From the first day, PP-DB have clearly shown that they are entering an election campaign and are looking for excuses for not having a stable government, setting new and new conditions.
Yordanka Fandakova, deputy and member of the executive committee of GERB, former mayor of Sofia, stated this to BNR.
For what reason do PP-DB want to support Silvi Kirilov and do not want to support Raya Nazaryan in order for the National Assembly to start working, she asked, drawing attention to the nuanced position of “Yes, Bulgaria”.
According to her, there is an “absolute refusal of dialogue and any desire to form a majority on the part of the PP”. In her words, while “from DB they have different requests, from PP the stubbornness is categorical”.
Fandakova relies on “spells, insults, qualifications” in the speeches of the PP, pointed out that they “shyly extend their hands to “Vazrazhdane” and talked about “a new assembly on the horizon”. She expressed the opinion that from the second political force “they twist their arms and manipulate the whole society”.
“There is no reason to give up on Raya Nazaryan”, declares Yordanka Fandakova in the program “Before All”.
In connection with the possibility of Silvi Kirilov ending up in the so-called “home book” for acting prime minister Fandakova comments:
“They did not deny this possibility. After we clearly stated that Raya Nazaryan, if elected as the Speaker of the National Assembly, would not agree to a nomination for acting Prime Minister, no one denied the possibility of Silvi Kirilov being acting Prime Minister, which for me is a very clear sign. This whole scenario is leading in that direction, including the PP-DB support.”
Against this background, Fandakova defined as “ridiculous” the expectation, expressed by representatives of the DB, that the Constitutional Court would annul the amendments to the basic law concerning the caretaker government.
The former mayor of the capital reproached the current leadership that for a year now there has been no movement on major projects fully prepared by her and her team.
What are the main challenges facing the political parties in Bulgaria as they attempt to form a stable government?
Interview between Time.news Editor and Political Expert on the Current Bulgarian Political Landscape
Time.news Editor (TNE): Welcome to our special segment on the political scene in Bulgaria. Today, we’re joined by Dr. Elena Petrova, a political analyst and expert on Bulgarian politics. Dr. Petrova, thank you for being here.
Dr. Elena Petrova (EP): Thank you for having me! It’s great to discuss these important issues.
TNE: Let’s dive right in. Recently, there’s been a lot of back-and-forth between the PP and DB parties concerning the formation of a stable government. Yordanka Fandakova, a member of GERB, expressed concern over their reluctance to support certain candidates. What’s your take on this situation?
EP: It’s quite a tense atmosphere, isn’t it? Fandakova’s comments highlight the deep divisions and the varying agendas within the parliament. The pushback from PP against certain candidates like Raya Nazaryan certainly indicates a strategic maneuvering as they gear up for the upcoming election campaign.
TNE: Yes, she specifically pointed out what she perceives as an “absolute refusal of dialogue” from PP. Do you think this refusal is a tactic, or is it indicative of deeper ideological divisions?
EP: It’s both, really. On one hand, the refusal to engage in dialogue can be seen as a tactical approach; they might believe that negotiating could weaken their position or compromise their values. On the other hand, we’re witnessing a broader ideological rift that plays into how these parties view governance and collaboration. The insistence on certain candidates reveals a fear of compromising on key issues.
TNE: Fandakova also mentioned the “stubbornness” from the PP and a nuanced stance from ”Yes, Bulgaria”. How do you think these differences will impact the formation of a government?
EP: Those differences are significant. Political parties often have to reach a consensus to form a government, and when there’s stubbornness from one side, it can create a stalemate. “Yes, Bulgaria” might be trying to walk a middle path, which could either facilitate dialogue or, conversely, lead to frustration on both sides if they feel their needs aren’t being addressed.
TNE: You mentioned the election campaign. How do you see the upcoming elections affecting these negotiations? Would it drive cooperation or further entrench divisions?
EP: In an election year, political players often become more entrenched in their positions, aiming to solidify their voter bases. However, there’s also the potential for unexpected alliances if parties feel compelled to show that they can govern effectively. It’s a delicate balancing act—they’ll need to weigh their immediate political survival against the necessity of forming a functioning government.
TNE: Fandakova’s comments about “spells, insults, and qualifications” during speeches from the PP raise the question of political rhetoric. How does rhetoric shape these political dynamics?
EP: Political rhetoric can be a double-edged sword. While it can galvanize a party’s base and create a strong narrative, it can also alienate potential partners. If PP continues to use combative language, it may harden positions and make compromise nearly impossible. Leveraging rhetoric responsibly can invite dialogue, while aggressive tactics might only reinforce divisions.
TNE: Dr. Petrova, your insights have been invaluable. Thank you for shedding light on these complex dynamics. We’ll keep watching how this situation unfolds as elections approach.
EP: Thank you for having me! It’s an exciting yet challenging time in Bulgarian politics, and I look forward to seeing how it all plays out.