Originally published in Deutsche Welle България on 29 June 2013
Author: T. Vagsberg, Editor: B. Mihaylova Translated in english by Ani Artinyan
The Parliament was left without a smart move and will go down together with the government. The person responsible for the critical situation, Mihail Mikov, managed to cross several lines within five minutes of TV airtime and is now heading towards thin ice.
Even obdurate socialists were surprised by the three catastrophic elements of current everyday life which Mikov listed, namely the ”impossibility of finding a way out of the crisis using a democratic approach”, the “escalation of tension supported by the media” and a “countable group of citizens” who “threatens the life and health of the members of the Parliament and deprives them of their dignity”.
In other words, the citizens are alleged to be inflicting violence on their legal representatives which cannot be handled in a democratic way, therefore the act of violence is to be brought under control by taking other measures.
Mikov even said to have turned to the Minister of Internal Affairs to address the issue of ensuring normal working conditions for the National Assembly.
The media environment is not hopeless
Only one of Mikov’s messages received an appropriate response – the one regarding the media. Within twenty four hours everybody who was supposed to react, did it – The Council for Electronic Media, the Association of Bulgarian Broadcasters, the Bulgarian National Television, the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee, several journalistic organizations, journalists working for different print editions, and last but not least Reporters without Borders as well as some politicians from other European countries. All of them reminded the Chairperson of the Parliament of the fact that the media are independent, non-controllable by the government and non-willing to stop doing their job.
This concordant and adequate reaction deserves the special attention of everybody who considers the media environment hopeless. It is evident that the media have the potential to controvert this negative labeling. All they have to do is make choices like the one described above more often.
The problem is that there is hardly any reaction to the other statements made by Mikov, such as the impossibility of a democratic way out of the crisis he claimed.
Undemocratic
Examining the context it can be inferred that the Chairperson has the following explanation for the latest occurrences in the country: In February there was a crisis which was tackled by early Elections and now, four months later, we are faced with another crisis which cannot be resolved through early Elections one more time. It “cannot be resolved” through early Elections again because the first Elections that took place this year ended without ”considering the voice of the citizens, the constitutional order and the institutions”.
Hearing Mikov’s words one could think that his party had won a majority and was then attacked by people who were acting against the democratic choice of the majority.
The truth is quite the reverse – the Bulgarian Socialist Party who lost the Elections is now governing in a coalition build on extreme compromises, counts on the support of nationalists and puts leaders with great concentrated power at positions where people fighting against such leaders are required. The least that can be expected from a sane and civilized legal practitioner chairing the Parliament is to protect the affected fellow citizens from the people who caused all this. Instead, Mikov is threatening the citizens with undemocratic measures for trying to hold the government to account rather than him.
“It would be best that the tanks came”
The speech Mikov held on TV on Wednesday is not a spark of originality – it is actually a remake of an old story from 1989 when the leading role was played by the President Petar Mladenov. On December 14th 1989 the Parliament in Sofia was surrounded by people pleading for the repeal of the First Article from the Constitution under Todor Zhivkov*. The people back then were far more discontent than the ones who are protesting bearing catchy and creative slogans today. It were those people back then at whom the President Mladenov directed his famous words “it would be best that the tanks came”. A great part of the citizens replied with emigration.
Before bringing up the phrase about the tanks, Mladenov tried to calm the protestants down in his own specific way. Those were his words: “The Parliament continues to function! With this extremism you are thrusting Bulgaria into the abyss. You have to realize this. The Parliament bears the responsibility for Bulgaria’s destiny. You also have to understand your responsibility “.
Just after it became clear to Mladenov that nobody intends to listen to nonsense, he got scared and mentioned the tanks.
The common between this story and the new one from 2013 is not only the ease with which overcoming a crisis by force is regarded as a resolution. What is also a replication in history is the firm conviction of the two speakers that the function of the Parliament is to keep the citizens safe from their own aspirations for their own good.
* The communist head of state of the People’s Republic of Bulgaria (PRB) from March 4, 1954 until November 10, 1989.
He became First Secretary of the Bulgarian Communist Party in 1954 and remained on this position for 35 years, until 1989, thus becoming the longest-serving leader of any Eastern Bloc nation,[1] and one of the longest ruling non-royal leaders in history
…
His rule marked a period of unprecedented political and economic stability for Bulgaria, marked both by complete submission of Bulgaria to Soviet rule[2] and a desire for expanding ties with the West. His rule remained unchallenged until the deterioration of East-West relations in the 1980s, when a stagnating economic situation, a worsening international image and growing careerism and corruption in the BCP weakened his positions.[3] He resigned on November 10, 1989, under pressure by senior BCP members due to his refusal to recognize problems and deal with public protests
No Responses to “Towards thin ice”