Elena Poptodorova, long-time ambassador to the USA and vice president of the Atlantic Club in Bulgaria, in an interview with Audiokasta of "Focus“ "This is Bulgaria“
You returned today from America. What's the mood there? Is it true that expectations are being imposed that Joe Biden will drop out in favor of Michelle Obama?
No. The short answer is: no. There are such speculations, there are noises in the system so to speak, but nothing like what I would call a partisan or credible guess that comes from serious analysts or from serious media. Yes, I say again, it goes along parallel discussions or rather suggestions, but you know, it's more related to, let me put it that way – the dissatisfaction with the candidate that the Democrats have. I.e. there is a desire to see another profile of a Democratic candidate at this time. But here I would like you to give me a few minutes to tell in more detail what the picture actually looks like, because it is, of course, neither so simple nor so clear-cut.
So the truth is that we have two candidates who are equally unpopular. We have a Republican candidate who is very unusual, who entered big politics without any prior experience, and who came out of it, entering this campaign with four criminal cases and a total of 91 charges. The first case is already underway, already underway. The campaign of President Trump, ex-President Trump, has basically run on, let me sum it up like this: culture wars. He's fighting against migrants, he's fighting against hostile liberal tendencies within society, but in general his thesis is a battle, his thesis is a war, first of all within, within American society itself, and of course outside of it, referring to those to call it to him unacceptable commitments that America has entered into. On the other side we have candidate Biden. For Biden, we have to say that he broke his own record for the oldest candidate, because he first won the record in 2020, and now he is the oldest candidate again.
And as a matter of fact, there are concerns and let's call it expectations around this circumstance, as you yourself announced about a change of candidate. I repeat again: no, the Biden-Kamala Harris couple is going to the Democratic convention in Chicago. The difference between the two candidates is Biden's long political history. Let's recall that he entered the Senate at the age of 30, twice ran for president: 1988 the first time, 2008 the next time, he became Obama's vice president, but now he managed in the last election to reach the position to which he obviously has been striving for a long time. His political platform is very different from that of President Trump. Biden has focused on America's economy.
And in fact, what he tried to accomplish, and he succeeded in no small measure in the time of the term that is now coming to an end, was to get very serious, very large pieces of legislation in Congress related to industrial development, with industrial policy generally speaking of the United States. Yes, as there is certainly concern about the economic development of the US internally from the Americans themselves, the citizens themselves, it also relative to the rest of the world, and unfortunately I will say Europe, America is doing much better numbers, much more -good numbers from the European ones, again I will say to a greater extent compared to the world. Unemployment is around 3.9%, inflation is now 3.5%, as of June 2022 it was 9.1. Public, public investments have increased a lot, under Biden, 537 billion such public investments were brought in, separately nearly 900 billion private investments.
Gross domestic product rose 0.4%. These are, I say again, these are figures that speak more probably in a more detailed analysis and of the specialists, and more importantly: when people enter the store, how they feel. But anyway, what I'm trying to convey is that he comes into this company from this perspective, he steps on the economy. Biden is a centrist democrat, yes he's pro-union, which is a little more left-wing, but he's trying to keep some sort of center anyway. And what we regret to say about President Trump, I say again, he is connected with these criminal cases that are already underway, with an unprecedented attempt to change election results, with an assault on the holy of holies of American democracy, the Capitol, the United States Congress , and like I said, with these culture wars. He is in a battle, he is in a constant battle with something and with someone.
And having said that, I want to remind again, this does not make Biden any easier to accept for the majority of Americans – on average, 70% would like to see other candidates. And the truth is that for 70 years there has not been such a combination, such a situation in which the two contending candidates are the same from the previous elections. Therefore, the hard cores will obviously stand behind their candidates. Although with regard to Trump we have to say that he is still waiting to get the support of 1/4 of the senators, they have still retained the vocal support, the declared support, and maybe about twenty percent of the representatives in the US House of Representatives . But there will be no change in personalities.
