Rosen Plevneliev, President of Bulgaria (now there are new elections going on - he is one of the candidates) said in an interview with the German publication faz
"Facts indicate (What? A.Sh.) that today Russia is a nationalistically aggressive state. Putin sees Europe not as a partner, but as an enemy. Putin perceives the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union as a disaster. According to the Bulgarian President, Putin wants to live, like in the 19th century, when there were great powers and peripheral states subordinate to them"
By some inspiration from above, he believes that Russia is an aggressor country and dreams of capturing all of Europe, just as it “captured” Crimea. Where are the examples? The USSR was destroyed. Yes. What does Russian aggression have to do with it?
Does the President of Bulgaria know history? I doubt it. The Bulgarians liked to call us “brothers.” But this does not mean brothers. In the Bulgarian language, the word “brothers” has an ironic meaning, even a familiarly dismissive one. Over the past 100 years, Bulgaria has betrayed us many times. For this reason, our ancestors died on Shipka. if after that the “brother Bulgarians” fought against us in both world wars. In 1914, in an alliance with Austria-Hungary and Germany. In 1941, in alliance with Hitler. Now, Bulgaria is a member of NATO and the EU. And just “yesterday” - the stop of South Stream, as they say, is a blow to the “gut” of Russia
Remember how Dostoevsky talked about the Slavic brotherhood - “It will be especially pleasant for the liberated Slavs to express and trumpet to the whole world that they are educated tribes, capable of the highest European culture, while Russia is a barbaric country, a gloomy northern colossus, not even pure Slavic blood, persecutor and hater of European civilization" (the half-Jew, half-Georgian Akunin talks about pure blood in his new work, paid for by the West)
What a visionary our great classic is! A simple prophet! A similar thing is observed in Serbia. I mean their elite (not the people) Example? Please. When the Crimean War of 1853-56 began, Serbia took an openly anti-Russian position, completely siding with Austria. As a result, the Russian ambassador was urgently recalled from “brotherly” Belgrade ((And who helped the Serbs win autonomy from Turkey before that? Russia)
Well, Ukraine is the most recent example. (Bloody) Let me give you one quote: Director of the International Monetary Fund Christian Lagarde. She said on April 3, 2014 to the BBC. "The economy of Ukraine was approaching the abyss at full speed... Without Russian support. Without the helping hand that Russia extended to them, Ukraine would not have had a future..."
And this is said by a seemingly neutral person. Knowing. All the basics of economics. Mira.
How did Ukraine thank us?
She already wants gas so that we can give it to them for free. What about debts? THEY HAVE NO MONEY. They devoured and stole
And Putin is flirting with Ukraine. With Poroshenko. Well, the liberals are putting pressure. It's clear. But you still need to understand that there is patience. The people.
Our allies are the army. And the fleet. ALL !!! So it is with all the Great Countries of the World. Is not it so?
100 years ago, on October 14, 1915, Bulgaria declared war on Serbia and entered World War I on the side of the Central Powers. Bulgaria sought to establish itself as a leader on the Balkan Peninsula and get even with its neighbors for the humiliating defeat in the Second Balkan War of 1913 (“National Catastrophe”) and for the loss of territories. The Bulgarian elite dreamed of creating a “Greater Bulgaria” with the capture of the northern coast of the Aegean Sea with Thessaloniki, all of Macedonia and Dobrudja up to the mouth of the Danube, with access to the Sea of Marmara. As a result, the Slavic power, most of whose population sympathized with the Russians, began to fight on the side of Germany and Austria. Bulgaria's entry into the war on the side of the Central Powers predetermined the defeat of Serbia.
Background. From Liberation to the Second Balkan War
The Russian army gave Bulgaria freedom from the Ottoman yoke. Following the results of the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878. Bulgaria, with its center in Sofia, was declared an autonomous principality, effectively becoming an independent state. However, a significant part of historical Bulgaria is the Bulgarian lands south of the Balkans (Eastern Rumelia with its center in Philippopolis); and Macedonia - the lands to the Adriatic and the Aegean Sea, remained with the Ottoman Empire. This did not suit Sofia. The Bulgarian leadership set a course for the unification of Bulgaria and Rumelia. At the same time, St. Petersburg did not want to “rock the boat” in the Balkans and did not support Sofia. Therefore, Sofia gradually began to look for allies in the West.
As a result of a popular uprising in Eastern Rumelia on September 8, 1885, its unification with Bulgaria was proclaimed in Philippopolis (Plovdiv). This event triggered the Bulgarian crisis. Vienna, fearing the emergence of a powerful Slavic power in the Balkans that would be oriented towards Russia, pushed Serbia to enter into a war with the still fragile principality of Bulgaria, promising Serbia territorial acquisitions in the Western Balkans. Serbia, in order to prevent the strengthening of Bulgaria and having a number of territorial disputes with the Bulgarians, declared war on Bulgaria. Serbia hoped that Türkiye would support it. But the Ottomans were afraid of pressure from the great powers, especially Russia, and did not enter the war. The Serbs underestimated the enemy and were defeated. Only the intervention of Austria-Hungary, which warned Bulgaria that if the Bulgarian army did not retreat, then Austria would intervene in the war, stopped the Bulgarian offensive. In February 1886, a peace treaty was signed in Bucharest; no territorial changes were made. However, the great powers accepted the unification of Bulgaria. At the same time, Sofia was very offended by Russia.
In Sofia itself, a pro-Russian coup took place and Prince Alexander, who supported the course of unifying Bulgaria and was oriented toward Austria, was overthrown. A man who was also not a supporter of Russia was again chosen as the new prince - Prince Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, a protege of Austria-Hungary. Ferdinand claimed Bulgaria's leadership in the Balkans, considering it the main contender for the European inheritance of the Ottoman Empire, which irritated Serbia and Russia. Therefore, he relied on the support of Austria and Germany.
Thus, Bulgaria met the 20th century as a completely different country than after liberation from the Turkish yoke. The struggle between Russophobes and Russophiles in the Bulgarian elite ended in victory for the Russophobes. Prince Ferdinand I established a “personal regime” based on fear and corruption. Russophobia even affected the sacred memory of the national liberation movement of 1876-1878 for Bulgarians. The temple-monument of St. Alexander Nevsky, built in 1912 in honor of Russian soldiers-liberators and standing unconsecrated for three years, was renamed by government decree in 1915 into the Cathedral Church of Saints Equal-to-the-Apostles Cyril and Methodius with the following argument: “The name of Alexander Nevsky ... never did not meet the people’s aspirations and ideals.”
The Treaty of Berlin in 1878 granted Bulgaria the status of a protectorate of the Ottoman Empire. Although in reality the country conducted its own foreign policy and was no longer subordinate to Istanbul for a long time, the status of a dependent state infringed on the national pride of the Bulgarians. After a coup took place in Turkey on July 11, 1908 and the government of the Young Turks came to power, Sofia decided that the time had come to shed the formal status of a dependent territory. Bulgaria has clearly shown that it wants complete independence. In response, the Ottoman Empire recalled its ambassador from Sofia. The Balkans were again on the brink of war.
In September 1908, several secret meetings between Ferdinand I and the Austrian Emperor Franz Joseph took place in Sofia. Vienna supported Sofia's position, since at that time she was preparing for the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and she needed to distract Russia. On September 22, 1908, a solemn ceremony took place to proclaim a new state - the Kingdom of Bulgaria. Ferdinand was declared king.
Despite a number of severe defeats for the Ottoman Empire, it still had large possessions in the Balkans, where millions of Bulgarians, Serbs and Greeks lived. Opponents of the Ottoman Empire decided to unite in order to finally oust Turkey from Europe and restore the integrity of their territories. Bulgaria, Serbia and Greece wanted to include historical lands and, moreover, achieve the greatest expansion of the borders of their powers (the “Great Greece”, “Great Serbia” and “Great Bulgaria” projects). These projects conflicted with each other, since Bulgaria and Greece jointly laid claim to Thrace; Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria - to Macedonia, Serbia - to the Adriatic Sea. Greece, Serbia and Montenegro were planning to partition Albania. However, for now they had a common enemy - Türkiye. Alone, neither Bulgaria, nor Serbia, nor Greece could resist the Ottoman Empire, which, despite its decline, still remained a great power with a large army. In March 1912, an agreement was signed between Serbia and Bulgaria to create a defensive alliance. Greece joined the union in May. Later, Montenegro and Romania signed a union treaty.
On October 8, 1912, the First Balkan War began. In May 1913, the war ended with the complete victory of the Balkan allies over the Ottoman Empire. According to the London Peace Treaty, Bulgaria acquired the province of Thrace with access to the Aegean Sea, as well as part of Macedonia. The First Balkan War allowed Bulgaria to create a fairly strong army with modern artillery and the first aviation detachment. The young Bulgarian industry was actively developing. Tsar Ferdinand was generally open to everything new and tried to develop the country.
The London Treaty opened the way to a new war. The Ottoman Empire abandoned most of its possessions in Europe in favor of the Balkan Union, but the member countries of the union had to divide the conquered territories themselves, without foreign mediation. None of the founding states of the Balkan Union was fully satisfied with the London Agreement and the result of the war. Serbia did not gain access to the Adriatic due to the formation of the new state of Albania, Montenegro did not occupy Shkoder, Greece did not annex Thrace and part of Albania. Bulgaria was dissatisfied with the Serbian claims to Macedonia. There were a lot of territories where Bulgarians lived mixed with Romanians, Serbs or Greeks. There was a dispute about the “Macedonians”; the Serbs considered them Serbs, the Bulgarians considered them Bulgarians. In Greece, Macedonia was considered part of ancient Greece. The division of the spoils led to a new war.
The war did not start over Albania, since the new independent state found itself under the protectorate of the great powers (primarily Austria-Hungary and Italy). Therefore, the main stumbling block was Macedonia and Thrace. Macedonia was claimed by Bulgaria and Serbia, Thrace was claimed by Greece and Bulgaria. Germany and Austria-Hungary played a major role in the outbreak of the war, who wanted to destroy the Balkan Union and, on the eve of a great war in Europe, lure its participants into their camp. German and Austrian diplomats in Belgrade persuaded the Serbian king to go to war with Bulgaria and Greece. They say that since Serbia was unable to gain access to the Adriatic, it can compensate for this by capturing Macedonia and Thessaloniki. Thus, Serbia would have access to the Aegean Sea. In Sofia, envoys from Vienna and Berlin said the same thing, but to Tsar Ferdinand. Austria-Hungary promised Bulgaria support in the Macedonian issue.
As a result, Serbia began to prepare for war and entered into an anti-Bulgarian alliance with Greece, which did not want the strengthening of Bulgaria and already had a common border with Serbia. Montenegro has become Serbia's traditional ally. British diplomat George Buchanan said about the outbreak of war: “Bulgaria was responsible for the opening of hostilities; Greece and Serbia well deserved the charge of deliberate provocation.” Indeed, it was an unjust war; all participants were, to one degree or another, aggressors.
In the summer of 1913, Bulgaria started the war, hoping for the complete capture of Macedonia. The Bulgarians were initially successful, but were then stopped. The Serbian-Greek troops recovered from the first unexpected blow and launched a counteroffensive. In addition, Romania (which laid claim to lands in Southern Dobruja) and Turkey decided to take advantage of the opportunity. They opposed Bulgaria. There was almost no resistance to the Romanian troops, since all the Bulgarian forces were located far in the west of the country - on the Serbian-Bulgarian and Greek-Bulgarian fronts. The Turks captured Eastern Thrace and Adrianople. Bulgaria suffered a complete defeat.
On August 10, 1913, the Bucharest Peace Treaty was signed. Bulgaria, as the losing side in the war, lost almost all the territories captured during the First Balkan War and, in addition, Southern Dobruja, which Romania received. On September 29, 1913, the Treaty of Constantinople was signed. The Ottoman Empire returned part of Eastern Thrace and the city of Adrianople (Edirne).
It is clear that Sofia was dissatisfied with this outcome of the war and wanted revenge. It is believed that the Bulgarian Tsar Ferdinand I, after signing the treaty, said the phrase: “My revenge will be terrible.” Among the losers was also Russia, which suffered a serious diplomatic defeat in the Balkans. The Slavic “brothers” carried out a massacre to the delight of Germany and Austria. The Balkan knot was not unraveled, but only added new reasons for the big war. So Serbia radicalized on the wave of victory. In Belgrade they dreamed of a “Greater Serbia”, which would include the lands of the now Austro-Hungarian Empire. In Vienna they were very concerned and were looking for an opportunity to “neutralize” Serbia.” Revanchist Bulgaria dreamed of restoring the borders of May 1913, for which it was necessary to break up Serbia. In addition, the Bulgarians had territorial claims to Romania, Greece and Turkey.
Bulgarian Tsar Ferdinand I
On the way to war
The defeat in the Second Balkan War was regarded in Bulgaria as the "First National Catastrophe". Vasil Radoslavov became Prime Minister, who in foreign policy was guided by Germany and Austria-Hungary. Ferdinand I supported this course. In Bulgaria, a “cleansing” was carried out among pro-Russian generals. Thus, the former chief of the Bulgarian General Staff, commander of the Bulgarian army during the First Balkan War and assistant commander-in-chief during the Second Balkan War, General Radko-Dmitriev was sent as envoy to Russia (and during the First World War he will fight on the side of Russia).
The ideas of revanchism were actively cultivated in Bulgarian society. Many leading newspapers carried out anti-Serbian and anti-Russian propaganda and were pro-German. The press propagated the idea that Bulgaria lost the war because the Entente countries (including Russia) supported Bulgaria's enemies - Greece and Serbia. Therefore, in a future confrontation, in order to regain lost territories, it is necessary to support Germany. Politicians often openly declared the need for revenge. In addition, the country was flooded with forced refugees from Macedonia, Thrace, and Southern Dobruja, which increased the discontent of the people and the positions of the revanchists. However, not everyone in Bulgaria believed that their country should get involved in a world war. In Bulgaria there were still many supporters of an alliance with Russia.
Before the outbreak of the First World War, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, frightened by the growing power of Serbia, showed the greatest interest in Bulgaria. Bulgaria also considered Serbia its main enemy, which could lead to the formalization of the Austro-Bulgarian union. However, at this time Berlin did not share Vienna's aspirations. Kaiser Wilhelm II believed that Bulgaria had suffered a severe defeat and its army had lost its combat effectiveness. Germany was more interested in Romania and Greece. Therefore, before the start of the war, Berlin did not give Vienna permission for active actions against Bulgaria for a long time. Russia at this time unsuccessfully tried to restore its influence in Bulgaria. St. Petersburg offered to transfer the important port of Kavala on the Aegean coast to Bulgaria, but France and Great Britain did not support this initiative. All attempts by Russian diplomats to restore the Balkan Union failed.
Finance played a major role in Bulgaria's behavior. During the Balkan Wars, Sofia fell into large debts. The defeat led to serious problems in the economy and finances. At the end of 1913, the Bulgarians began to look for the possibility of obtaining a large loan abroad. Envoys were sent to Paris, Vienna and Berlin. During the negotiations in Paris, the Bulgarians were made to understand that the loan was possible only if the Radoslavov cabinet abandoned the course of rapprochement with Austria-Hungary and Germany. Austria and Germany met Bulgaria halfway.
