THE HISTORY OF THE LAND now known as Bulgaria has been determined by
its location between Asia and Europe, by its proximity to powerful
states competing for land and influence at the junction of trade routes
and strategic military positions, and by the strong national territorial
drive of various Bulgarian states. Before the Christian era, Greece and
Rome conquered the region and left substantial imprints on the culture
of the people they found there. The Bulgar tribes, who arrived in the
seventh century from west of the Urals, have occupied the region
continuously for thirteen centuries. Over time Bulgarian culture merged
with that of the more numerous Slavs, who had preceded the Bulgars by
one century. After converting to Christianity and adopting a Slavic
language in the ninth century, the Bulgarians consolidated a distinct
Slavic culture that subsequently passed through periods of both
expansionist independence and subordination to outside political
systems.
From the ninth until the fourteenth century, Bulgaria was a dominant
force in the Balkans because of its aggressive military tradition and
strong sense of national identity. The chief rival and neighbor, the
Byzantine Empire, left a lasting political imprint on two Bulgarian
empires as it competed with them for regional domination. Marking the
deterioration of both the Byzantine and the Bulgarian political
structures, the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks in 1453
began four centuries of Turkish suppression of Bulgarian cultural and
political institutions.
By the eighteenth century, however, weakening Ottoman control allowed
a Bulgarian cultural revival. In the next century, Western political
ideas gradually combined with the reborn Bulgarian national
consciousness to form an independence movement. The movement was
complicated by internal disagreement on aims and methods, the increasing
weakness of the Ottoman foothold in Europe, and the conflicting
attitudes of the major European powers toward Bulgaria. Russia gained
distinction as Bulgaria's protector by driving out the Turks in 1877,
but France and Britain curbed Russian power in the Balkans by forcing
establishment of a limited autonomous Bulgarian state under Turkish
rule. The instrument of that limitation, the Treaty of Berlin, revived
longstanding Bulgarian territorial frustrations by placing the critical
regions of Macedonia and Thrace beyond Bulgarian control. Both of those
disputed regions had substantial Bulgarian populations. During the next
sixty years, Bulgaria would fight unsuccessfully in four wars, in a
variety of alliances, to redress the grievance. None of the four wars
brought substantial new territory to Bulgaria.
Beginning in 1878, Bulgaria was nominally ruled by members of West
European royal houses under a parliamentary form of government. Prime
Minister Stefan Stambolov unified the country during its first decade,
but extremist political parties exerted substantial influence from the
beginning. Between 1878 and the declaration of full independence in
1908, Bulgaria passed through a period of peaceful modernization with
expansion in industry, science, education, and the arts. Modernization
and industrialization sowed the seeds of class conflict, however,
nurturing strong socialist and agrarian opposition parties in the
decades that followed independence.
The period between 1912 and 1944 was full of irredentist wars and
internal political turmoil. By 1900 Serbia and Greece were the major
territorial rivals, but a World War I alliance with Germany gained
Bulgaria little advantage over them. After the war, the agrarian reform
government of Aleksandur Stamboliiski had failed to unite the country by
1923. The series of unstable factions and forms of government that
followed Stamboliiski was broken only by Bulgaria's participation as an
Axis ally in World War II. Again no territory was gained, but World War
II brought Soviet occupation, the end of the monarchy, and forty-one
years of unbroken communist rule beginning in 1948. During that entire
period, Bulgaria was the closest East European imitator of Soviet
internal and foreign policy. The years 1948 through 1989 were a time of
collectivization, heavy industrialization, drastic restriction of human
rights, and close adherence to Soviet Cold-War policy.
