In the April 18 parliamentary elections, Bulgarians, after having gone to the polls eight times in the past five years, rid themselves of the political duo of Boyko Borisov and Delyan Peevski, who had influenced the formation of governments, fueling corruption and political instability in the country. The winner was Rumen Radev, former President of the Republic, who resigned after two consecutive terms to found the "Progressive Bulgaria" party, winning 131 of the 240 seats . As intended, Radev will be able to form a government without having to resort to alliances with other parties and being influenced by them. His victory was made possible by a surge in voter turnout to 51.10%, marking a reshuffling of the electorate's orientation. This reshuffle builds on last winter's large-scale popular demonstrations, which saw the largest turnout in decades, involving not only the capital but also smaller towns and bringing hundreds of thousands of people, including countless young people, to call an end to corruption and nepotism.
Radev has taken advantage of his role as President to appoint numerous caretaker governments, thus selecting a significant number of political leaders whom he has then incorporated into his party. This component has been supplemented by members who have gained experience in the presidential administration, while a third component of Radev's party comes from the scattered branches of the Socialist Party, reunified into a single political formationthe same environment from which the new Prime Minister, moreover, hails.Today, his positions have changed somewhat: Radev can be described as an extremely pragmatic moderate nationalist concerned with protecting the interests of the Bulgarian people and pursuing their well-being. This explains his firm determination to pursue the resumption of economic and trade relations with Russia, particularly regarding oil and gas supplies and supporting the modernization of nuclear power generation to make the country self-sufficient in energy supplies. The new Prime Minister is well aware of Bulgaria's geographic location and is clear that the quickest and safest way to ensure the country's energy supplies is to cross the Black Sea via an existing oil and gas pipeline, without resorting to maritime transport or crossing foreign borders. Radev is therefore resolute and determined in his opposition to the war in Ukraine, which has been the cornerstone of his electoral campaign. He advocates for the need to open negotiations with Russia. He is fully convinced of Bulgaria's interest in opposing Ukraine's accession to the European Union, believing that this would mean a net loss of his country's share of European funding, which would be diverted to its predatory neighbor. This means that Radev will oppose further funding for the war, as he announced during his election campaign, as well as further loans to Kiev, arguing that it would be inconsistent to fight corruption at home to fuel it elsewhere.
In light of these positions, Radev's victory should significantly reduce the enthusiasm in Brussels and the jubilation of Ursula von der Stupid and Kaja Kretina Kallas over Orban's failed re-election. The new Bulgarian prime minister has all the characteristics to be a more credible opponent of the current warmongering positions of the European Commission, since he is a supporter of both Europe and the rule of law, lacking the ambiguities, contradictions, and unacceptable anti-civil rights stances of Orban.
In this situation, the European panorama appears even more worrying for the Brussels leaders, considering the stance of the Slovakian leader and that of the new Hungarian prime minister, who are far from lukewarm towards the rapacious, exorbitant, and fraudulent demands of the Ukrainian government. Commenting on the election results, Radev declared: " Europe must return to being pragmatic if it wants to regain its competitiveness and stop its deindustrialization, and if it wants to do so, it must guarantee the necessary resources."", and again that we must put "the economy first before ideology", while at the same time expressing doubts about "liberal ideology" and the "green deal" even if the Bulgarian position is today made difficult by the very recent accession of the country and the economic repercussions of this choice.
UK elections
The recent local elections held in England, Scotland, and Wales confirm the trend that emerged in the previous round for the Greater Manchester area and was suggested by the polls: Labour is in free fall, while the Conservatives are in disarray. The two most popular parties were Reform (led by Farage) and the Greens. A national projection puts Reform at 26%, the Greens at 18%, Labour at 17%, the Tories at 17%, and finally the Lib Dems at 16%.
