2024-04-29 08:51:57
“The European Commission made a regrettable mistake by engaging Europe in a war in which we have no say,” the MEP believes
“The work of this European Parliament has been derailed by Covid and the war in Ukraine. He did not fulfill the initial requests, although he passed useful legislation in the field of ecology. At the same time, without solving the problems in the energy sector, it burdened producers with too many environmental requirements, as a result of which European industry lost competitiveness. This also affects agriculture.”
Ivo Hristov, a member of the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the EP (S&D), said this on the air of the morning block of Euronews Bulgaria – “Good morning, Europe”.
Regarding his mandate, the MEP said: “As vice-chairman of the EP’s Science and Technology Panel (STOA), I commissioned a series of studies on the topic of ‘The use of artificial intelligence in education’, as well as on deepfake technologies that allow stealing someone’s identity. identity in order to disgrace a person – a politician but also an ordinary person. These are all topics that have become central to the European Parliament, it has adopted useful legislation in this area Black Sea, which brought the problems of Bulgarian fishing and the Bulgarian coast back into the focus of the EP.
I cannot fail to mention the work in the industrial commission – ITRE – where I was a co-rapporteur on the space topic and we managed to draft new European legislation, which is the basis for the deployment of an autonomous constellation of EU satellites with clear parameters and purpose. I also dealt with the subject of supercomputers”.
“There are a lot of unfinished business, but I find the mistakes made by the European Commission to be the most regrettable”, Ivo Hristov is categorical.
In his words, the EC has engaged Europe actively in a war in which we have no say; war between Russia and the USA on the territory of Ukraine with the money of Europe.
“The end of this conflict is not up to us. Together with several other deputies, we pleaded for a peace initiative of the European Union, but this was not heard. The “war until the end” logic is harmful and will also affect the unity of the Union. I am afraid that this will happen even with the election of the next European Parliament, which will include many colorful formations, some of them – Eurosceptic, others – Frankly Europhobic. The arguments of the pro-European formations will not be strong, since this legacy – the belief in the war until the end – will be the reason for these colorful results in the EP,” said Hristov.
According to the MEP, the statement that Ukraine protects the whole of Europe is a bluff.
“Ukraine coexisted peacefully with Russia for twenty years. The problems started after the coup in Kiev in 2014. Europe lost its mediating qualities, which it was then, after failing to enforce compliance with the Minsk agreements. Today it is part of the general chorus of war and, most sadly, the European Commission is currently adopting a course towards militarization. That is, it cancels the meaning of the EU, which is a union for peace and prosperity, and turns militarization into its new meaning. When an economy of war is created, it also feeds certain interests that have no reason to want the war to stop, they profit from it, and this is already visible in many places,” believes Ivo Hristov.
When asked by the host if he will take part in the upcoming elections, Hristov replied: “I will not be part of the next European Parliament. This is a decision following a rift with the leadership of the party that nominated me in the previous European elections – BSP. She maintains anti-war rhetoric, but was part of a government that delivered record amounts of ammunition to Ukraine. This is unacceptable. Even if Ms. Ninova claims that not a single cartridge was sent to Ukraine, Ukrainian generals thanked Bulgaria, and Prime Minister Petkov boasted about the volumes of exported weapons.”
The MEP was adamant that he would not change his political family either, as he is permanently anchored in the left, in whose principles I continue to believe.
“My understanding is that clear and sustainable principles are needed in politics. This is what we are for – to set certain benchmarks and allow the citizen to make his choice. I am afraid that in Bulgarian politics – both in the parliamentary lists and at the local level – everything is played out like in the football championship. Different people are carded between two seasons in different football clubs, in different party families. This political life is indicative of the decay of the parliamentary republic; it is already bad for the citizen.
Regarding Kornelia Ninova’s claims about Elena Yoncheva’s addictions: I would leave Ms. Yoncheva to comment on them herself, but Ms. Ninova presented Mr. Peevski with some reports of corruption in official offices a day after the Prosecutor’s Office stated that had no such signals. This also shows some strange synchronicity,” said Hristov.
According to him, the BSP leadership’s criticisms of the Delegation of the Bulgarian Socialists in the EP are nothing more than administrative tricks to pressure the political opponent: “It was not reported”, “there was no report”, etc. We have known these grips since Komsomol times. In fact, the rift is deep and fundamental and dates back to the beginning of the mandate. The conflict is not just between us and management; it is between the leadership and the metropolitan organization, between the leadership and many other regional organizations; between the management and the former composition of the “DUMA” newspaper, between the management and everyone.”
“You know my conviction: both the party and the constitutional model in Bulgaria are in a deep crisis and need a restart, a deep reform,” Ivo Hristov also said on Euronews Bulgaria.
He also commented on the current political events in Bulgaria: “It can be seen that the official cabinet was created quickly, but badly, since the election of the president was limited to a few functions, some of which were incompatible with the post itself. Finally, the figure of Mr. Glavchev, who has a clear party past, was chosen. The same people who reformed the Constitution resent this. This is the best certificate for the failure of the constitutional reform. The same arguments – that they did not have time to finish it – we heard at the time about the judicial reform, after which Geshev was elected.
The President cannot refuse a decree. He even showed character with a view to preserving some stability of power and asked for reasons for the proposed changes in the composition of the cabinet. He could sign and automatically, whatever possibility exists in the current Constitution, it is ill-conceived at all levels. Imagine that every week some party or business circle wants to replace some unpopular minister – this could lead to an accelerated carousel and the collapse of the cabinet.”
Hristov defined as a “media suggestion” the statement that the president wants more power.
“This insinuation comes from politicians who took away his power to usurp it.” They have limited his powers, they are reaching out to the regulators, they want to control the services and they have compromised to be in power. The same ones say that someone else wants more power, that’s ridiculous,” he believes.
According to Ivo Hristov, a presidential republic is the only possible way out.
“Historically, it has proven itself in other countries as well. In our country, returning to the original version of the Constitution, if the Constitutional Court nullifies the changes, will do nothing to solve the issue. It will return us to the Constitution that gave birth to a series of unproductive elections.”
The MEP said he did not dare to predict whether there would be a coalition after the elections in June: “There could be, but it will be the result of so many compromises that we will all long for new elections.” Let’s say: a coalition of DPS, GERB and something or a coalition of the “assembly 2″ type – which of the two could make us happy? Nothing.”
Regarding the composition of the future European Parliament, the MEP said: “I don’t know what we call “extreme formations”. I find those who declare themselves “war to the end” to be the most extreme possible. Currently, these are the traditional parties in the EP. Either way, the next parliament will be much noisier, much more confrontational, more difficult to build consensus, most likely to block the work of European institutions, and sit in conditions of war and accumulated crises. A possible economic and inflationary crisis will be added to the war. This will put Parliament in a very delicate position.”
According to Hristov, the bet for Bulgaria’s membership in land-based Schengen is greatly overestimated.
“It is possible that Schengen in its current version will be reformed, that is, the whole process will be restarted. We must try to be a part of it. I am very skeptical about many of the things that are done in the EU and have often voted against proposed policies. At the same time, I am fully convinced that the EU must be preserved, as its collapse would mean crises, wars and nothing better than the present. We should not waste historical time and go back 30-40 years, we know how much effort all this integration cost. We must try to preserve it and heal it, if we succeed,” Ivo Hristov believes.