We expect to see in July at the Republican Conference: who will be Trump's vice presidential candidate, because his previous vice president Mike Pence – one of the classic, let's call them, exponents of traditional republicanism in the US politicians, he not only distanced himself from Trump, but was even a critic of him. So I think that's the only question mark we have at this point. And as has always happened and I have had occasion to tell you earlier on previous occasions, the outcome of the election will be decided by those twenty percent who have not yet decided their preferences. But I say again, this is not one of America's most brilliant and exciting campaigns, on the contrary.
And how are the voting results going so far in the primary elections in the various states? Today, for example, Democrats and Republicans vote in Indiana.
Yes, that's right. There is one poll as of May 5th that gives Trump a 1% lead over Biden. This is from May 5th. But again, these are dynamic numbers, and depending on the state where the primaries are going, the by-elections will fluctuate up and down, but I don't think they measured more than a 4-5% difference – this is the maximum, which percentage, of course, depending, I repeat, on the state in which they are held, will change. I do not rule out Trump entering the actual race with some percentage lead, and so I turn again and remind those twenty percent undecideds, who have not yet decided where to cast their vote.
I will express a personal regret, perhaps because I have work experience, acquaintance with Nikki Haley, who heroically tried to the end, to the end to be a contender for the Republican nomination, the governor of South Carolina, who would be a truly reforming figure in the American politics, but in today's Republican Party, that was not going to happen. But it was telling that she never steered her supporters, who were one-twentieth of Republicans, in the direction and support of President Trump's candidacy.
Is it predictable how America will vote on November 5th?
I wouldn't go with such a prediction, because I think we will again be talking about very close results, a very small margin. Now, here is perhaps the time to say a few words about the so-called "third candidate”. It's not a third party, more like a third candidate, and it's a scion of the Kennedy family – Robert Kennedy Jr., who is campaigning as an independent candidate, he is not supported by the Democratic Party, but he has a strong chance of taking away votes in truth from both parties. Because just as the Democratic Party is a kind of coalition of currents and trends, the same is true for the Republican Party.
There is a let's call it a sizable percentage of Republican registered voters, and supporters in general, who are by no means happy with their current candidacy, not just now, but earlier in 2020. I know such people, I have spoken to such people, who, of course, vote Republican by virtue of inheritance, of continuity, of allegiance to a political trend, but who would deviate their vote given a good opportunity. I can't predict what parts of both parties would go in Robert Kennedy's direction, but he's the only one who could bring a bit of a stir, bring some excitement to both campaigns.
What are the scenarios for NATO depending on the results of the US presidential election?
You know, I think that in the previous phase, in Trump's first term, NATO was more unprepared as an organization, surprised, so touchingly naive and innocent, because no one had ever assumed that it was from the United States that such a thing could come a jolt, let's call it, that President Trump produced in his first term, which by the way was salutary. And here I must say that, at least for myself, but I am not alone in this opinion, that Trump destabilized NATO only led to the mobilization of the countries individually and the organization as a whole in terms of contribution, financial contribution of course, but and not only, both in a political and a military sense to the organization.
This is even stronger today. But here the role is no longer Trump's, the role is the war that Putin waged in Ukraine. And so, just as it has already become banal to say that Europe has woken up, the same has happened to a much higher degree with NATO precisely as a military-political organization. For many years, since 2022, that is two full years already, next year when the echelon in the White House changes, it will be three years, NATO is preparing medium and long-term not only plans, but also military preparations for a good, solid defense against external enemy, against an external threat. And the US, as it is a major factor in the organization itself, will not be alone in providing this protection.
You see that a series of decisions have been taken, including in relation to the defense industry of the Member States, to national budgets, with concrete plans for both exercises and the construction of collective security systems in various parts of Europe, including The Black Sea region. I.e. NATO has moved, turned the wheels just as an organization, a regional security organization, and the goal is exactly that – to build a European pillar that would be sufficiently effective participating in this collective defense. Now there is nothing to close our eyes – yes, the US has for 70 years borne the brunt both militarily and strategically and in terms of military plans for the defensive nature of NATO and its defense forces.