In mid-June 1914, the Bulgarian leadership decided to enter into an agreement with Austrian and German financiers. Russia and France, in order to disrupt this agreement, sent the Bulgarian government a proposal for a loan of 500 million francs without any political conditions and onerous annexes. However, Sofia, despite the profitability of the French offer, refused it. At the same time, the Bulgarian government hid from the public the fact that France was offering a loan without conditions. As a result, German bankers provided Bulgaria with a loan of 500 million francs. Creditors received the right to build a railway to the Aegean coast, a free concession to operate coal mines, Bulgaria had to spend part of the money on military orders at enterprises in Germany and Austria-Hungary. After the signing of the agreement, German influence on Bulgaria increased significantly.
Head of the Government of Bulgaria Vasil Radoslavov
Bulgaria during the First World War
The Austro-Serbian conflict that began after the Sarajevo murder made Sofia happy. There was hope that this conflict would resolve Bulgarian territorial problems. In addition, the outbreak of the World War increased the importance of Bulgaria for the warring alliances. For each of the two coalitions, the Bulgarian army and resources were of significant importance. At maximum tension, Bulgaria could field an army of half a million. Bulgaria occupied an important military-strategic position in the region: the country had access to the Black and Aegean Seas, and had a common border with all significant Balkan states. For Germany and Austria, Bulgaria was important as a strategic link to Turkey and the Middle East. Bulgaria, in the opinion of Vienna and Berlin, could neutralize Romania and Greece and help in the defeat of Serbia. Especially after the failure of the Austrian army's attempts to defeat Serbia during the 1914 campaign. For Atlanta, Bulgaria was a corridor connecting Serbia with Russia. The transition of Bulgaria to the side of the Entente could lead to a severance of ties between Germany, Austria and Turkey, increase pressure on the Ottoman Empire and strengthen Serbia.
On August 1, 1914, Radoslavov announced in the People's Assembly the determination of the Bulgarian government to maintain neutrality until the very end of the war. In fact, it was a deception. Sofia began bargaining with Berlin and Vienna. Ferdinand and the Bulgarian government did not immediately intend to rush into battle. They used “wise neutrality” to negotiate the highest price for joining the warrior and see which side the military fortunes leaned on. In addition, Bulgaria was exhausted by previous wars; it was necessary to restore strength. And it was not easy to raise the Bulgarian people to a new war. In addition, neighboring Greece and Romania took a neutral position.
On August 5, 1914, the Russian envoy in Sofia, A. Savinsky, presented Tsar Ferdinand with a document in which Bulgaria was invited to join Russia in the name of “... the implementation of people's ideals.” Sofia declared strict neutrality. It must be said that the Entente powers had good trump cards - they could tempt Sofia with the prospects of a possible division of the Turkish inheritance. However, the weakness of the unity of the positions of France, Russia and England affected. Britain quite often refrained from actively supporting the position of the representatives of Russia and France in Sofia.
In this regard, it was easier for Vienna and Berlin to develop a common position and jointly put pressure on Turkey to make concessions to Bulgaria. True, they had to take a restrained position towards the Balkan countries, which so far remained neutral, so as not to push them into the Entente camp. As a result, the struggle for Bulgaria dragged on.
On November 1, 1914, Bulgaria officially confirmed its neutrality after the Ottoman Empire entered the war. Sofia took into account the successes of Serbia in the fight against Austria-Hungary, the neutrality of Greece and Romania, and the successes of the Russian army in Austrian Galicia. Moreover, Bulgarian society was not enthusiastic about Bulgaria's possible participation in the European conflict. At the same time, the Bulgarian government was still hostile to Russia. Petersburg’s request to allow Russian transports with grain for Serbia to pass through Bulgarian territory was categorically rejected by Radoslavov’s cabinet. In turn, transports from Germany and Austria-Hungary followed the territory of Bulgaria to the Ottoman Empire.
At the initiative of Russia, Entente diplomats began discussing the size of possible territorial increments for Bulgaria, which could be used to lure Sofia into their camp. In addition to Turkish territories, the Entente tried to persuade Serbia to cede part of Macedonia. Traditional British-Russian contradictions in the Balkans and in the Straits area, as well as the intransigence of Serbia, for a long time did not allow us to develop a common position on this issue. Only on December 7, 1914, Sofia was given a document stating that if Bulgaria remained neutral in the war, it would receive minor territorial compensation in Eastern Thrace at the expense of Turkey. If Bulgaria entered the war on the side of the Entente, then it was promised an expansion of territorial increments in Eastern Thrace. Sofia promised to maintain neutrality, although she continued active negotiations with Berlin and Vienna.
At the end of 1914, the Bulgarian government was in no hurry to enter the war. The failure of the German offensive in France, the successes of Russian troops in the fight against Austria-Hungary and the reluctance of the people to fight had a sobering effect on the highest ruling circles of the Third Bulgarian Kingdom. At the same time, right-wing political forces announced “the leading role of Bulgaria in the Balkans” and plans to create “Great Bulgaria”, with access to three seas - the Black, Marmara and Aegean.
In January 1915, Austria-Hungary and Germany, despite the severity of the war, provided new loans to Bulgaria in the amount of 150 million marks. At the same time, the Germans and Austrians financed Bulgarian newspapers, bribed politicians and provided financial assistance to pro-German political forces (the same policy was pursued in Greece). Therefore, in February 1915, Sofia again allowed the transit of goods from Austria and Germany to Turkey. Bulgaria made exciting offers at the expense of Turkey, the Turks were offered large compensation at the expense of Serbia.
The start of the Dardanelles operation contributed to the increased interest of Britain and France in Bulgaria. The Entente powers began funding newspapers and politicians in Bulgaria, following the example of Austria-Hungary and Germany. Envoys were sent to Sofia to try to convince Ferdinand of the benefits of an alliance with the Entente. Bulgaria was offered concessions at the expense of Turkey, access to the Sea of Marmara at Rodosto, the opportunity to return part of Dobruzhda (Romanian possessions), indicating that Romania in return would receive after the war part of Hungary, whose population is Romanian. However, Bulgaria demanded another part of Serbian and Greek Macedonia with the port of Kavala.
The “Bulgarian bride” still had doubts. The Bulgarian government was ready to support the Central Powers. However, in Bulgaria they were still afraid of Russia. At the same time, Sofia was irritated by Russia’s plans to gain Constantinople. Therefore, the bargaining continued.
Bulgarian units go to war
Bulgaria decides to enter the war
In the spring of 1915, Bulgaria continued to maintain “wise neutrality,” which enabled the politicians of this country to consistently sell themselves to either Germany or the Entente. Waiting and lavishing declarations of benevolent neutrality, Bulgarian politicians, like the Greeks, scattered assurances of friendship towards the Anglo-French, and themselves leaned towards Germany. As a result, England and France, confident that Bulgaria would not act against the Entente, did not force negotiations.
Only on May 29, 1915, representatives of the Entente handed over to the Bulgarian government a document in which Bulgaria was again invited to take the side of England, France and Russia. The Entente countries guaranteed the return of Eastern Thrace to the Bulgarian kingdom at the expense of Turkey. The Allies promised to begin negotiations with Belgrade, Athens and Bucharest on the transfer to Bulgaria of some parts of Vardar Macedonia, Aegean Macedonia and Southern Dobruja. On June 14, the Bulgarian government proposed to clearly define the boundaries of the territories in Vardar and Aegean Macedonia, which should become part of Bulgaria. However, the Entente was unable to do this. If Serbia, forced by military circumstances, was ready to make concessions, then Greece and Romania were not willing to concede. In addition, among representatives of France, Great Britain and Russia there was still no unity on ways to involve Bulgaria in the war on the side of the Entente powers.
Germany and Austria-Hungary were more generous. They unequivocally stated that if Bulgaria came out on their side, Sofia would receive all of Macedonia, Thrace, as well as Southern Dobruja (if Romania entered the war on the side of the Entente). In addition, Germany pledged to provide Bulgaria with a war loan in the amount of 500 million marks. Germany also managed to reconcile Bulgaria and Turkey. The Germans prepared an agreement that satisfied the Bulgarians at the expense of Turkey. In addition, the situation on the fronts was unfavorable for the Entente. England and France failed the Dardanelles operation. Russia suffered a heavy defeat on the Eastern Front, lost Galicia and Russian Poland. Anglo-French troops behaved passively on the Western Front. This convinced the Bulgarian leadership that the Central Powers were gaining the upper hand in the war, and that the time had come to enter the war and get their share of the spoils.
