The threat of "Revival" on October 27 is real, and the pro-Western parties are not reacting adequately so far. However, from the eventual successful performance of "Revival" it can also have a positive effect on her opponents.
It is unlikely that the parliamentary victory of the pro-Kremlin Austrian Freedom Party will have an electoral impact on the Bulgarian "Revival". But the surprise of the far-right victory in Austria may focus political perspectives on what could conceivably happen here. On the eve of our election campaign, a sociological agency gave second place to Kostadin Kostadinov's party. For now, it seems unthinkable that he will achieve the success of Herbert Kickle, but there are too many unknowns in our country and the horizon of the conceivable becomes alarmingly wide.
Many unknowns in the October 27 election
First, it is not clear what the turnout will be. Sociologists and political scientists do not rule out that it will fall below that of the previous elections, but it is not clear whether and where a protest vote can be concentrated. It is unknown how many parties will enter the parliament – it could be seven, or nine, according to different researchers' expectations. It is also not clear what the ratio will be between the two DPS. Besides, the sociological polls regarding exactly this vote are too conditional, because no one can guarantee the adequacy of the samples and the declarative attitudes among this yesterday's monolithic electorate, nor what the share of the bought and controlled vote will be.
The refusal at the last moment to participate in the elections of a number of parties that, even if they did not enter the parliament, would receive more than 1%, which is sufficient for a subsidy, is also questionable – doesn't someone buy them back for non-participation? We also don't know if the bought vote is not concentrated in one place, so that the stable share of the largest formation in the polls turns out to be smaller in the end, because there has been a concentration of the vote market towards only one new political center with many financial opportunities and ambition to play wabank.
Secondly, it is not clear whether the threat of “Revival“ will mobilize voters from other parties against her. But for this, the ideologically threatened party headquarters must first place this threat as an emphasis in their election campaign. Such appear to be the formations mainly in the center-right and pro-Western political spectrum – GERB and PP-DB. But even if they feel it, they will hardly have enough time to deploy this emphasis as a serious mobilization tool until the vote. And from GERB, this is at least expected, insofar as Boyko Borisov consistently keeps a respectful, but not confrontational, distance to “Vazrazhdane” – one, because a significant part of his voters are not so anti-Russian - and second, because several times he remains isolated as the winner of elections and needs room for tactical maneuvers. On the left, a confrontation with a stronger formation on the same pro-Russian terrain would be suicidal for the already unsuccessful attempt at a serious left unification once again.
The threat as a weapon for electoral mobilization
Only PP-DB has a chance to find in the election campaign a mobilization trump among their voters against a threat that threatens not only the geopolitical orientation of the country, but also basic human rights – especially after the march of “Revival“ against the so-called foreign agents and against the so-called school propaganda of non-traditional sexual orientation. Kostadinov's party built its pre-election bridgehead with them, and PP-DB did not respond with systematic determination and energy – some of their representatives took pride in this.
However, from the eventual very successful performance of “Revival“ in the elections it may also have a positive effect for her opponents. And he seems to be able to capitalize only after the election – especially if the US presidential election is won by Kamala Harris. Then “Revival“ can play the role of Euro-Atlantic glue for GERB, PP-DB, DPS-Dogan and ITN, which President Radev and the war against Ukraine played for the parliamentary majority of GERB, PP-DB and DPS under the so-called assembly.
Equally distant prime minister with the legitimacy of the current one?
Because the idea of an equally remote prime minister with his own authority in the version of the PP-DB (but also of the BSP) is unconvincing not only pre-election, but also post-election. Such a temporary and with unclear political responsibility management can hardly have a greater public authority and time horizon than that of the current cabinet, which after the changes in the constitution is also the parliament or some invisible part of it. And now a new management assembly again “against the greater threat”, as after the official administrations of President Radev and the invasion of Ukraine, although weaker, may receive some value legitimation. In contrast to the too loose assembly of the “equally remote prime minister”, based solely on not immediately having an eighth election in a row.
The Euro-Atlanticism or anti-corruption dilemma
Of course, another assembly will be another postponement of the resolution of the great dilemma which is the basis of the political crisis – anti-corruption or Euro-Atlanticism. Because in the end it depends on the PP-DB, who invariably face the choice – either you are Euro-Atlantic along with GERB and DPS and leave anti-corruption on the back burner, or you are anti-corruptionist with “Revival” (because they haven't ruled so far) but then you are folding the Euro-Atlantic wings.
It turns out to be most difficult to solve an equation with these two known ones. Then the logical explanation is that you either don't have the courage and the skills to do it – that's why you look for combinations (the Denkov-Gabriel cabinet) and quasi-combinations (an equally distant prime minister with his own authority), or you hope for an auspicious occasion (the war in Ukraine, the threat of "Revival"), which alone will remove the contradiction from the equation at least for a while . Or we do not have a critical mass of voters (but also parties to consolidate them) who can accept a phased solution to the dilemma, similar to French voters who ally with opponents against more dangerous opponents – as last happened in the parliamentary vote in July against the extreme right of Le Pen and Bardela.
This comment expresses the personal opinion of the author and may not coincide with the positions of the Bulgarian editorial office and DV as a whole.