Bulgaria - EARLY SETTLEMENT AND EMPIRE
The Ottoman Empire was founded in the early fourteenth century by
Osman I, a prince of Asia Minor who began pushing the eastern border of
the Byzantine Empire westward toward Constantinople. Present-day
European Turkey and the Balkans, among the first territories conquered,
were used as bases for expansion far to the West during the fifteenth
and sixteenth centuries. The capture of Constantinople in 1453 completed
Ottoman subjugation of major Bulgarian political and cultural
institutions. Nevertheless, certain Bulgarian groups prospered in the
highly ordered Ottoman system, and Bulgarian national traditions
continued in rural areas. When the decline of the Ottoman Empire began
about 1600, the order of local institutions gave way to arbitrary
repression, which eventually generated armed opposition. Western ideas
that penetrated Bulgaria during the 1700s stimulated a renewed concept
of Bulgarian nationalism that eventually combined with decay in the
empire to loosen Ottoman control in the nineteenth century.
Introduction of the Ottoman System
Ottoman forces captured the commercial center of Sofia in 1385.
Serbia, then the strongest Christian power in the Balkans, was
decisively defeated by the Ottomans at the Battle of Kosovo Polje in
1389, leaving Bulgaria divided and exposed. Within ten years, the last
independent Bulgarian outpost was captured. Bulgarian resistance
continued until 1453, when the capture of Constantinople gave the
Ottomans a base from which to crush local uprisings. In consolidating
its Balkan territories, the new Ottoman political order eliminated the
entire Bulgarian state apparatus. The Ottomans also crushed the nobility
as a landholding class and potential center of resistance. The new
rulers reorganized the Bulgarian church, which had existed as a separate
patriarchate since 1235, making it a diocese under complete control of
the Byzantine Patriarchate at Constantinople. The sultan, in turn,
totally controlled the patriarchate.
The Ottomans ruled with a centralized system much different from the
scattered local power centers of the Second Bulgarian Empire. The single
goal of Ottoman policy in Bulgarian territory was to make all local
resources available to extend the empire westward toward Vienna and
across northern Africa. Landed estates were given in fiefdom to knights
bound to serve the sultan. Peasants paid multiple taxes to both their
masters and the government. Territorial control also meant cultural and
religious assimilation of the populace into the empire. Ottoman
authorities forcibly converted the most promising Christian youths to
Islam and trained them for government service. Called pomaks,
such converts often received special privileges and rose to high
administrative and military positions. The Ottoman system also
recognized the value of Bulgarian artisans, who were organized and given
limited autonomy as a separate class. Some prosperous Bulgarian peasants
and merchants became intermediaries between local Turkish authorities
and the peasants. In this capacity, these chorbadzhi (squires)
were able to moderate Ottoman policy. On the negative side, the Ottoman
assimilation policy also included resettlement of Balkan Slavs in Asia
Minor and immigration of Turkish peasants to farm Bulgarian land. Slavs
also were the victims of mass enslavement and forcible mass conversion
to Islam in certain areas.
Bulgarian Society under the Turks
Traditional Bulgarian culture survived only in the smaller villages
during the centuries of Ottoman rule. Because the administrative
apparatus of the Ottoman Empire included officials of many
nationalities, commerce in the polyglot empire introduced Jews,
Armenians, Dalmatians, and Greeks into the chief population centers.
Bulgarians in such centers were forcibly resettled as part of a policy
to scatter the potentially troublesome educated classes. The villages,
however, were often ignored by the centralized Ottoman authorities,
whose control over the Turkish landholders often exerted a modifying
influence that worked to the advantage of the indigenous population.
Village church life also felt relatively little impact from the
centralized authority of the Greek Orthodox Church. Therefore, between
the fourteenth and seventeenth centuries, the villages became isolated
repositories of Bulgarian folk culture, religion, social institutions,
and language.
Early Decay and Upheaval in the Empire
Notable Bulgarian uprisings against the Ottomans occurred in the
1590s, the 1680s and the 1730s; all sought to take advantage of external
crises of the empire, and all were harshly suppressed. Beginning in the
1600s, local bandits, called hajduti (sing., hajdutin),
led small uprisings. Some writers now describe these uprisings as
precursors of a Bulgarian nationalist movement. Most scholars agree,
however, that hajdutin activities responded only to local
misrule and their raids victimized both Christians and Muslims. Whatever
their motivation, hajdutin exploits became a central theme of
national folk culture.