On September 6, 1915, a convention was signed between Germany and Bulgaria in the capital of Bulgaria, Sofia. Bulgaria was represented by the head of government Vasil Radoslavov, and Germany by Georg Michaelis. According to the terms of the convention. Germany and Austria-Hungary each had to field six infantry divisions within 30 days, and Bulgaria - four divisions within 35 days for action against Serbia. General command of the Austro-German-Bulgarian group was to be taken by German General August von Mackensen. In addition, it was planned to station a mixed German infantry brigade in Varna and Burgas and send submarines to the Black Sea. Bulgaria pledged to mobilize four divisions by September 21 and begin operations in Serbian Macedonia on October 11. Germany pledged to provide financial and material support to Bulgaria. Bulgaria opened its territory for the transit of goods from the Ottoman Empire to Germany and vice versa.
Only when Bulgaria had already determined its position did the Entente powers become alarmed and began to make more tempting offers. Thus, on September 15, 1915, the Entente offered Bulgaria the territory of Macedonia, which was transferred to Serbia following the 1913 war. The Serbs, having learned about the preparation of a large offensive operation by Austro-German troops, also became excited and agreed to all the sacrifices that Britain and France offered to make. However, the proposals, firstly, were late, and secondly, they were significantly less profitable than those made by the Central Powers. Therefore, the Bulgarian government responded, in order to delay time, that it would refer this issue to the consideration of the Bulgarian Tsar Ferdinand. Although an alliance with Germany had already been concluded, and the process of mobilizing the Bulgarian army was underway.
Belgrade asked in vain for permission to attack Bulgaria before it completed mobilization, but the French still hoped for the success of the negotiations and the Serbs were refused. As a result, Bulgaria calmly carried out its mobilization, continuing to assure the Entente of its neutrality. The Russians put an end to this stupid situation by sending an ultimatum to Sofia on October 3, 1915, demanding that German and Austrian officers be removed from the Bulgarian army within 24 hours and an end to the concentration of Bulgarian troops on the Serbian border. The result of this ultimatum was the issuance of their passports to the Russian, British and French representatives on October 4, 1915.
On October 14, Bulgaria declared war on Serbia. The Bulgarians had no complaints either against Russia, or against England and France, but, based on the principle of solidarity, they themselves declared war on Bulgaria in the following days. October 15 300 thousand The Bulgarian army crossed the border with Serbia along its entire length. The defeat of Serbia was a foregone conclusion - the country had been at war with the Austro-Hungarian Empire for more than a year and was exhausted by the war and blockade. In addition, a few days earlier, German units had already entered Belgrade. Greece and Romania maintained their neutrality.
Bulgarian cavalry in a captured Serbian city. October 22, 1915
Ctrl Enter
Noticed osh Y bku Select text and click Ctrl+Enter
Photos from open sources
If it is possible to apply the concept of “black ingratitude” in such an openly cynical area as geopolitics, then Bulgaria can undoubtedly serve as such a standard (at least in relation to Russia). Liberated (and repeatedly!) from foreign occupation at the cost of many Russian lives, saved by Russian blood from genocide, striving to join the USSR “be it as a carcass or as a scarecrow,” “brotherly” Bulgaria today is gladly ready to participate in any anti-Russian abomination.
Little Bulgaria, which achieved great “prosperity” in the European Union, was allowed to “steer” a little. That is, to chair the Council of Europe for six months from January 1, 2018. And what did the permanent representative of this country to the EU, Ambassador Dimiter Tsantchev, note at the very beginning of this presidency? Vivid Russophobic statements...
When asked what policy the Bulgarian presidency will continue regarding sanctions for the Russian Federation (especially considering that the president of the state speaks out about the advisability of lifting economic sanctions from the Russian Federation), Tsantchev immediately answered as an exemplary “European pioneer”:
“We will adhere to the five principles regarding relations with Russia, which were approved by the Council in March 2016. An important condition for changing the EU’s relations with Russia is the full implementation of the Minsk agreements by all parties to the conflict. Now this condition has not been met!”
And then he continued to “scratch”, as usual, according to the European Union-NATO “cheat sheet”: they say, "...The EU insists that Russia respect international law."(And she, go ahead, doesn’t respect her!), Brussels. one might say, with tender trepidation "...counts on the Normandy format, the implementation of the Minsk agreements..."(What does Russia have to do with it anyway?!), and the stumbling block here is “The withdrawal of heavy weapons from the contact line,” which “is absolutely necessary.”
Tsantchev knows exactly what is going on there in Donbass and who is to blame for it! He knows everything for certain about both heavy weapons and the Minsk agreements. For some reason, the Bulgarian diplomat does not say a word about the role of Ukraine in the constant breakdowns of Minsk. And also that Bulgaria has long been convicted of supplying weapons to the Kyiv junta - precisely the weapons with which it is shooting at Donbass, not caring about any and all “agreements” and “contact groups!” Obviously, Mr. Tsantchev professes the principle that is very popular in Western diplomacy today: “your own doesn’t stink”...
No less clearly than strange amnesia, this “diplomat” demonstrates refined hypocrisy - if you listen to him, then Bulgaria is ready to “work to improve relations with the Russian Federation if the situation changes.” But he laments. only, without shedding crocodile tears, Tsantchev, “there are no conditions for this yet”... what a pity! How can we live without her, without such a “brotherly” Bulgaria?!
So that no one has any doubts that these are not situational and spontaneous statements, but precisely the POSITION of Bulgaria at the state level, let me briefly recall the history of this country’s participation in the sanctions “movement” against Russia. Remind the main milestones, so to speak. In February 2015, Bulgarian Foreign Minister Daniel Mitov said:
“Sanctions are not just the position of the EU, it is also the position of Bulgaria. We defend international law - no one can annex the territory of another country, no one can destabilize a neighbor through military means. We will continue to focus on sanctions as the only instrument of European influence on Russian policy. "
By the way, then this figure clarified that sanctions are being introduced by the European Union, and Bulgaria in particular... “so as not to fight with Russia”! Yes, Bulgaria. falling with all its might on Russia... it would be interesting to see!
In March 2015, the same Mitov, continuing to jump out of his own trousers, already said that Bulgaria was ready to “broaden and deepen” anti-Russian sanctions:
"Sanctions are the only tool that the European Union and the transatlantic community have at the moment. Of course, we are ready to react accordingly if the peace agreement in Donbass is violated."
It is not for nothing that in 2016 Bulgaria “received” gratitude from the main executioner of Ukraine and Donbass - Poroshenko. On this occasion, the press secretary of the president of the “nnezadezhnaya” Svyatoslav Tsegolko even tweeted: “President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko thanked Bulgaria for supporting the extension of sanctions against the Russian Federation for failure to comply with Minsk.
And here are the words of Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borisov, again spoken in 2016:
“We all decided to leave sanctions against Russia in force until the Minsk agreements are implemented. And it will be possible to talk about new sanctions against Russia only if the bombing in Syria, which is killing civilians, does not stop.”
That is, the topic of Donbass was not enough for this clown - he decided to “remember Russia” and also Syria. Probably the Syrians really irritate the Bulgarians - in terms of gratitude (elementary, human) to the Russian soldiers who give their lives for their freedom, these residents of the Middle East can give our “Slavic brothers” from Bulgaria not even a hundred, but a hundred thousand points in advance.
By the way, for their “fresh” Russophobia, the Bulgarians were also congratulated by the ghoul Poroshenko (the height of shame for normal people!):
“I congratulate our reliable partner - Bulgaria - on the start of the first presidency of the Council of the European Union in the history of this state. I look forward to progress in our ambitious agenda: deepening the political association and economic integration of Ukraine with the EU, as well as strengthening EU support in restoring the territorial integrity of Ukraine. Our strength lies in unity!"- Poroshenko wrote.