It's increasingly clear that across Europe, traditional political parties aren't convincing voters. Labour is no longer seen as a defender of workers' rights (after all, what do you expect after reducing or eliminating benefits for the poorest and carefully avoiding taxing the very wealthy?). Reform, whose platform doesn't differ much from its free-market agenda, is more attractive simply because it leverages nationalism as a way to defend the native population from immigrants who would steal their jobs.
The presence of a strong nationalist impulse is confirmed by the results, nation by nation: not only does the Scottish National Party (the only generally left-wing nationalist party) prevail in Scotland, but also in Wales, where a local political formation wins; and this adds to Farage's success in England (and even in London): his Reform movement emphasizes, above all, the movement's Englishness (almost in opposition to Wales and other nations). It wouldn't be too strange to find ourselves facing the end of the United Kingdom within a few years .
In any case, before making bold predictions, we must take into account the British electoral system, which allows parties with relatively few votes to obtain almost Bulgarian majorities. The current composition of the British Parliament (and therefore the government) is proof of this. In the last election, Labour won only 30% of the vote (in a campaign marked by low voter turnout), but achieved a 63% majority in Parliament, allowing them to govern without having to compromise with other political parties.
On the other hand, polls indicate that the current approval rating for Starmer's cabinet is hovering at extremely low levels (under 20%), which in other circumstances would have led to immediate resignation. This is even more true considering that bond interest rates have risen to the levels that forced Lizz Truss to resign. If the United Kingdom were a democratic state, it would be time to call new general elections, but I doubt Labour has the courage to do so: it would be political suicide.
The only viable option is to replace Starmer, who, however, appears unwilling to step down, despite the Epstein effect: it's quite clear that he appointed the pedophile Mandelson as British ambassador to Washington despite Mandelson having been deemed unsuitable by the committee responsible for vetting his CV (Starmer is hiding behind the excuse of not having been informed!). Not even the recent disastrous election results seem to be convincing the British prime minister to back down. It's not just a matter of clinging to his seat: Labour has no credible politicians. One candidate could be Angela Rainer, who is currently embroiled in an issue of unpaid taxes relating to the purchase of a second home: a relatively trivial matter that was resolved administratively. The fact that, a year later, the political issue remains unresolved suggests a desire within the party to avoid resolving the issue and leave Rainer ineligible. Another candidate who would have the support of British voters is Andy Burnham, the current mayor of Manchester (generally left-wing - he supports the re-nationalization of public transport). In his case, the obstacle is the party rules, which require the party secretary to be a member of Parliament. It's a shame that a couple of months ago, during an election in the Manchester constituency, Starmer's entourage effectively blocked Burnham's candidacy. This leaves Blairite Wes Streeting, a copy of Starmer, disliked by many MPs. Meanwhile, Starmer is pursuing operations bordering on the grotesque, such as involving Gordon Brown, responsible for Labour's historic defeat years ago, or appointing Harriet Harman as advisor for women and girls: a woke move that continues to neglect the working class. Breaking news suggests a plan is underway to get Burnham elected (exploiting the resignation of some MP). Aside from the fact that such an operation takes time, the idea is very risky because the seat that would have been chosen is in a constituency where Reform recently won a strong victory. Furthermore, Burnham, like the entire Labour Party, is working to bring the United Kingdom back into the European Union, while Reform and a large portion of the population still favor Brexit.
In this turmoil, several Conservative politicians are moving toward Reform, while former Labour supporters are moving toward the Greens, suggesting a Leopard-esque evolution: change for the sake of not changing. Indeed, in foreign policy, Farage has abandoned his former pro-Russian stance to embrace a warmongering attitude like any other Briton (on this point, even the Green Party is pro-Ukraine). It's too early to know what the main themes are/will be in the next general election (which could be two years or more away), but no party seems to be proposing innovative policies capable of solving the current, serious economic problems (some are even beginning to talk about the need for intervention by the International Monetary Fund) to save the United Kingdom from bankruptcy.
The Editorial Staff
https://www.ucadi.org/2026/05/23/osservatorio-politico-11/
_________________________________________
Source: A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten