The presidential election has concluded, and the outcome was largely predictable right after the first round on November 14. There was no way the GERB candidate could win against the sitting president, who was supported not only by the socialists but also by other parties, primarily “We Continue the Change” and “There Is Such a People.” After the runoff, there were loud headlines celebrating Rumen Radev’s victory. Yes, he indeed received double the votes compared to his opponent, Anastas Gerjikov.
But how can this victory be termed “crushing” in light of a mere 24 percent voter turnout and the votes of just over 1.5 million Bulgarians? From the other 5.2 million eligible voters, nearly 734,000 cast their votes for the rector of Sofia University, while the remaining 4.5 million Bulgarians simply stayed home on November 21. Such a result hardly seems representative, let alone meriting superlatives.
The defeat in the runoff is a personal loss for Professor Gerjikov, but it was predetermined by the fact that he was the GERB candidate, supported by the DPS as well. In the country, the rector of Sofia University only outperformed Radev in the Kardzhali electoral district, and abroad, in Turkey and Morocco. Nevertheless, the votes of Bulgarian expatriates in our southern neighbor, which the DPS either could not or did not want to mobilize for the vote on the 21st, did not narrow Radev’s lead.
Thus, for the first time during the years of the Transition, a president was elected without the votes of the Bulgarian Turks, a thesis repeated like a mantra over the years by the elite of the communist and secret police-created party.
In practice, a real contest between Radev and Gerjikov did not take place. Their only televised debate was lackluster, tedious, filled with clichés, and lacking ideas for priorities in our foreign policy, as well as an answer to the question of whether constitutional changes are needed for judicial reform. Moreover, there was a gaffe from the sitting head of state, who stated, “Crimea is Russian, what can it be?” His remark triggered reactions in Kyiv, Washington, and Brussels, particularly on the day the Central Election Commission announced Radev’s victory. At home, these reactions were more accepted as a storm in a teacup rather than as a false start to his second term. Many analysts and politicians took it upon themselves to act as his advocates to win his favor. Meanwhile, a text appeared on the website of the Russian embassy in Bulgaria, distributed by RIA Novosti. In it, the chairman of the Bulgarian National Cultural Autonomy in Crimea, Ivan Abazher, stated that President Radev should visit Russian Crimea, where he would receive a “warm and cordial welcome.”
The analyses of the presidential elections will not conclude with Rumen Radev’s reelection as head of state. The record-low voter turnout in the runoff is explained by some as a result of voter fatigue from elections. Yes, but in the first round, the turnout was almost double that, due to the parliamentary vote. Others believe that the incumbent president’s lead following the November 14 results led voters to think that Radev would be elected even without their support. However, the hypothesis that a portion of the 4.5 million Bulgarians who did not go to the polls on the 21st simply do not like either of the candidates is barely discussed in public discourse.
Why can’t my president be either Rumen Radev or Anastas Gerjikov?
On November 14, I voted for Lozan Panov, even though I knew it was a lost cause. If the elections were held today, I wouldn’t change my vote, unlike others who have sprinkled ashes on their heads. But I did not vote in the runoff because I grew tired of having to choose the lesser evil throughout the Transition, as I assume many other Bulgarians at home and abroad feel.
Throughout the campaign, Radev played the role of the leader of the protests against the status quo, corruption, and dishonesty in politics, and aligned himself with the project of his caretaker ministers, Kiril Petkov and Asen Vassilev, “We Continue the Change.” Last summer, he joined the protesting citizens in front of the presidency, raised a clenched fist, and called them to battle against the mafia.
But he has no moral right to be a leader in this battle, despite running for election with the change he promoted as his banner, accompanied by a dozen agents from the former State Security in his Initiative Committee.
Rumen Radev began appointing people with a background in the former repressive services of the communist state to the presidential administration during the first year of his term and continued to include them in his inner circle in the following years. These appointments did not go unnoticed by our European and overseas partners, but in Bulgaria, they were rarely discussed and by only a few analysts. How our head of state presented himself in foreign policy, where he holds the greatest powers and opportunities for action, is a topic for another discussion. What will stand out from Rumen Radev’s first term are primarily his constant calls at various high-level forums for lifting sanctions against Russia imposed due to the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol. And perhaps nothing else. This was likely the reason E Elena Poptodorova stated immediately after his victory that she expected the president to show greater freedom and initiative in foreign and security policy in the coming years.
Leaving aside the president’s silence or empty rhetoric over the years on significant issues related to our national security, energy projects, waste, and theft of public resources, it is inexcusable for Rumen Radev to claim to be a leader in the battle against the parallel state that was precisely created by State Security. A pop-folk singer like Luna was the only one to raise the issue of lustration in the electoral debate, but such thoughts cannot even enter the mind of our president. And what kind of change can he truly offer us with his entourage of agents, a cohort of sycophants, and with parties that are products of the matrix?
To cast my vote for Radev felt like renouncing my belief that the State Security and the behind-the-scenes players created a facade of democracy, oligarchs, and the mafia, along with political projects that have demoralized society and instilled a lasting negative attitude towards political parties.
The infiltration of agents from the former repressive services in all authorities and at all levels prevented the adoption of a Lustration Law, similar to those implemented in all former Soviet bloc countries. Supporting Rumen Radev would mean abandoning my 30 years of journalistic practice and the causes I believed in and fought for.
It is far easier for me to explain why I did not recognize my president in the face of the professor from the Department of Classical Philology at Sofia University, who served two terms as rector in recent years. Anastas Gerjikov is undoubtedly a person of rich culture and intellect, which even Rumen Radev’s supporters do not deny. However, as we know well, there is no direct correlation between intellect and morality. Whether Professor Gerjikov experienced a moral dilemma in accepting the presidential offer from Boyko Borisov and GERB is something we cannot know. Yet he clearly and without visible remorse sought to convince us throughout the campaign that he was an independent candidate who would not reject the support of any Bulgarian party or citizen. Such behavior does not assure society that the rector of Sofia University could be a president independent of the influence of the prime minister who has ruled the state for 12 years with an authoritarian style. Even less does it suggest that he would stand up against him and the remaining corrupt elite and encourage their judicial prosecution.
As a translator of Aristotle, Professor Gerjikov likely shares the conclusions of the ancient philosopher from his work “Politics,” such as: “It often happens that a form of government, which by law is not democratic, is governed democratically due to custom and its method of leadership; and conversely, in other cases, the form of government is legally democratic, but by virtue of its method of leadership and customs, it is more oligarchic.” Or as described in Book Two: “The fact that the people are at ease, even though they do not participate in governance, does not prove that such an order is correct.”
Nonetheless, the president of Bulgaria, who will lead the representative authority for another five years, is Rumen Radev. Whether he will be a pillar of change, a role he chose during last summer’s protests, we will find out soon. Now, as journalist Asen Grigorov asserts in “Free Europe,” it is time for the president to relax his fist and take his position as head of state without “extending” his powers.
