Foreign Minister Velislava Petrova: Bulgaria Presented Its Position on the Skopje Arson Attack

Bulgaria has presented its position regarding the arson attack on diplomatic vehicles in Skopje through all available mechanisms and formats, Foreign Minister Velislava Petrova told journalists in the corridors of Parliament on June 17.

Petrova recalled that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had condemned the attack in an official statement, describing it as evidence that when hate speech is tolerated and promoted at a high political and diplomatic level, it can lead to such acts.

Velislava Petrova, Minister of Foreign Affairs: “Bulgaria’s position was presented at the General Affairs level in Brussels, through our representatives at the Council of Europe, and at the OSCE in Vienna. At present, our Members of the European Parliament are engaged in discussions on how best to present Bulgaria’s position. Therefore, through every available mechanism and in every possible forum, Bulgaria has made its position clear.”

• The Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned the chargé d’affaires of the Embassy of the Republic of North Macedonia in Bulgaria in connection with the arson attacks on diplomatic vehicles

She also referred to her conversation with her counterpart from North Macedonia.

Velislava Petrova, Minister of Foreign Affairs: “I made it clear that we expect to learn not only who carried out the attack, but also what the motives were and what measures will be taken on their side to prevent such incidents from occurring in the future, because this is not the first time something like this has happened.”

According to Petrova, the attempt to remove from the report on North Macedonia a passage relating to the work of the Joint Expert Commission on Historical and Educational Issues demonstrates that its activities are not viewed favourably by the authorities in Skopje.

Velislava Petrova, Minister of Foreign Affairs: “It is evident that the Commission on Historical and Educational Issues and its work are regarded as something that runs counter to the wishes of the political leadership on the other side.”