Well, there is absolutely nothing surprising here. Let me remind you, in case anyone has forgotten, that in two World Wars Bulgaria fought against Russia and the USSR. Well, “fought” - that’s it. Of course, it is said loudly, but officially it belonged to military alliances hostile to us. The blood of Russian soldiers shed at Shipka and Plevna, the soulful song about Alyosha standing on the mound - “Bulgaria's Russian soldier” - all this has long been forgotten and trampled into the dirt for the sake of a momentary and extremely dubious political situation.
The only thing that needs to be done about all this is to firmly remember the REAL attitude of the Bulgarians towards the Russians. So that again, having forgotten, you won’t feel emotional when they once again come running to ask to be “brothers”.
Alexander Neukropny specially for Planet Today
12/11/2014 Russia announced the termination of construction of the South Stream gas pipeline. The reason is the freezing of the project by Bulgaria, into whose territory the gas pipeline was supposed to exit from the Black Sea. This summer, Bulgaria joined economic sanctions against Russia, and part of these sanctions was the boycott of the construction of South Stream.
It was clear that President Vladimir Putin was very irritated by the position of the Bulgarian side. According to him, the Bulgarian rulers spent a long time convincing Moscow that this project would never be frozen, despite any pressure from Western countries unfriendly to Russia - this is understandable, because the project promised enormous benefits for Bulgaria, estimated in revenues of 400 - 700 million euros per year. year. However, in reality the Bulgarians behaved completely differently.
As soon as relations between Russia and the European Union worsened due to the events in Ukraine, as soon as the American Russophobe Senator Dojon McCain visited Sofia, the Bulgarians, like petty and vile mongrels, immediately raised an anti-Russian howl and quickly curtailed the construction of the gas pipeline. Not only that, they also demonstratively dismantled the symbolic pipes, which last year were solemnly installed in the place where the pipeline was supposed to begin its journey across Bulgarian soil. These pipes were cut and taken to a landfill.
It is not for nothing that Vladimir Putin, when he announced the liquidation of the project, loudly doubted that Bulgaria is a truly sovereign country, capable of making independent and beneficial decisions, primarily for itself...
Did the Russian soldier die for them in vain?
However, for specialists in this country, nothing out of the ordinary happened. In particular, Doctor of Historical Sciences Andrei Ivanov told Internet readers that what happened with South Stream has its own long-standing, historically established logic. In particular, Ivanov notes:
“Almost every book, article or brochure dedicated to Bulgaria reports on many years of close friendly ties between our two fraternal countries. But, despite this popular opinion, which was especially firmly established in the late Soviet period, in reality relations between Russia and Bulgaria were not always cloudless, and the current crisis is another and clear confirmation of this.”
Ivanov writes that for almost 500 years Bulgaria was under the Ottoman yoke, from which it was liberated by the Russian army during the war with Turkey in 1877-1878. The mood of Russian society at that time was more than Bulgarian-phile; the liberated Bulgarians were seen exclusively as “brothers” who would forever be bound by friendly ties with Russia. Only a few Russian conservatives turned out to be free from these illusions, approaching the Slavic question without excessive sentimentality.
Thus, the outstanding Russian philosopher and diplomat of the 19th century, Konstantin Leontyev, in an article with the characteristic title “Our Bulgarians,” was indignant at the fact that “only the Bulgarians are always right, always oppressed, always unhappy, always meek and sweet, always victims and never oppressors.” ”, and “for some reason all Bulgarian interests were considered directly Russian interests; all enemies of the Bulgarians are our enemies.” Leontyev quite rightly believed that as soon as Ottoman rule on Bulgarian soil was overthrown, the Bulgarians would immediately turn not to Russia, but to Western Europe: “the destructive effect of liberal Europeanism will be much stronger for the Bulgarians.”
Fyodor Dostoevsky was of approximately the same opinion, noting in 1877:
“...According to my inner conviction, the most complete and irresistible, Russia will not, and never has had, such haters, envious people, slanderers and even outright enemies as all these Slavic tribes, as soon as Russia liberates them, and Europe will agree to recognize them as liberated!”
Fyodor Mikhailovich prophetically warned that the “liberated” Slavs (and above all the Bulgarians) would immediately rush into the arms of Europe “and convince themselves that they do not owe Russia the slightest gratitude, on the contrary, that they barely escaped from Russia’s lust for power at the conclusion of peace intervention of the European concert."
“Perhaps for a whole century, or even more, they will continuously tremble for their freedom and fear Russia’s lust for power; they will curry favor with European states, they will slander Russia, gossip about it and intrigue against it,” the great writer predicted and, unfortunately, he was not mistaken...
Relations between Russia and Bulgaria, Professor Ivanov points out, deteriorated already under Emperor Alexander III. There was a reorientation of Bulgaria towards Austria-Hungary, and the Austrian German Ferdinand Coburg was elected as Bulgarian Tsar. As Leontyev and Dostoevsky warned, the good deeds of Russia were very quickly forgotten, and Bulgaria turned into an instrument of intrigue for Austria-Hungary and Germany. At the beginning of the 20th century, Professor P.I. Kovalevsky bitterly admitted that through constant intercession we only achieved “that all these Slavic brothers of ours looked at us as their obligated farm laborers. As soon as someone harms them, Russia should help them out. If it helps, so be it. In gratitude, the same brothers who helped out will kick this stupid Russia..."
Therefore, Bulgaria’s participation on the side of Russia’s enemies during the First World War was literally predetermined. According to Professor Ivanov:
“Maintaining crafty neutrality in 1914, the Bulgarian government provided assistance to Germany, and in October 1915, seeing that the scales began to tip in favor of Berlin, it openly sided with the Germans, Austrians and its yesterday’s oppressors the Turks, delivering a treacherous blow to the back of the allied Russia Serbia. This caused a violent outburst of indignation in Russian society. “Cunning Bulgarian foxes”, “Balkan adventurers”, “German serfs”, “shame of the Slavic family” - these and other nicknames were awarded to the newspapers of yesterday’s “brothers” in 1915. What was especially indignant was that Bulgaria not only opposed its liberator Russia, but that the Bulgarians found themselves in an alliance with Turkey, “which for five centuries kept her in humiliating slavery, beat her population, raped her women, desecrated her temples.” .
Bulgaria was among Russia’s opponents during the Second World War. Refusing to accept the USSR's proposal to conclude a Soviet-Bulgarian treaty of friendship and mutual assistance, Sofia concluded a protocol on the deployment of German troops on Bulgarian territory in 1941, and then joined the Berlin Pact. Only the successes of the Soviet army, which entered the territory of Bulgaria in September 1944, forced it to leave the war and, after a coup d’etat, become an ally of the USSR.”
It must be said that the time Bulgaria was in the socialist camp became the time of real prosperity for this country - the standard of living there was considered one of the highest in Europe. Experts indicate:
“The USSR was very active in helping the Bulgarian economy. Thus, in the period 1970-1982, due to the expansion of trade with the USSR, more than 54% of the total increase in Bulgaria’s foreign trade turnover was achieved. Due to supplies from the USSR, Bulgaria's needs for natural gas and iron ore were fully satisfied, 98% for electricity and coal, 94.6% for timber, etc. The entire scientific and technical potential of Bulgaria was created with the decisive participation of the USSR. Bulgaria has constantly had the opportunity to use the experience and achievements of our science and technology and introduce them into its economy.”
But as soon as the Soviet Union had problems, the Bulgarians traditionally immediately went over to the side of the enemies of Russia...
