Interview by Ana Kocheva
Q: We all thought that once we became EU
members everything would be OK in the country, but that is far from the case.
Is this a Bulgarian phenomenon or has it happened with other new members in the
past?
A: These expectations were based on a false
presumption: that EU institutions would influence and intervene in our affairs
directly. In reality this can only occur when a convincing, socially imbedded
critical mass of organizations, institutions, civic, and business sectors,
parallels European influence.
Q: We find ourselves between a monitoring
report and the decision whether to enforce the preventive clause, part of our
pre-integration agreement. It seems that the criticism from the EC is an
insufficient mechanism of discipline.
A: The decision shows that the EU has
fallen into an institutionalized trap. The membership criteria are established
in such a way that a country can comply with 5 of them and still have an
ineffective judicial system. The existence of criteria presupposes that a
series of more fundamental issues has been resolved. Laws have been adopted,
yet ministers themselves behave in a way that is fundamentally unacceptable and
anti-European. How should one go about formulating criteria to prevent this?
The clause cannot change anything. The EU realizes this and the talks have
taken a completely new direction, one that is unfavorable to Bulgaria. I raised
the issue of suspending our membership for precisely this reason – if the
absence of constructive dialogue and shameless displays of arrogance continue
(to which deputy PM Plugchieva openly admitted), then the discrepancy between
Bulgaria’s politicians and European institutions will be ascertained. Enforcing
the clause is the only adequate response to this political arrogance.
Q: How many more political scandals can
Bulgaria take? We seem to have lost face permanently…
A: Obviously we can take many, but some
scare the government more than others. The suspended EU subsidies were scarier
than the MI scandal, although the latter should have scared them more.
Q: If this had happened in any other
country, there would have been consequences. Here there are none.
A: Yes. That is the real issue – how is a
scandal defined in a political context. The scandals culminate in social
apathy. Politicians must take into account that the waning interest of voters
must be contained somehow. If it isn’t the election process will become a
network of buying votes. I have the feeling that most parties have gotten used
to the idea that their electorate has disintegrated. They have accepted that
from here on the only way to win elections will be through periodic waves of populism
or by buying votes – directly or through close business circles.
Q: The general view is that no matter what
political reforms are undertaken, the same people will stay in power – i.e. the
game may change, but the players remain the same.
прочетете още...
КОМЕНТАРИ
ФРОГ-КИНО
Асен Гаргов - Развод Ми Дай
VOICE OF THE FROG
NEWS
POLITICS
ФОТО ТЕМА
След получаването на "Оскар", Бигълоу нарече моментът - "момент на живота си".
С роми в първите редици РЗС променя Конституцията
Джеф Бриджис получи "Оскар" за великолепното си превъплъщение в образа на залязващия кънтри певец Бед Блейк във филма "Лудо сърце"
търсене
нов коментар