By 1600 the Ottoman Empire had reached the peak of its power and
territorial control. In the seventeenth century, the empire began to
collapse; the wealth of conquest had spread corruption through the
political system, vitiating the ability of the central government to
impose order throughout the farflung empire. For the majority of people
in agricultural Bulgaria, centralized Ottoman control had been far from
intolerable while the empire was orderly and strong. But the growing
despotism of local authorities as the central government declined
created a new class of victims. Increasingly, Bulgarians welcomed the
progressive Western political ideas that reached them through the Danube
trade and travel routes. Already in the 1600s, Catholic missionaries in
western Bulgaria had stimulated creation of literature about Bulgaria's
national past. Although the Turks suppressed this Western influence
after the Chiprovets uprising of 1688, the next century brought an
outpouring of historical writings reminding Bulgarian readers of a
glorious national heritage.
Bulgaria - NATIONAL REVIVAL, EARLY STAGES
For Bulgaria the eighteenth century brought transition from static
subservience within a great Asian empire toward intellectual and
political modernization and reestablishment of cultural ties with
Western Europe. The monasteries of an increasingly independent Bulgarian
church fostered national thought and writing; Western influences altered
the nature of commerce and landholding in the Balkans; and the forcible
assimilation of Bulgarian culture into a cosmopolitan Asian society
ended, allowing Bulgarian national consciousness to reawaken. At the
same time, social anarchy inhibited the liberation process. These
developments set the stage for a full national revival.
The Written Word
In the eighteenth century, all Slavic cultures moved away from the
formal Old Church Slavonic language that had dominated their literatures
for centuries. The literary language that emerged was much closer to the
common vernacular, eventually making books accessible to a much wider
readership. In 1741 Hristofor Zhefarovich published his Stematografia,
a discussion of the cultural history of the Serbs and the Bulgarians.
The book displayed the Bulgarian coat of arms and praised the glorious
past of the Bulgarian people. In 1762 Father Paisi of Hilendar wrote a
history of the Bulgarian peoples in a mixture of Old Church Slavonic and
vernacular language. Circulated in manuscript form for nearly one
hundred years, the book was a lively, readable celebration of the
Bulgarian past and a call for all Bulgarians to remember their heritage
and cultivate their native language. Paisi's history inspired
generations of writings on Bulgarian patriotic themes. In part, its
influence was strong because Paisi wrote at the monastery of Mt. Athos,
the largest spiritual center in the Balkans and an early receptacle of
ideas of the European Enlightenment. Paisi's follower Sofronii
Vrachanski further developed the literature by using a much more
vernacular language to advance secular ideas of the Enlightenment in
translations of Greek myths and his original Life and Tribulations
of the Sinner Sofronii. Sofronii also published the first printed
book in Bulgaria in 1806.
Commerce and Western Influences
Under the Ottoman Empire, the Mediterranean and Asian trade routes
met in Bulgaria. Fairs and regional markets eventually brought tradesmen
into contact with their foreign counterparts. After centuries of
exclusion from population centers by Turkish policy, Bulgarians began
migrating back to the towns, establishing an urban ethnic presence. By
the eighteenth century, trade guilds included many workers in cloth,
metal, wood, and decorative braid. The estate holders of Macedonia also
profited from growing European cotton markets. Some Bulgarian merchants
assumed positions as intermediaries between Turkish and European
markets, grew rich from such connections, and established offices in the
major European capitals. As the Bulgarian cultural revival spread from
the monasteries into secular society, these newly wealthy groups
promoted secular art, architecture, literature, and Western ideals of
individual freedom and national consciousness. Of particular impact were
the ideals of the French Revolution, introduced through commercial
connections at the start of the nineteenth century.