It is true that in these 70 years they were not tested, but this construction of the European component of the transatlantic security system is going on very, very intensively. So with these detailed considerations, I mean that even with President Trump entering the White House, even with his spontaneous, let's call it extravagant desire to somehow separate America from NATO, it could not work out either practically , nor institutional. Once again, I will remind you of the American political system, in which no president can make unilateral decisions. Yes, we've heard Trump's calls to clean up the administration – it's another part of his platform that stands in stark contrast to the policy theses that are actually part of Biden's platform. Yes, he would want, if he got into the White House, he would want to replace the decision-making levels with people loyal to him, but those people loyal to him, and they would be part of the US political system.
Separately – you can't make a docile Congress and House of Representatives and a disobedient Senate. Very deep are the roots of this system of checks and balances, which are manifested even now – and in a moment I will give an example of this to predict dramatic, apocalyptic, catastrophic events after Trump enters the White House. Just think, what happened to the aid package? Because it was not only Ukraine – there was Israel, there was Taiwan. Yes, for two months there was a senseless blockage of this bill, totally inspired, dictated, imposed by President Trump. Even when a very good agreement was reached between Democrats and Republicans on this bill, which would also include adequate funds to build defenses on the border with Mexico – and that was, again I say bipartisan, and only Trump's intervention thwarted it, even that event somehow failed to prevent the logical one, namely – the adoption of this package with the votes of both parties.
Now, since we mentioned that the Republicans are also a coalition of sorts – there's a very far right that's very unhappy that the speaker, the speaker of the house, mike johnson, actually copped democrat votes to pass this package because maybe 1/4 of the republicans abstained or were against it. But there is a desire to remove him from office and it will happen in the coming days, literally this week. But here, obviously, his post will be saved by the Democrats from the Democratic votes. But here the role of Trump, who was… it is no coincidence that I mentioned that he failed a long time ago, maybe a month and a half ago, the opportunity to vote for the aid. Now, right on the eve of this vote, he made an announcement, very sparingly, but absolutely clear and explicit, in support of Ukraine, to uncork this vote. Why am I telling this case in detail again – because the decisions will develop in a similar way, if with a question mark, hypothetically Trump would enter the White House next year.
According to the Italian newspaper "Repubblica", the Alliance is ready to intervene directly in the war in Ukraine if Russia crosses one of two red lines, the first being the intervention of third countries such as Belarus, and the second being military provocations against the Baltic countries, Poland or Moldova. Is it only a matter of time before the backlash against these red lines ie. is it only a matter of time before NATO intervenes?
This, as we said, entirely depends on Russia's behavior. We saw that the reaction was immediately a half-step, let's call it, to what Russia has been scaring with for a long time, in fact it has always been scaring, and that is its nuclear potential. Medvedev was very explicit, very unequivocal in this sense. But not only him – both Peskov and Lavrov immediately brought the tactical nuclear weapons card into play. Not by chance, not just the Kremlin – Putin announced upcoming exercises near the border with Ukraine. They are more exercises in the sense of some kind of rehearsal of how such weapons would be deployed, how they would be used. In a word, nuclear blackmail is naturally underway.
But let me say that we have very clear statements from more than one NATO country. I think the last one was by British Secretary of State Cameron, who was now in Kiev, who admitted that it was possible to strike Russia with British weapons by Ukrainians. Just to remind you that Britain voted, approved 3 billion pounds of annual military aid, after already giving them 500,000 pounds last year, anti-aircraft missile systems that are being sent. USA and Germany – I also emphasize Germany, finally – to strike out again, finally, because this action is overdue…
Perhaps the events would have been different if this decision had been made earlier. But anyway these anti-aircraft missile systems "Patriot“ from the USA and Germany are about to arrive in Ukraine. Now, this provoked, of course, the reaction of the Kremlin. There is a threat that Moscow will strike British military sites wherever they are. This is common language, which should not surprise us. Macron, by the way, was undaunted at all and continued to insist that the deployment of Western troops to Ukraine would probably be necessary, meaning that NATO was preparing for aid to actually lead to some sort of exit from this stalemate in hostilities. in Ukraine. It is clear that a final decision will not be made on the battlefield.