In today's Bulgaria there is a real revaluation of values. As Russian researcher Oksana Petrovskaya writes in one of her articles, in the 90s of the last century the history of Bulgarian-Soviet relations began to be presented exclusively in a negative way. Anti-Sovietism gradually turned into Russophobia. Russia’s role in the liberation of the Bulgarians from the Turkish yoke also underwent “rethinking”:
“Modern Bulgarian historians are making attempts to shift the blame for the dismemberment of Bulgarian lands at the Berlin Congress of 1878, which allegedly saved Bulgaria “from the bear hug of the liberators,” onto Russian diplomacy. There were even regrets expressed about the fact that it was the USSR that liberated Bulgaria from fascism, and the question of Soviet responsibility before the country was even raised.
In the wake of Russophobia, the attitude of Bulgarians towards their Slavic identity began to change. In the process of active searches in their past for what supposedly prevents the Bulgarians from becoming Europeans, even a version of the ethnogenesis of this people and their statehood in the early Middle Ages appeared. The main goal of this version is to prove the non-Slavic origin of the Bulgarians. At the same time, the “test for Europeanness” demanded reconciliation with the “Turkish yoke”, replacing this term with a tolerant “Ottoman presence”. The topic of the fight against the Turkish conquerors has been removed from the media today, and among the “advanced to Europe” public there was even an initiative to erect a monument to the Turkish soldiers who fell on Shipka” (?!).
I will add that Bulgaria is one of those vile places in Europe where they regularly mock monuments to Soviet soldiers, painting them in clown colors (see the picture to our text). Local authorities try not to notice these “incidents”...
This is not the power of the people
It is noteworthy that during the period of its stay in the EU, Bulgaria itself dropped almost to the level of Africa in terms of its economic level. Moreover, today there is an urgent question about the future of the Bulgarians as a nation! Here is one typical testimony that is now very popular among Internet users:
Do you want to know what life is like within the European Union? Go to Bulgaria. Just not on vacation to walk along the embankment from restaurant to restaurant. This is a mask - this is a facade. Travel a little, a few tens of kilometers, inland. You will see the ruins of factories, you will see the poverty that reigns around. You will see an economy crushed by the European Union, you will see people who are trying in vain to find a job...
What you won’t see are happy young people, since some of them left temporarily to work, while others left forever. It seems that there is freedom of speech, and you can scold the government, but not too much - so that there are no problems at work. And if, God forbid, you still use the words Russia, Putin, mark the time: in a week you will receive a “wolf ticket” to nowhere. They will immediately brand you a spy, an accomplice, and accuse you of all mortal sins.
It seems that the borders are open - you can go on vacation to Western Europe, but who will go? Unemployment at 18%, which the authorities cheerfully report, is a blatant lie! In reality, twice as much! At least one in four able-bodied people cannot find a job. Those who can leave, since the borders are open. But who are they there? Maybe managers, technologists, engineers?.. No, they are unskilled workers, dishwashers. Guest workers! This is what the European Union gave us - the opportunity to leave without a visa to engage in unskilled labor.
Yes, we joined the European Union, but the European Union did not join us. We still have the same corrupt government, the same corrupt officials, coupled with strict standards, rules, and methods of the European Union. We found ourselves destroyed, crushed by the European Union. Yes, they give us some tranches for development, but no one knows where this money goes. Everything ends up in the pockets of officials, and even if it gets somewhere, it is only for “their own” and for “their” projects.
The incompetent government obtained loans from the IMF, which began to dictate its new economic policy. Harsh conditions were imposed that ultimately destroyed the country's economy.
The entire industry was methodically destroyed, everything possible was privatized for next to nothing and cut into scrap metal. Agriculture was completely destroyed. The higher education system has been destroyed. There has been a proliferation of universities that issue higher education diplomas for a bribe. All we can offer for export is cheap unskilled labor.
In Bulgaria, the population decreased from 9 million to 7. Young couples stopped having children. Those who can leave. There is a generation gap. A huge number of people work in the West. Children are raised by grandparents. Children don't see their parents. This is the price that Bulgaria paid for the EU.
We wanted a different life, but not like this. We were cruelly deceived. We were dragged into this EU without asking the people. We are being bombarded with Western propaganda. We hoped that by joining the EU we would live better. No! Life has become unbearable!
Joining the EU was beneficial to a handful of oligarchs who made money by squandering the national economy. Very few people live well in Bulgaria. Most barely make ends meet...
The young, talented and stubborn pack their things and run away without looking back, leaving the old people to die in the villages. The north of the country, where unemployment is (according to official data) 60% (!), is depopulated. Rare tourists compare it with the Chernobyl zone. Over the past 20 years, 2 million people have left the country. The country has lost more people than in two world wars, but this is not the limit. The economic crisis coincided with a demographic catastrophe of terrifying proportions. By 2060, the population of Bulgaria will be only 5 million people, of which 1.5 million are Roma. The Bulgarians, as a single people with an ancient Orthodox culture, are doomed.
“Last year only 62,000 children were born,” says TV journalist Ivo Hristov. — This is the lowest birth rate since 1945. Bulgaria is melting faster than any European country. Only Estonia has a worse result. In its entire 1,300-year history, our country has never been so close to collapse."
In the early 90s, when the USSR empire was collapsing and the Eastern European bloc was falling apart, CAPITAL watched the process closely and triumphantly with cold, greedy eyes. New exciting prospects opened up for the monopolies. First, the financial crisis was delayed for as long as twenty years. Secondly, the collapse of the Iron Curtain opened the way to global domination of the oligarchy under the guise of “globalization” and “free market” (the so-called “Washington Consensus” of 1989).
The owners of transnational corporations rubbed their hands with pleasure and anticipation - before them lay vast, defenseless territories with a naive population, fooled by slogans about freedom. The plan of the oligarchy was simple, like the plan of some conqueror like Attila: the territory was to be seized, conquered, humiliated, ruined, sucked dry of all the juice, and the population was to be reduced to eternal slavery. Yes, the plan was simple, but the methods were much more sophisticated...
In the early 90s, American economic advisers and consultants arrived in droves to the CIS countries, Eastern Europe and Russia. These were well-mannered and impeccably dressed, energetic people of mature years, in their views they were all convinced libertarians of the extreme right. (Libertarianism in economics is one of the most inhumane theories that completely denies the social state, as well as any state intervention in the economy. In essence, this is economic Darwinism: let the strong survive in free competition and the weak perish. The state should refuse to finance health care and education, and at the same time from taxation, and pension funds should only become private. If you haven’t saved for yourself for old age, then blame yourself. And if you are poor and sick, cry at the doors of charitable funds. Your children are only your problem , don’t fool the state.)
In the decent countries of Western Europe with a strong social policy, libertarians at that time were not allowed anywhere near public administration (they would have been trampled by militant trade unions), but in the ex-socialist land they were held in high esteem by unafraid idiots. They weren’t just applauded and stared at, they were also paid for consultations. Local politicians stood before them on their hind legs, fascinated by phrases about “market reforms”...
“Electricity distribution networks were sold to the Czechs, Austrians and Germans, the French got water supply and sewerage, and copper ore, according to rumors, went to the Belgians,” says one of the nationalist leaders, Angel Jambazki. — These were the secret conditions for Bulgaria’s accession to the EU. All the old powers bargained to sell their consent at a higher price. Thanks to betrayal at the very top, Bulgaria was put under the hammer.”
“Since the early 2000s, Bulgaria has lived like a merry widow after the death of her rich husband,” says journalist Valery Naydenov. “She sells houses, lands, all her husband’s property and for five years lives much better than before. And then the stupid woman remains on the beans and begs on the porch. Until 2005, Bulgaria demonstrated excellent GDP growth (all sales transactions were taken into account). That is, we sold off national assets, and this was reflected in the GDP as our income. Everyone was happy: oh, what foreign investment! The authorities destroyed national economic science and dispersed serious institutions. And all research commissioned by the government and paid for by taxpayers is carried out by pro-Western NGOs."