The end of centralized Ottoman power over Bulgarian territory brought
several decades of anarchy, called the kurdzhaliistvo, at the
end of the eighteenth century. As at the end of the Second Bulgarian
Empire four hundred years before, local freebooters controlled small
areas, tyrannized the population, and fought among themselves. Political
order was not reestablished in Bulgaria until 1820. Meanwhile, large
population shifts occurred as Bulgarians fled the taxation and violence
inflicted by this anarchic condition; the new communities they founded
in Romania and southern Russia were important sources of cultural and
political ideas in the nineteenth century.
The Bulgarian national revival took place in the larger context of
Christian resistance to Turkish occupation of Eastern and Central
Europe--a cause whose momentum increased as the Ottoman Empire crumbled
from within. Russia fought a series of wars with the Turks between 1676
and 1878, and was given the right to protect Christians living under
Ottoman rule in treaties signed in 1774 and 1791. Those treaties granted
semiautonomy to the Romanian regions of Wallachia and Moldavia, which
gave hope that Russia might provide similar help to Bulgaria during the kurdzhaliistvo.
Intellectual ties between Bulgaria and Russia promoted the adoption of
Russian revolutionary thought along with Western influences. In 1804
Sofronii offered the help of the entire Bulgarian people to Russian
armies fighting the Turks and moving toward Bulgarian territory. By 1811
a special volunteer army of several thousand Bulgarians had been formed,
in the hope that Russian success against the Turks would liberate
Bulgaria. Although the Russians did not aid the Bulgarians directly at
that time, Russia remained crucial to Bulgarian foreign relations from
that time to the late twentieth century.
European and Russian Policies, 1800
By 1800 the Ottoman Empire was universally labeled "The Sick Man
of Europe." The empire was precariously near total collapse and
ready to be dismantled by a powerful neighbor, just as the Byzantine
Empire had been dismantled by the Ottomans. In this case the logical
successor was Russia, an expanding empire with strong religious and
cultural ties to the captive Slavic groups. Russia also had a continuing
desire to achieve access to the Mediterranean Sea. Russian military
power reached its peak with the defeat of Napoleon's invading army in
1812, but throughout the nineteenth century France and Britain used
diplomatic and military means to counterbalance Russian influence in the
Balkans and the Bosporus. This implicit defense of the Ottoman Empire
delayed Bulgarian independence, but the intellectual basis of revolution
grew rapidly in the nineteenth century.
Bulgaria - BULGARIAN INDEPENDENCE
Revolution in the Balkans
In 1804 Serbia began a series of uprisings that won it autonomy
within the Ottoman Empire by 1830. Especially in the campaigns of 1804
and 1815, many Bulgarians in areas adjacent to Serbia fought beside the
Serbs. When the Greeks revolted against Turkish rule in 1821, Bulgarian
towns provided money and soldiers. Several hundred Bulgarians fought in
the six-year Greek uprising, some of them as commanders, and some became
part of the government of independent Greece. Bulgarians also fought the
Turks in Crete, with the Italian revolutionary Giuseppe Garibaldi, and
in other nationalist uprisings against the Habsburgs in 1848-49. In
spite of Bulgarian sympathy for national liberation movements nearby,
and although the ideals of those movements permeated the Balkans from
1804 on, the anarchy of the early 1800s confined expression of Bulgarian
national feeling primarily to the cultural realm until the 1860s.
Cultural Expressions of Nationalism
In 1824 Dr. Petur Beron, a member of the Bulgarian emigrant community
in Romania, published the first primer in colloquial Bulgarian. His book
also explained a new system of secular education to replace the outdated
precepts of monastery pedagogy, and Beron's suggestions strongly
influenced the development of Bulgarian education in the nineteenth
century. In 1835 a school was opened in Gabrovo according to Beron's
design. Under direction of the monk Neofit Rilski, it was the first
school to teach in Bulgarian. Similar schools opened in the ensuing
years, and in 1840 the first school for girls opened in Pleven.
