Registration has opened for candidates for Bulgaria’s presidential elections, to be held on October 22, with most observers expecting a second round. Clive Leviev-Sawyer and Petar Kostadinov survey the runners.
Culture Minister Stefan Danailov of the Bulgarian Socialist Party, who heads (officially, “in his capacity as an actor”) the initiative committee nominating Georgi Purvanov for a second term in office as head of state, has what he believes is a winning message to guarantee Purvanov’s re-election.
The incumbent, Danailov said, should brand himself as ‘THE President”. Although we must take into account that this is an English rendition of something that would sound somewhat different in Bulgarian, meaning that the definite article with the emphasis would be behind the word “President” and not in front of it, you get the idea.
It would seem an obvious strategy for Purvanov, where his incumbency would seem to be an advantage, given that during his term he has not dragged the Presidency into damaging controversy. Others have tried, of course, as mindfulness grew that election day was beginning to draw near, but no more than a smidgeon of grime has stuck. Perhaps it has been established in the public mind, that ephemeral space where truth does not necessarily matter, that Purvanov was a collaborator with the communist regime, as “Agent Gotse”. It is difficult to see, with the current Bulgarian political tide not running deep blue – the traditional colour of the centre-right – that this allegation against him would sway a single vote among those either strongly affiliated to the right or to the left.
Purvanov’s liability is, of course, the fact that he played midwife to the current governing tripartite coalition of the BSP, the National Movement Simeon II and the Movement for Rights and Freedoms. This means that his detractors already have tried to start using the shortcomings, real and perceived, of the coalition Government against him. Even controversies that may seem to have direct partisan or personal connotations, such as the controversy about the estates given to Simeon Saxe-Coburg through the post-communist property restitution process, or the publicly-expressed suspicion about the “business circles” close to the MRF’s Ahmed Dogan, might be subject to manipulation so as to attempt to damn Purvanov by association.
Without these and other spectres being summoned up in an attempt to hobble Purvanov, it seems that the former BSP leader should be able to look forward to a comfortable stroll back into office in January next year, when the election results take effect, with nary a carefully-coiffed hair stirred by any threatening political gusts.
However, Purvanov and his people are taking precautions. As regards his association with the tripartite coalition, what is going on may be characterised as an egg dance, if you wish to be a tad nasty, or an elegant ballroom display of footwork, if you choose to admire the artistry. Purvanov’s dances with the party that he used to lead, and with the coalition that he brought to birth, are conducted at arm’s length, and with an eye to every step being just in the right place.
Yes, Purvanov has the endorsement of the BSP as their candidate, as he was in the October 2001 elections. But this time around, he is being presented as the nominee of an initiative committee, of well-known artists, athletes, scientists, sports people and educators. Better yet, discord has been sown in the rival camp – just when it seemed that Sofia mayor Boiko Borissov was the “mayor of mayors” through his political association founded of first citizens, any number of mayors signed up behind Purvanov. This has led to reported threats of expulsion of such defectors from Borissov’s “Citizens for the European Development of Bulgaria” group, given that Borissov – for his own reasons, founded on his own long-term political ambitions – has declined to endorse Purvanov. The episode also led to the entertaining spectacle of Bansko mayor Alexander Kravarov, who told journalists on August 20 that his membership of the Purvanov initiative committee did not necessarily mean that he would actually vote for him.
While Kravarov presumably has not heard the old undergraduate saying that attempting to stay in the political middle of the road is putting oneself precisely where the accidents happen, his attempt at finesse is not dissimilar to Purvanov’s.
Purvanov is on record as saying that he does not want the tripartite coalition to be an obstacle to him.
“Those who think that I’ll be the defence lawyer for the ruling coalition after I had helped its formation, are wrong,” Purvanov said on August 25. He had, he said, publicly pointed out mistakes by the coalition. At the same time (connoisseurs of dancing skills, watch this move) he said that he would not “wage war on institutions” for political gain ahead of the election.
Few would not believe, however, that whatever he hopes for, he will not be at risk from protest voters, including those who simply abstain. Nor will it help him to point out, not that he should do so at the risk of sounding too defensive, that he is not the coalition’s candidate – one of the three parties, the NMSII, is expected to put up its own candidate. For that matter, the support he will receive from the MRF, the party supported mainly by Bulgarians of ethnic Turkish descent, may deliver some loyal partisan votes, but will also expose his flank to the right, by those who lash out at ethnic Turkish political influence, or make insinuations against the MRF “business circles”.
One unquestionable advantage for Purvanov is that all his opponents of any significance are to his right, making it easier to forge his message, and, even better from his point of view, that the field of his rivals is scattered, individually weak, and less well-resourced in terms of campaign resources - allowing for the fact that Purvanov has been campaigning for a very long time, and through his office, has ample chance to provide photo opportunities. Certainly, this was the case, to take just one example, this past summer, when there was hardly a village in Bulgaria on which the presidential presence was not bestowed.
If current polls are to be believed, Purvanov has about 50 per cent of the vote. Allowance must be made for the fact that the polls were done before all candidates were announced (and perhaps it may be said that clarity is still lacking on this point) and before the official launch of campaigns. That the field is now better known may affect his place in the polls. If the European Commission releases a negative report on September 26 on Bulgaria’s readiness to join the EU, this too may have some negative spinoff for Purvanov.
But otherwise with the election appearing to be Purvanov’s to lose, the only real question his strategists must be considering is who he will face in the second round, and how to handle the television debates.
