Perhaps it would be incorrect to overestimate the phenomenon represented by Volen Siderov, leader of the ultra-nationalist Ataka party and runner-up in the October 22 presidential elections.

After all, about 60 per cent of eligible Bulgarians did not vote. Of those who did, only about 20 per cent chose Siderov, with most backing incumbent President Georgi Purvanov and a small but significant number supporting Nedelcho Beronov, the candidate of a clutch of centre-right parties.

So it may be argued that most Bulgarians chose candidates that are avowedly pro-EU and favour the general policy directions stated (if not always honoured) in this country in recent years, meaning a free market economy, an environment receptive to foreign investment, ethnic and religious tolerance, and a constructive attitude towards Bulgaria’s neighbours in the region.

It may be added that Siderov’s ranking in second place was because he could slip into the electoral vacuum created by the absence of the highly popular Boiko Borissov, currently the mayor of Sofia but widely perceived to harbour ambitions of higher office, and by the ineptitude among the centre-right parties in coming up with viable election campaigns and candidates.

For that matter, lest it be forgot, the National Movement Simeon II - which in 2001 was the strongest vote-getter in the country but now is a political spent force - had no candidate in the election. This too creates circumstances whereby a certain slice of the electorate either feels unmotivated to vote, or opts for a candidate of another stripe.
Following this argument, Siderov could be written off as a political flash in the pan, admittedly one that leaves an unpleasant stench, made possible only by the absence or failings of other, more credible, more moderate political forces.

But Siderov, while it seems highly likely that he will be defeated in the second round of presidential elections on October 29, cannot be written off that easily.

With Purvanov aided by highly-motivated voters who would want to support him on personal or political grounds or simply want to vote against Siderov, and with Purvanov having the backing - however grudging - of other players such as Borissov and the NMSII, January 22 2007 should see Purvanov sworn in for a second term. In the National Assembly, should he turn up for the ceremony at all, Siderov would be no more than a glowering face somewhere in the back rows.

However, the Siderov phenomenon is about more than just the October 2006 presidential elections. In the 2005 parliamentary elections and in these elections, Ataka and Siderov have drawn voter support from across a reasonably wide spectrum, by no means only from those with less education, less economic wealth, fewer opportunities and diminished morality when it comes to ethnic and religious inter-relations.

It is easy to write off some of the votes for Siderov as “protest votes” but the fact of protest votes being made is no reason for complacence either. Where the political establishment has failed to address an issue, or prefers not to speak about it, Siderov is there, raising the issue. His conclusions may be unpalatable, and he may be nothing more than a hollow populist, but the issues he raises - the Roma, perceived Turkish influence - obviously resonate with a wide cross-section of Bulgarians.

Commenting on the votes he drew on October 22, Siderov spoke of an “awakening” of Bulgarians. In an entirely different sense, it is to be hoped that there is a real awakening in Bulgaria, and there be a constructive debate and action, to bring together all the elements in society for a positive future of Bulgaria. Unless this is done, both frustration and Siderov will grow, and there will indeed be an awakening - to a nightmare.