Education grew especially fast in trading towns such as Koprivshtitsa
and Kalofer in the foothills of the Balkans, where textiles and other
trades created a wealthy merchant class. In the 1840s, the first
generation of Western-educated Bulgarians returned home. Forming a
cosmopolitan intelligentsia, they diversified and expanded Bulgarian
schools in the following decades.
In the first half of the 1800s, special educational and cultural ties
developed with Russia and France. In 1840 the Russian government began
awarding grants for Bulgarian students to study in Russia. The total
number of students in the Russian program was never high, but several
graduates were leaders in the independence drive of the 1870s. Several
notable Bulgarians of that generation also were educated in France and
at Robert College, founded as a missionary institution in
Constantinople.
Parallel with educational advancement, Bulgarian book printing
advanced substantially after 1830. Before that date only seventeen
original Bulgarian titles had been printed; but by mid-century, printing
had replaced manuscript copying as the predominant means of distributing
the written word. The first periodical was printed in Bulgarian in 1844,
beginning an outpouring of mostly ephemeral journals through the
nineteenth century. Censorship before 1878 meant that the majority of
such journals were printed in the Romanian emigrant centers, outside the
Ottoman Empire. Most Bulgarian-language periodicals printed within the
empire came from Constantinople, showing the cultural importance of that
city to the Bulgarian National Revival. After 1850 Bulgarian �migr�
periodicals, supporting a wide variety of political views toward the
national independence movement, played a vital role in stimulating
Bulgarian political consciousness.
In the mid-1800s, a number of cultural and charitable organizations
founded in Constantinople supported and directed Bulgarian national
institutions that resisted Ottoman and Greek influence. The social
institution of the chitalishte (literally "reading
room") played an important cultural role beginning in 1856.
Established in population centers by adult education societies, the chitalishte
was a center for social gatherings, lectures, performances, and debates.
Because it was available to the entire public, this institution spread
national cultural and political ideals beyond the intelligentsia to the
larger society. By 1878 there were 131 such centers.
The Bulgarian National Revival also stimulated the arts in the
nineteenth century. Dobri Chintulov wrote the first poetry in modern
Bulgarian in the 1840s, pioneering a national literary revival that
peaked in the 1870s. Translation of Western European and Russian
literature accelerated, providing new influences that broke centuries of
rigid formalism. Painting and architecture now also broke from the
prescribed forms of Byzantine church art to express secular and folk
themes. Bulgarian wood-carving and church singing assumed the forms that
survive today.
Religious Independence
The Bulgarian church achieved new independence in the nineteenth
century. The Ottoman Empire had left the Bulgarian church hierarchy
under the Greek Patriarchate of Constantinople for four centuries,
disregarding the differences between the two Orthodox churches. (The
last separate Bulgarian church jurisdiction, the archbishopric of Ohrid,
was absorbed in 1767.) Early in the 1800s, few of the Bulgarian church
leaders most closely connected with Enlightenment ideas sought
separation from the Greek Orthodox Church. But in 1839, a movement began
against the Greek Metropolitan of Turnovo, head of the largest Bulgarian
diocese, in favor of local control. In 1849 the active Bulgarian
community of Constantinople began pressing Turkish officials for church
sovereignty. Other large Bulgarian dioceses both inside and outside
Bulgaria sought a return to liturgy in the vernacular and appointment of
Bulgarian bishops. The first concession came in 1848, when the Greek
patriarch of Constantinople allowed one Bulgarian church in that city.
Because a decade of petitions, demonstrations, and Ottoman reform
suggestions had brought no major change, in 1860 Bishop Ilarion
Makariopolski of Constantinople declared his diocese independent of the
Greek patriarchate. This action began a movement for ecclesiastical
independence that united rural and urban Bulgarians and began a bitter
Greek-Bulgarian dispute. The Turks and the Russians began to mediate in
1866, seeking a compromise that would ensure the security of each in the
face of increasing regional unrest. In 1870 the Ottoman sultan
officially declared the Bulgarian church a separate exarchate. The Greek
patriarchate, which never recognized the separation, excommunicated the
entire Bulgarian church; but the symbolism of the Ottoman decree had
powerful political effect. The new exarchate became the leading force in
Bulgarian cultural life; it officially represented the Bulgarians in
dealing with the Turks, and it sponsored Bulgarian schools. The novel
administrative system of the exarchate called for lay representation in
governing bodies, thus introducing a note of self-government into this
most visible institution.