We all know that. Of course, it must be some kind of treaty, peaceful or whatever it is called, but it must be based on certain circumstances, on a certain situation on the battlefield. And now, when we see that Russia has been building a 50,000-strong army in the north to attack Kharkiv – according to the intelligence services, it is clear that helping Ukraine by all possible means is more than imperative. I think that will be necessary. Ukraine must be given the opportunity to go on the offensive so that it can negotiate on anything, if not equal, then at least acceptable terms when the time to sit down at the negotiating table will inevitably come.
And are we more than ever facing a world war or are we just bluffing for now?
I think we are still in the bluffing and dominance phase. I think we said it a long time ago – Ukraine is the visible goal, the declared goal of the Kremlin, but the real, strategic goal is supremacy or at least equal opposition of Russia against NATO and against the West. Look, Russia's behavior patterns now are exactly what we know from before – preparation of Russia, pre-war preparation of Russia for a conflict with NATO, with the West. And it was never hidden. I will go back a bit, before the actual entry of Russia into Ukraine, when you remember that there were a couple of letters that Putin sent – I think it was November 2021, addressed to the President of the United States and the Secretary General of NATO.
I.e. Russia does not talk to anyone else. Countries like ours, they are absolutely immaterial, they are pointless, uninteresting. So he has to agree with the two big powers – USA and NATO, how to divide the world, how to distribute the sphere of influence. Then Putin asked for nothing less – to return the borders of NATO to 1997. And since this cannot happen, because all countries – we must repeat it, tell it, remind it – we have all entered and become members of NATO at our own request and desire. Bulgaria, like all the other 32 member states – I will not stop reminding, Finland, Sweden, last – we have officially submitted our application for NATO membership at the highest state level. This has happened by its own national sovereign desire.
And Putin's attempt to totally obliterate the states as politics made within the states themselves, and to try to negotiate our destinies with the most powerful of the day – The US and NATO, they have nowhere to go, they have no future, and as you know, these two letters had no answer. And since then, guess what Putin's answer is now – it is preparing Russia itself with the possible satellite countries around it – Belarus is the most obvious, of course, there are probably not many others, because China is also cautious, maybe North Korea as a missile supplier would add to that number, but not more than that. But what is happening, and what for me suggests irreversible trends at least for the foreseeable future, is the way in which Putin is militarizing Russian society. It inspires unhealthy, irrational patriotic, as we have variant patriotic passions. He remodeled the entire education system of Russia, called the scientists "traitors". It created some new orthodox religiosity so that the church was included in the whole plan.
The young generation – it is brought up to perceive the West as a mortal enemy, in a battle almost for the survival of Russia, which, you see, is attacked from all sides. A very dark image of the events in the world is being built, which is totally false. Women – an absolutely retrograde role is assigned to women. They are fit for nothing but the reproduction and maintenance of what we call pathetic politics. And all this is being built in Russian society, which, in my opinion, makes the future very, very difficult, because there is no way without attitudes in the relevant society and governments to make the right decisions. And I regret to say – we are doomed for years to come to a very tense coexistence, which I cannot call a peaceful coexistence with Russia, rather a cold war, but already even more complicated, even more difficult, given the modern means not only of propaganda – of sabotage, of sabotage.
Because other data coming out of the intelligence agencies of various countries – here is Germany, Sweden, of course Great Britain, the national security services literally days ago issued warnings that Russia is preparing sabotage in the respective countries, which rather aims to break European unity and of course unity within NATO. So we have very, very complicated, very difficult years ahead of us. I am not sure that we, especially Bulgaria, are ready for this.