Political Reactions Following Consultative Council for National Security at the President's Office

Four parliamentary groups did not support the position adopted by the Consultative Council for National Security. Movement for Rights and Freedoms, Democratic Bulgaria and We Continue the Change opposed it because Russia was not identified as the aggressor. Vazrazhdane, meanwhile, did not support it because, according to the party, its proposal for Bulgaria to act as a mediator between Russia and Ukraine was not accepted.

GERB was the only party that did not comment on the Consultative Council meeting. Statements by the other participants made clear that the position was supported by Progressive Bulgaria and Borisov’s party, although he left the Presidency building without making a statement while Prime Minister Radev was speaking to the media. MRF, Democratic Bulgaria and We Continue the Change were unanimous that Russia should be identified as being behind the attack on the two commercial vessels, while Vazrazhdane called for Bulgaria to stop supporting sanctions against Russia.

• Consultative Council for National Security: Bulgaria Should Seek Joint Action with Romania and Turkey on Security in the Black Sea

Democratic Bulgaria explained why it had not supported the position adopted by the Consultative Council.

Ivaylo Mirchev, Democratic Bulgaria: “No, we did not support it because our two proposals were not supported. The first proposal was to send a note to Russia over violations of maritime law and for Russia to make clear commitments that there would be no further attacks on commercial vessels in Bulgaria’s exclusive economic zone. Only We Continue the Change, MRF and we supported this. I do not remember anyone around the table having doubts that Russia was behind this attack.”

Members of “We Continue the Change” added to the arguments.

Nikolay Denkov, We Continue the Change:“There is no logic in Ukraine firing on its own ships carrying grain. What we agreed on is that the investigation must be completed. There is no logic in someone firing on their own ships. This is why we cannot support an approach in which the blame is shifted from the guilty party to the innocent one.”

According to MRF, there was no reason not to directly identify who was behind the attacks on the two commercial vessels.

Stanislav Anastasov, MRF: “I can calmly tell you that the issue on which there is no consensus is who the aggressor is, and that is perfectly clear. The government has sufficient information, but they should be the ones to say it. As a respected member of NATO and the EU, Bulgaria should state openly who caused this incident involving the two drones. Yes, we understand. We in MRF will never allow Bulgaria to deviate from the EU and NATO.”
i

"Vazrazhdane" left the meeting before it ended, stating that they did not support the common position, but for different reasons.

Kostadin Kostadinov, “Vazrazhdane”: “Our position has not received support. The document that was proposed stated that Bulgaria should actively participate in the process of achieving peace. But How? How? After Bulgaria has incorporated into its legislation, and is due to vote at second reading, a specific amendment to the Criminal Code that would criminalise even commercial relations with Russia. I received no answer to this question.”

Photos: BTA

Vazrazhdane also called for Bulgaria to act as a mediator between Ukraine and Russia.