What is today's Bulgaria? This is a sacrificial pawn on a chessboard. Her role is to be a blocking pawn for all Russian projects. We serve other people's interests, spoil relations with Russia and lose money for the transit of oil and gas. And American friends pat the Bulgarians on the shoulder and say: “Well done, guys! You have a democracy! One Bulgarian satirist very precisely defined what democracy is: “This is not the power of the people - it is the power of democrats.”
It is obvious that the refusal of South Stream hammered another nail into the coffin of Bulgarian statehood... However, this is a problem for the Bulgarians themselves, and it should never concern us, Russians, ever again.
This week Russia announced it would stop construction of the South Stream gas pipeline. The reason is the freezing of the project by Bulgaria, into whose territory the gas pipeline was supposed to exit from the Black Sea. This summer, Bulgaria joined economic sanctions against Russia, and part of these sanctions was the boycott of the construction of South Stream.
It was clear that President Vladimir Putin was very irritated by the position of the Bulgarian side. According to him, the Bulgarian rulers spent a long time convincing Moscow that this project would never be frozen, despite any pressure from Western countries unfriendly to Russia - this is understandable, because the project promised enormous benefits for Bulgaria, estimated in revenues of 400 - 700 million euros per year. year. However, in reality the Bulgarians behaved completely differently.
As soon as relations between Russia and the European Union worsened due to the events in Ukraine, as soon as the American Russophobe Senator Dojon McCain visited Sofia, the Bulgarians, like petty and vile mongrels, immediately raised an anti-Russian howl and quickly curtailed the construction of the gas pipeline. Not only that, they also demonstratively dismantled the symbolic pipes, which last year were solemnly installed in the place where the pipeline was supposed to begin its journey across Bulgarian soil. These pipes were cut and taken to a landfill.
It is not for nothing that Vladimir Putin, when he announced the liquidation of the project, loudly doubted that Bulgaria is a truly sovereign country, capable of making independent and beneficial decisions, primarily for itself...
Did the Russian soldier die for them in vain?
However, for specialists in this country, nothing out of the ordinary happened. In particular, Doctor of Historical Sciences Andrei Ivanov told Internet readers that what happened with South Stream has its own long-standing, historically established logic. In particular, Ivanov notes:
“Almost every book, article or brochure dedicated to Bulgaria reports on many years of close friendly ties between our two fraternal countries. But, despite this popular opinion, which was especially firmly established in the late Soviet period, in reality relations between Russia and Bulgaria were not always cloudless, and the current crisis is another and clear confirmation of this.”
Ivanov writes that for almost 500 years Bulgaria was under the Ottoman yoke, from which it was liberated by the Russian army during the war with Turkey in 1877–1878. The mood of Russian society at that time was more than Bulgarian-phile; the liberated Bulgarians were seen exclusively as “brothers” who would forever be bound by friendly ties with Russia. Only a few Russian conservatives turned out to be free from these illusions, approaching the Slavic question without excessive sentimentality.
Thus, the outstanding Russian philosopher and diplomat of the 19th century, Konstantin Leontyev, in an article with the characteristic title “Our Bulgarianism”, was indignant at the fact that “Only our Bulgarians are always right, always oppressed, always unhappy, always meek and sweet, always victims and never oppressors,” A “for some reason all Bulgarian interests were considered directly Russian interests; all enemies of the Bulgarians are our enemies.” Leontyev quite rightly believed that as soon as Ottoman rule on Bulgarian soil was overthrown, the Bulgarians would immediately turn not to Russia, but to Western Europe: “The destructive effect of liberal Europeanism will be much stronger on the Bulgarians.”
Fyodor Dostoevsky was of approximately the same opinion, noting in 1877:
“...According to my inner conviction, the most complete and irresistible, Russia will not, and never has had, such haters, envious people, slanderers and even outright enemies as all these Slavic tribes, as soon as Russia liberates them, and Europe will agree to recognize them as liberated!”
Fyodor Mikhailovich prophetically warned that the “liberated” Slavs (and above all the Bulgarians) would immediately rush into the arms of Europe “and they will convince themselves that they do not owe Russia the slightest gratitude, on the contrary, that they were barely saved from Russia’s lust for power when peace was concluded through the intervention of a European concert.”
“Perhaps for a whole century, or even more, they will continuously tremble for their freedom and fear Russia’s lust for power; they will curry favor with European states, they will slander Russia, gossip about it and intrigue against it,”– the great writer predicted and, unfortunately, he was not mistaken...
Relations between Russia and Bulgaria, Professor Ivanov points out, deteriorated already under Emperor Alexander III. There was a reorientation of Bulgaria towards Austria-Hungary, and the Austrian German Ferdinand Coburg was elected as Bulgarian Tsar. As Leontyev and Dostoevsky warned, the good deeds of Russia were very quickly forgotten, and Bulgaria turned into an instrument of intrigue for Austria-Hungary and Germany. At the beginning of the 20th century, Professor P.I. Kovalevsky bitterly admitted that with constant intercession we only achieved “that all these Slavic brothers of ours looked at us as their obligated farmhands. As soon as someone harms them, Russia should help them out. If it helps, so be it. In gratitude, the same brothers who helped out will kick this stupid Russia..."
Therefore, Bulgaria’s participation on the side of Russia’s enemies during the First World War was literally predetermined. According to Professor Ivanov:
“Maintaining crafty neutrality in 1914, the Bulgarian government provided assistance to Germany, and in October 1915, seeing that the scales began to tip in favor of Berlin, it openly sided with the Germans, Austrians and its yesterday’s oppressors the Turks, delivering a treacherous blow to the back of the allied Russia Serbia. This caused a violent outburst of indignation in Russian society. “Cunning Bulgarian foxes”, “Balkan adventurers”, “German serfs”, “shame of the Slavic family” - these and other nicknames were awarded to the newspapers of yesterday’s “brothers” in 1915. What was especially indignant was that Bulgaria not only opposed its liberator Russia, but that the Bulgarians found themselves in an alliance with Turkey, “which for five centuries kept her in humiliating slavery, beat her population, raped her women, desecrated her temples.” .
Bulgaria was among Russia’s opponents during the Second World War. Refusing to accept the USSR's proposal to conclude a Soviet-Bulgarian treaty of friendship and mutual assistance, Sofia concluded a protocol on the deployment of German troops on Bulgarian territory in 1941, and then joined the Berlin Pact. Only the successes of the Soviet army, which entered the territory of Bulgaria in September 1944, forced it to leave the war and, after a coup d’etat, become an ally of the USSR.”
It must be said that the time Bulgaria was in the socialist camp became the time of real prosperity for this country - the standard of living there was considered one of the highest in Europe. Experts indicate:
“The USSR was very active in helping the Bulgarian economy. Thus, in the period 1970-1982, due to the expansion of trade with the USSR, more than 54% of the total increase in Bulgaria’s foreign trade turnover was achieved. Due to supplies from the USSR, Bulgaria's needs for natural gas and iron ore were fully satisfied, 98% for electricity and coal, 94.6% for timber, etc. The entire scientific and technical potential of Bulgaria was created with the decisive participation of the USSR. Bulgaria has constantly had the opportunity to use the experience and achievements of our science and technology and introduce them into its economy.”
But as soon as the Soviet Union had problems, the Bulgarians traditionally immediately went over to the side of the enemies of Russia...
In today's Bulgaria there is a real revaluation of values. As Russian researcher Oksana Petrovskaya writes in one of her articles, in the 90s of the last century the history of Bulgarian-Soviet relations began to be presented exclusively in a negative way. Anti-Sovietism gradually turned into Russophobia. Russia’s role in the liberation of the Bulgarians from the Turkish yoke also underwent “rethinking”:
“Modern Bulgarian historians are making attempts to shift the blame for the dismemberment of Bulgarian lands at the Berlin Congress of 1878, which allegedly saved Bulgaria “from the bear hug of the liberators,” onto Russian diplomacy. There were even regrets expressed about the fact that it was the USSR that liberated Bulgaria from fascism, and the question of Soviet responsibility before the country was even raised.
