On the need for a whip. The internal BSP games

The chants of protesters in the streets, "Red trash," are unlikely to please some of the BSP members. It is unlikely that even some of them associate themselves with those party members for whom the slogan itself was created in the early 1990s. It was precisely the offended BSP sympathizers who rose up in rebellion against the party leaders on Friday.

They want a new leader, someone who will uphold the BSP's dominant position in the coalition government. But will this not have the opposite result, namely a party split that will lead to the collapse of the government?

Party discipline

The Socialist Party is known for the fact that there is no monolithic management structure in the party. Various factions, formed around a few key figures, compete for the leadership position. In the last ten years, the compromising personality of Sergei Stanishev has prevailed, because it was believed that he could easily be managed by stronger behind-the-scenes players. Among the best-positioned party leaders outside the current ones are Georgi Parvanov, Rumen Petkov and Mladen Chervenyakov. It was Parvanov who on Monday insisted on convening the National Council of the party. MP Georgi Kadiev also openly declared himself against Stanishev, demanding the leader's resignation. Stanishev's fate will be decided perhaps on Thursday, when during the council he will request a vote of confidence from the party. It is likely that the vote will be won anyway, otherwise Stanishev would hardly have been so bold in insisting on testing the party's trust. On the other hand, he needs it to defend his chairmanship in the PES, which is organizing a leadership meeting on Saturday at the National Palace of Culture.

The rebellion in the party came after Sergey Stanishev announced on Friday, just minutes before the start of the National Assembly session, that the Prime Minister, Plamen Oresharski, would nominate Delyan Peevski as head of the National Security Agency. The surprise in the ranks of the BSP was so great that nearly half of the members of the parliamentary group, including the group’s deputy chairman, Yanaki Stoilov, voted against it. Although only eight MPs later voted against Peevski in parliament, the split was already a fact.

Dissatisfaction within the party, however, grew even with the beginning of the cabinet due to the lack of dialogue with the party leadership on the appointments of ministers and regional governors. Even then, talk began about the exceptional influence of the MRF, as well as figures from the personal entourage of Sergey Stanishev and Monika Yosifova. Unlike the GERB government, when internal party discipline was at a very high level, and dissent was often punished by the replacement of MPs, now the BSP feels the lack of strong figures who could discipline the party.

In the English Parliament and the American Congress, this role is played by the “Whips” (from the English Whip = whip). These are deputies who have the responsibility of pressuring the members of the parliamentary groups to vote in sync with the decisions of the party. They use all sorts of means to ensure the necessary majority, and can often even resort to compromising information against individual deputies to keep them in subjection. When it comes time for a decisive vote, the “Whips” have the task of ensuring the presence of all members of the parliamentary group, and non-participation in the vote can mean the end of a certain deputy’s party career. In Bulgaria, such a system does not officially exist, but we remember how an angry frown on the part of Borisov, Tsvetanov or the parliamentary organizer, Fidosova, guaranteed unity in the voting of GERB bills.

Stanishev has been trying to play this role since the start of the new parliament, but his authoritarian behavior has not gone down well with BSP MPs, many of whom have expected greater rewards for their loyalty. To a large extent, the BSP leader has tried to isolate the interests of many BSP MPs in order to place more power in the hands of the MRF, something that frankly irritates key BSP figures.

Party suicide

Ironically, it was the BSP-led government that introduced changes to the National Assembly rules that would once again allow parliamentary nomadism. Now, breakaway groups from a particular parliamentary group will be able to unite in new factions or become part of existing groups. The goal of the change was to lead to a split in GERB, as it was tacitly believed that now that it was no longer in power, the party would have difficulty uniting people with a fairly short party history. Paradoxically, in the new situation of destabilization in the BSP, party nomadism could hit them precisely.

Although Georgi Kadiev and Yanaki Stoilov, who were the most vocal opponents of the decision regarding Delyan Peevski and the current party leadership, hinted from the parliament rostrum that they were returning to the party ranks for the time being, a future controversial decision by the parliamentary group could lead to real disunity. Another reason for the temporary easing of tensions is that BSP members are aware that after this political crisis and after the mass street protests, trust in the socialist party is collapsing, and the result of any early elections would be catastrophic.

Boyko Borisov on a white horse

Of course, all this serves GERB and its leader Boyko Borisov. Public distrust of the coalition government seems likely to spill over into mass approval of the previous rulers. For the moment, they seem to be the only strong alternative to the Oresharski cabinet. It would not be surprising if GERB manages to win at least 110 seats, making the formation of a new government much easier. If the party of SKAT TV, NFSB, also crosses the four percent barrier, which seems increasingly likely given the collapse in trust in ATAKA, then a coalition between GERB, NFSB and possibly another right-wing party, for example "Bulgaria of Citizens", will return Borisov to power.

Skillfully, the former Prime Minister is waiting for the self-destruction of the ruling coalition. Now the only salvation for the government will be to strengthen internal discipline, make cardinal changes, limiting the influence of the MRF, which irritates people on the streets, and begin to quickly pass popular laws that calm public discontent. Perhaps one such measure is precisely the amendment of the electoral code to grant citizens greater rights to control individual deputies.

The problem for the government, however, is how to unite all internal interests and, above all, convince the MRF to step down from power. Let us not forget that the MRF will not lose much from new elections. Their electorate is strong and will become even stronger after the wave of street protests with an ethnic flavor, especially in the countryside. It is also uncertain whether their influence in the new parliament will not be preserved. After all, behind them are exactly the same economic groups that supported the GERB government for three and a half years. Their removal from power requires much more than new elections.

Did you like it? Take a minute to support the EKIP on Patreon!