequately – both trumpeting that they are winners and complaining that they are in the minority and in parliament everyone is against them. (Their nomination for Speaker of the National Assembly did not attract a single vote outside their group.) In a parliamentary democracy, the winner is the majority: the largest party in parliament that is not part of the majority is the “winner” as much as in football the winner is the one who kicks the ball first.
Moreover, GERB falls into a dead defense, as all of Borissov’s moves are designed simply to calm his ego. First: it’s already been said that he “won” for the fifth time, although he actually just got a chance to kick the ball first. Second: the candidacy of Daniel Mitov for Prime Minister. Many read this appointment as a nod to the right-wing electorate outside GERB, as Mr Mitov was part of a number of right-wing parties before ending up with Borissov. However, the goal is rather different: an attempt is being made to rub the nose of the right-wing city voter, who has long disliked the resigned prime minister, by showing that “one of them” has agreed to him. The logic is not electoral expansion, but rather personal rehabilitation: “you don’t like me, but one of you agreed to be my prime minister.”
The logic of Ms. Karayancheva’s equally doomed proposal to chair the new National Assembly is similar: Borisov had insulted her outrageously in an expired recording and has now made another attempt to cover up this harmful damage. And finally: Dimitar Nikolov and Yordanka Fandakova were to blame for the loss of GERB (although they are supposed to be “winners”). Not, for example, the locker, the gambling affair and other scandals of the prime minister.
A big change has already happened
The most comical is the situation of the MRF in the new National Assembly – the Movement behaves as “born again”. And as freshly official oppositionists of GERB. Perhaps the MRF is trying to shake off Peevski’s legacy, which has made the party toxic to everyone else. If this experience is sincere, the desire is commendable, but it is too early for big conclusions on this issue. And in their behavior there is a mixture of messages – both a change in the management of GERB, and a dialogue between all. Doesn’t this mean that for the Movement without Borisov it can, but without Geshev and Tsatsarov – no?
The start of the parliamentary season has been given. This season may be short, there may be new elections, especially if ITN wants to experience the power of the wave of inertia among voters. But even in new elections: it is quite obvious that the new parties in parliament want to act in a coordinated and joint way so as to maximize their chances. This is bad news for GERB. And a signal that a major political change has already taken place.
–