In the wake of Russophobia, the attitude of Bulgarians towards their Slavic identity began to change. In the process of active searches in their past for what supposedly prevents the Bulgarians from becoming Europeans, even a version of the ethnogenesis of this people and their statehood in the early Middle Ages appeared. The main goal of this version is to prove the non-Slavic origin of the Bulgarians. At the same time, the “test for Europeanness” demanded reconciliation with the “Turkish yoke”, replacing this term with a tolerant “Ottoman presence”. The topic of the fight against the Turkish conquerors has been removed from the media today, and among the “advanced to Europe” public there was even an initiative to erect a monument to the Turkish soldiers who fell on Shipka” (?!).
I will add that Bulgaria is one of those vile places in Europe where they regularly mock monuments to Soviet soldiers, painting them in clown colors (see the picture to our text). Local authorities try not to notice these “incidents”...
This is not the power of the people
It is noteworthy that during the period of its stay in the EU, Bulgaria itself dropped almost to the level of Africa in terms of its economic level. Moreover, today there is an urgent question about the future of the Bulgarians as a nation! Here is one typical testimony that is now very popular among Internet users:
"Do you want to know what life is like as part of the European Union? Go to Bulgaria. Just not on vacation, to walk along the embankment from restaurant to restaurant. This is a mask - this is a facade. Travel a little, several tens of kilometers into the interior of the country. You will see the ruins of factories , you will see the poverty that reigns around you. You will see the economy crushed by the European Union, you will see people who are trying in vain to find a job...
What you won’t see are happy young people, since some of them left temporarily to work, while others left forever. It seems that there is freedom of speech, and you can scold the government, but not too much - so that there are no problems at work. And if, God forbid, you still use the words Russia, Putin, mark the time: in a week you will receive a “wolf ticket” to nowhere. They will immediately brand you a spy, an accomplice, and accuse you of all mortal sins.
It seems that the borders are open - you can go on vacation to Western Europe, but who will go? Unemployment at 18%, which the authorities cheerfully report, is a blatant lie! In reality, twice as much! At least one in four able-bodied people cannot find a job. Those who can leave, since the borders are open. But who are they there? Maybe managers, technologists, engineers?.. No, they are unskilled workers, dishwashers. Guest workers! This is what the European Union gave us - the opportunity to leave without a visa to engage in unskilled labor.
Yes, we joined the European Union, but the European Union did not join us. We still have the same corrupt government, the same corrupt officials, coupled with strict standards, rules, and methods of the European Union. We found ourselves destroyed, crushed by the European Union. Yes, they give us some tranches for development, but no one knows where this money goes. Everything ends up in the pockets of officials, and even if it gets somewhere, it is only for “their own” and for “their” projects.
The incompetent government obtained loans from the IMF, which began to dictate its new economic policy. Harsh conditions were imposed that ultimately destroyed the country's economy.
The entire industry was methodically destroyed, everything possible was privatized for next to nothing and cut into scrap metal. Agriculture was completely destroyed. The higher education system has been destroyed. There has been a proliferation of universities that issue higher education diplomas for a bribe. All we can offer for export is cheap unskilled labor.
In Bulgaria, the population decreased from 9 million to 7. Young couples stopped having children. Those who can leave. There is a generation gap. A huge number of people work in the West. Children are raised by grandparents. Children don't see their parents. This is the price that Bulgaria paid for the EU.
We wanted a different life, but not like this. We were cruelly deceived. We were dragged into this EU without asking the people. We are being bombarded with Western propaganda. We hoped that by joining the EU we would live better. No! Life has become unbearable!
Joining the EU was beneficial to a handful of oligarchs who made money by squandering the national economy. Very few people live well in Bulgaria. Most barely make ends meet...
The young, talented and stubborn pack their things and run away without looking back, leaving the old people to die in the villages. The north of the country, where unemployment is (according to official data) 60% (!), is depopulated. Rare tourists compare it with the Chernobyl zone. Over the past 20 years, 2 million people have left the country. The country has lost more people than in two world wars, but this is not the limit. The economic crisis coincided with a demographic catastrophe of terrifying proportions. By 2060, the population of Bulgaria will be only 5 million people, of which 1.5 million are Roma. The Bulgarians, as a single people with an ancient Orthodox culture, are doomed.
“Last year only 62,000 children were born,” says TV journalist Ivo Hristov. - This is the lowest birth rate since 1945. Bulgaria is melting faster than any European country. Only Estonia has a worse result. In its entire 1,300-year history, our country has never been so close to collapse."
In the early 90s, when the USSR empire was collapsing and the Eastern European bloc was falling apart, CAPITAL watched the process closely and triumphantly with cold, greedy eyes. New exciting prospects opened up for the monopolies. First, the financial crisis was delayed for as long as twenty years. Secondly, the collapse of the Iron Curtain opened the way to global domination of the oligarchy under the guise of “globalization” and “free market” (the so-called “Washington Consensus” of 1989).
The owners of transnational corporations rubbed their hands with pleasure and anticipation - before them lay vast, defenseless territories with a naive population, fooled by slogans about freedom. The plan of the oligarchy was simple, like the plan of some conqueror like Attila: the territory was to be seized, conquered, humiliated, ruined, sucked dry of all the juice, and the population was to be reduced to eternal slavery. Yes, the plan was simple, but the methods were much more sophisticated...
In the early 90s, American economic advisers and consultants arrived in droves to the CIS countries, Eastern Europe and Russia. These were well-mannered and impeccably dressed, energetic people of mature years, in their views they were all convinced libertarians of the extreme right. (Libertarianism in economics is one of the most inhuman theories that completely denies the social state, as well as any state intervention in the economy. In essence, this is economic Darwinism: let the strong survive in free competition and the weak perish. The state should refuse to finance health care and education, and at the same time from taxation, and pension funds should only become private. If you haven’t saved for yourself for old age, then blame yourself. And if you are poor and sick, cry at the doors of charitable funds. Your children are only your problem , don’t fool the state.)
In the decent countries of Western Europe with a strong social policy, libertarians at that time were not allowed anywhere near public administration (they would have been trampled by militant trade unions), but in the ex-socialist land they were held in high esteem by unafraid idiots. They weren’t just applauded and stared at, they were also paid for consultations. Local politicians stood before them on their hind legs, fascinated by phrases about “market reforms”...
“Electricity distribution networks were sold to the Czechs, Austrians and Germans, the French got water supply and sewerage, and copper ore, according to rumors, went to the Belgians,” says one of the nationalist leaders, Angel Dzhambazki. “These were the secret conditions for Bulgaria’s accession to the EU. All the old powers "They bargained in order to sell their consent at a higher price. Thanks to betrayal at the very top, Bulgaria was put under the hammer."
“Since the early 2000s, Bulgaria has lived like a merry widow after the death of her rich husband,” says journalist Valery Naydenov. “She sells houses, lands, all her husband’s property and for five years lives much better than before. And then the stupid woman remains on the beans and begs on the porch. Until 2005, Bulgaria demonstrated excellent GDP growth (all sales transactions were taken into account). That is, we sold off national assets, and this was reflected in the GDP as our income. Everyone was happy: oh, what foreign investment! The authorities destroyed national economic science and dispersed serious institutions. And all research commissioned by the government and paid for by taxpayers is carried out by pro-Western NGOs."
What is today's Bulgaria? This is a sacrificial pawn on a chessboard. Her role is to be a blocking pawn for all Russian projects. We serve other people's interests, spoil relations with Russia and lose money for the transit of oil and gas. And American friends pat the Bulgarians on the shoulder and say: “Well done, guys! You have a democracy! One Bulgarian satirist very precisely defined what democracy is: “This is not the power of the people - it is the power of democrats.”
It is obvious that the refusal of South Stream hammered another nail into the coffin of Bulgarian statehood... However, this is a problem for the Bulgarians themselves, and it should never concern us, Russians, ever again.
Vadim Andryukhin, editor-in-chief