Bulgaria – December Analytical Brief, 2025
Ilian Vassilev – Commentary in the “Alternativata”
It has been a long time since I last shared my thoughts, but today I will, as a parliamentary crisis of unprecedented duration appears to have ended—at least on the surface. The crisis manifested in the prolonged inability of deputies to elect a Speaker of Parliament. It is the culmination of years of political parties and their leaders being trapped in narrow partisan interests, unable to craft messages or alliances that reflect the complexity of public sentiment and societal needs.
However, this is more than just another political crisis in an EU member state, as some analysts may suggest. It is a crisis of parliamentary democracy itself, which has struggled to defend against hybrid warfare, external interference, and internal saboteurs. While the fragmentation of Bulgarian politics mirrors trends in other European nations, not all of its causes can be attributed to external forces.
Yes, democratic leaders in the EU have made significant missteps. Some, driven by messianic ambitions, have sought to rush society into a “perfect” world of green economies and pristine planet. This urgency, coupled with a lack of self-criticism and the speculative influence of financial capital, has unleashed forces no less threatening than direct hybrid attacks. The digital and technological revolution has trapped citizens in echo chambers, making them vulnerable to manipulation. This, in turn, has fostered individualism, which—when taken to extremes—rejects collective action. This phenomenon is not unique to Bulgaria but is evident in democracies worldwide.
Nonetheless, Bulgarian democracy remains intact, albeit precariously.
Political Challenges
The challenges ahead are formidable. It is unrealistic to expect any single political party to secure a majority and govern independently. The political elite continues to splinter. GERB, while still the largest party with 69 MPs, is unlikely to achieve significant growth in the next elections. Instead, fragmentation will likely deepen, with more parties vying for influence but little change in overall support for the dominant political forces.
This chaos and unpredictability are destabilizing even entrenched oligarchic structures like those associated with Peevski and Borissov. Increasingly, people are living and working outside their spheres of influence. However, this shift has also contributed to a decline in civic engagement and voter turnout.
This brings us to a classic definition of a socio-political crisis: the masses refuse to live as before, while the elites are incapable of offering meaningful new solutions to meet contemporary challenges.
External Factors
To grasp the full scope of this crisis, it is essential to consider alongside the domestic the external dimensions:
- European Institutional Challenges
European institutions—the European Commission, Parliament, and Council—frequently adopt decisions that fail to account for national specificities. The energy transition is a prime example of this disconnect. It is an enormous challenge, made more daunting by insufficient reserves in the EU and the Bulgarian energy system. The assumption that decisions at the EU level are inherently beneficial for Bulgaria is a dangerous illusion. This uncritical mindset flourished during Borissov’s tenure, underpinned by the simplistic notion that “if Merkel supports it, so do I.”
Even staunchly pro-European parties, such as PP and DB, often promote the idea that EU and NATO loyalty requires unquestioning support. This leaves ample room for anti-European forces to exploit gaps in logic and policy. True Europeanism, however, demands autonomous contributions—local assessments and tailored solutions that enhance EU-wide strategies.
- Global Competitiveness
Europe’s competitiveness challenges are systemic. The absence of raw material security, exacerbated by restrictions on rare-earth exports from China, is a growing concern. Instead of incentivizing investment and attracting industries, that are relocated back to Europe, Bulgaria is contemplating new taxes on its extractive sector.
Meanwhile, strategic resources like thallium (a byproduct of zinc processing) and germanium (used in electronics and sourced from aluminum production)—key assets in China’s industrial strategy—remain outside the focus of Bulgarian policymakers.
The symbolic aspect of the parliamentary crisis—electing a Speaker—is now resolved. Yet the deeper crisis persists. It is a crisis of leadership and the ability to inspire society with vision and integrity.
This is not just Bulgaria’s challenge; it is Europe’s challenge. The future demands more than blind adherence to external models. It requires a strategic approach that capitalizes on global opportunities to bolster national political and economic stability.
Ilian Vassilev
