Bulgaria’s Eurozone games

On May 9, 2025, Bulgaria’s president Rumen Radev proposed the initiation of a referendum on the date of Bulgaria’s joining the Eurozone. His initiative caused a political storm and public hysteria, but, most of all, shone a light on the degree of capture of Bulgarian institutions, including parliament.

Polls carried out earlier this year by Myara showed that 51.7 per cent of Bulgarians argue Bulgaria’s Eurozone entry in rule while 39 per cent support it in principle. Meanwhile, erstwhile reminded that joining the euro area is 1 of the country’s obligations under the EU Treaties and in view of current efforts to adopt the euro on January 1st, 2026, 41.4 per cent of respondents asserted that Bulgaria should “never” join the Eurozone while 30.8 per cent stated that it should join at a later stage.

As Bulgaria is simply a country in which appearances can be deceiving and as populist rhetoric is common even among non-nationalist parties, to realize what lurks behind the Eurozone debate and its implications, 1 needs to take a step back.

The Eurozone as a smokescreen propelling autocracy

A series of corruption scandals as well as a raid against Radev’s Presidency on July 9th, 2020 which was perceived as an attempted coup, ignited mass anticorruption protests against Borissov’s 3rd government that lasted more than one-hundred days. Coincidentally, on the following day, July 10th, 2020, the European Commission made the surprising announcement that Bulgaria (and Croatia) had been included in the Exchange Rate mechanics II (ERM II), besides known as Eurozone’s ‘waiting room’.

Whether Bulgaria’s acceptance into the ERM II was the consequence of an nonsubjective evaluation or last-minute behind-the-scenes political deals facilitated by the European People’s organization (EPP) is subject to debate. Considering the Commission’s own deplorable record of dual standards in monitoring Bulgaria’s compliance with EU law, Borissov’s warm ties to the EPP, and Manfred Weber’s public statement that he admired Borissov’s fight against corruption dated July 10th, 2020, 1 is entitled to serious doubts. What was visible, however, was that Borissov rapidly blamed the protesting citizens of not being “joyful” about Bulgaria’s success and jeopardizing the country’s bright future that only he could ensure.

An election spiral exposing Borissov’s dependencies behind-the-scenes

Since the dramatic events from 2020, Bulgaria has been caught in an election spiral. This pushed Borissov’s GERB organization to make any of its unhealthy dependencies public. Unsurprisingly, the current ‘Zhelyazkov’ government and parliament have negative ratings – 27 per cent of citizens have assurance in the government while 46 percent do not have assurance in it; 13 per cent of citizens trust parliament while 64 per cent do not. 2 main factors shed light on this crisis of trust. The latest parliamentary election in October 2024 was marked by specified flagrant irregularities that even the Constitutional Court, which has a evidence of pro-Borissov’s bias, declared it, in part, unlawful. Even more importantly, president Radev is among the fewer politicians who have called out the actual underlying problem of the government formally led by Rossen Zhelyazkov: “Instead of a Zhelyazkov government, we have a government of Borissov and Peevski… We have visible results, specified as the capture of institutions and resources”. It is an open secret that Borissov and Peevski, who was sanctioned for corruption by the US and UK governments, respectively, in 2021 and 2023, are partners behind-the-scenes. As visible by the current voting patterns, the endurance of the ‘Zhelyazkov’ government is ensured by Peevski’s ‘New Beginning’ party, which branched off the DPS party, erstwhile ALDE and Renew threatened to terminate DPS’s membership if Peevski remained at the forefront.

In view of the constant controversies surrounding Zhelyazkov’s government, joining the Euro area has become the straw to which it clutches like a drowning man to justify its existence. In February this year, Zhelyazkov’s government asked for an extraordinary convergence study for Bulgaria in an effort to guarantee Eurozone entry on January 1st, 2026. usually specified reports are published all 2 years – Bulgaria’s latest report was released in the summertime of 2024. This inevitably begs the question – why the abrupt rush?

The abrupt rush and the legitimate concerns against it

Bulgaria is simply a country in which public institutions compete at spreading falsehoods, which on its own leads to concerns about Bulgaria’s preparedness to join the Euro area. As Eurozone membership involves the fulfillment of the Maastricht criteria, which are macroeconomic in nature, worries are only exacerbated by Bulgaria’s evidence of tweaking data.

First, Bulgaria has been historically plagued by scandals concerning manipulations of the GDP. Moreover, already in the first Borissov government, 1 of the strategies to tweak the budget deficit active accounting expenses not on an accrual basis, which is considered the more reliable bookkeeping method, but on a cash basis – if the state does not pay in the year in which a payment is due, this is not considered an expense in the eyes of the state. Recently, even more problematic accounting tricks have been put to light. In a rush, in March 2025, parliament adopted a fresh budget. Vigilant observers were fast to note, however, that a fresh debt of more than 7 billion leva was concealed as expanding the capital of Bulgarian state-owned companies. In parallel, the Minister of Finance Temenuzka Petkova announced that all profit by state-owned companies will be “collected” in favour of the state. This leads to educated guesses that Bulgaria’s actual deficit is above 6 per cent, while pursuant to the Maastricht criteria, the budget deficit should be little than 3 per cent.

Until recently, even based on tweaked statistics, it was believed that Bulgaria’s main impediment to joining the Eurozone was inflation. Data by the planet Bank shows that inflation amounted to 15.3 per cent in 2022, 9.4 per cent – in 2023, and – 2.4 per cent in 2024. While it is unclear what possible strategy Bulgaria could have relied on to reduce inflation, average citizens indeed wonder how their bills proceed to emergence while institutions argue that inflation has been tamed.

Against this background and in view of the fact that the value of the Bulgarian lev is artificially appreciated due to the specifics of the country’s currency board, it is not amazing that many average citizens and macroeconomists alike worry that joining the Eurozone in 2016 is premature and may consequence in a financial crisis. The memory of the fresh crisis in neighbouring Greece, which, among another factors, was triggered by the discovery that Greece joined the Eurozone with tweaked statistic and hidden debt, is rather fresh and fuels even more skepticism.

The ocean of propaganda and the deficiency of meaningful debate

Radev’s initiative not only shed further light on the Borissov-Peevski alliance, but besides on its hidden supporters. Regrettably, already the Denkov government (2023-2024) galvanized the unhealthy synergies between the aforementioned duo and parties that emerged from the anticorruption protests. In the eyes of many, the participation of the PPDB coalition in the Denkov government constituted a betrayal of the protests since PPDB promised to challenge Borissov and Peevski and not make dirty deals on multiple occasions. Unsurprisingly, due to their unprincipled actions, this coalition lost public support as it could not be seen as a actual opposition to the toxic position quo. At the April 2023 election, PPDB received 621, 069 votes while at the October 2024 election, after the betrayal of their voters, they only received 346, 063 votes.

In this light, it is rather revealing that prominent PPDB members did not engage in a substantive debate about Radev’s proposed referendum, but relied on simplistic propaganda, labeling, and overt speculations instead. Ivaylo Mirchev, co-leader of ‘Yes, Bulgaria’, argued that Radev was attempting to delight the Kremlin. Nevertheless, he failed to explain what Putin gains from Bulgaria’s delayed entry to the Eurozone and he omitted to mention that Borissov and Peevski, who support Bulgaria’s immediate entry, have a long evidence of Russian ties. The PP party, in a public position, claimed that Radev was attempting to bring Bulgaria back to the “dark past” and undermine the “security” of the EU, without bothering to clarify how a referendum in line with public concerns can consequence in specified an apocalypse. Its leader Kiril Petkov went as far as saying that Radev’s proposal violated the postulates of national hero Vassil Levski who wanted to see Bulgaria equal to another European states. Levski was fighting for Bulgaria’s independency from the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century – in Levski’s rhetoric equality surely meant the sovereignty which another European peoples had achieved.

The simplistic means to deviate attention from the core concerns underpinning Radev’s referendum rise even more eyebrows considering that under the Constitution and pertinent laws, Radev’s proposal is not binding – it must be examined by parliament on its merits first.

The head of parliament puts herself above the Constitution and parliament?

While populism even among parties that claim to be anti-populist is not the exception on the Bulgarian political stage, the seemingly unlawful actions by Natalia Kiselova, current head of parliament, incarnate a more sinister game twist. In a press release of May 13th, 2025, parliament announced that Kiselova refused that parliament examine Radev’s proposal, arguing his initiative was anti-constitutional. It transpires that in her letter Kiselova has referred to a decision by the Constitutional Court which considered a referendum on a different question pertaining to the Euro.

Nevertheless, under the Constitution, the Constitutional Court has the final, authoritative say on constitutional compliance. The decision referenced by Kiselova was accompanied by a dissenting opinion, which shows that there is area for debate even on the question the court allegedly resolved. Furthermore, it is not for Kiselova, but for the court to draw any parallels and reason by analogy. More importantly, neither the Constitution, nor pertinent legislation, nor the rules of parliament bestow specified powers to reject proposals for referenda upon the head of parliament, which only shows that Kiselova’s neglect of the law was politically motivated. It is for parliament to approve or reject the organization of specified referendum – specified prerogative cannot lie in a single MP who has the position of first among equals.

Normally, Kiselova should have assigned Radev’s proposal for examination by the competent parliamentary committees. Considering that the governing majority is committed to fast Eurozone entry, it is highly improbable that the referendum would have been given the green light, either. It seems that Kiselova’s actions are a smokescreen behind which the majority can hide their fear of discussion. Yet, substantive debate regarding key issues is simply a mechanics enforcing trust in a democracy. So is dialog between citizens and their representatives.

The Eurozone games: besides early for the aftermath

Considering the position quo in parliament, it is clear that Radev knew that his initiative was doomed to begin with. He seems to have pursued another goals – exposing the various unhealthy dependencies in parliament and showing to what degree MPs are disinterested in citizens’ concerns.

There are respective lessons to be taken. First, since Radev’s second word as president is about to expire and he cannot run for office again, he may benefit from the wave of discontent and establish his own party, in effort to decision waters in the toxic swamp that Bulgaria’s political scenery has transformed in. Yet, luck favours the brave and Radev is not known for excessively bold political moves. This leaves small hope for disillusioned citizens.

Second, Bulgaria’s joining the Eurozone seems to be an entirely political decision at this phase – for years, EU institutions have turned a blind eye to irregularities, falsifications, and overall rule of law decay. Whether the ECB will look the another way like the remainder of EU institutions, remains to be seen in its convergence report, but it will be illustrative of how much it cares about its own legitimacy. After all, should problems arise in the future, it will be the 1 primarily stuck with a hot potato.

Dr. Radosveta Vassileva is simply a Bulgarian legal student whose investigation interests encompass EU law and comparative public and private law. She maintains a individual blog dedicated to the regulation of law in Bulgaria. She is presently Adjunct elder investigation Fellow at University College Dublin.

Please support New east Europe's crowdfunding campaign. Donate by clicking on the button below.