Early Insurrections
The social and cultural events of the National Revival moved parallel
to important political changes. Bulgarian aid to the Russians in the
Russo-Turkish wars of 1806-12 and 1828-29 did nothing to loosen Ottoman
control. Then the Ottoman Empire ruthlessly quelled major Bulgarian
uprisings in 1835 (in Turnovo), 1841 (in Nis), and in 1850-51 (in
Vidin). Those uprisings still bore the disorganized qualities of the hajduti,
but, together with smaller movements in intervening years, they
established a tradition of insurrection for the next generation.
Meanwhile, beset by European enemies and internal revolutions, the Turks
entered a reform period in 1826. They replaced the elite but
increasingly untrustworthy Janissary forces with a regular army and
officially abolished the feudal land system. These changes reduced
oppression by the local Turkish rulers in Bulgaria. In the 1830s, Sultan
Mahmud II recentralized and reorganized his government to gain control
over his corrupt officials and follow European administrative models.
Although these changes had little direct effect on Bulgaria, they
clearly signaled to the Slavic subjects of the empire that reform was
now possible.
Balkan Politics of the Mid-Nineteenth Century
By 1850 the emerging Bulgarian nationalist movement had split into
two distinct branches. The moderates, concentrated in Constantinople,
favored gradual improvement of conditions in Bulgaria through
negotiations with the Turkish government. This was the approach that
created a separate Bulgarian exarchate in 1870. This group believed that
the protection of the Ottoman Empire was necessary because a free
Bulgaria would be subject to Balkan politics and great-power
manipulation. The radical faction, however, saw no hope of gradual
reform. Following their understanding of European liberal tradition and
Russian revolutionary thought, the leaders of this faction aimed first
for liberation from all outside controls. Liberation, they believed,
would automatically lead to complete modernization of Bulgarian society.
The crushing of the large-scale Vidin peasant revolt in 1851 brought
intervention by Britain and France, who bolstered and protected the
Ottoman Empire throughout the nineteenth century as a counterweight to
Russian expansion. To prevent destabilizing unrest, Britain and France
forced the Turks to introduce land reform in western Bulgaria in the
early 1850s and a series of major social reforms in 1856 and 1876.
Nominally, those measures included equal treatment for non-Muslims in
the empire and parliamentary representation for Bulgarians and Serbs.
These changes, however, were the cosmetic product of Turkey's need for
Western support in major wars with Russia. They did nothing to blunt the
nationalist drive of the Bulgarian radicals.
The First Independence Organizations
In 1862 Georgi Rakovski assembled the first armed group of Bulgarians
having the avowed goal of achieving independence from the Ottoman
Empire. Rakovski, well-educated and experienced in the 1841 uprising and
the drive for ecclesiastical independence, envisioned a federal republic
including all Balkan nations except Greece. His fighters were to stir a
full-scale national uprising after crossing into Bulgaria from assembly
points in Romania and Serbia. But the Serbs, who had supported the
Bulgarians while they were useful in opposing the Turks, disbanded the
Bulgarian legions in Serbia when they no longer served that purpose.
Although Rakovski died in 1867 without achieving Bulgarian independence,
he united the �migr� intelligentsia, and the presence of his army
influenced Turkish recognition of the Bulgarian church in 1870.
The Bulgarian Secret Central Committee, founded by �migr�
Bulgarians in Bucharest in 1866, continued Rakovski's mission under the
leadership of Vasil Levski and Liuben Karavelov. These ideologues
refined Rakovski's idea of armed revolutionary groups, creating a cadre
of intellectuals who would prepare the people to rise for independence.
Beginning in 1868, Levski founded the first revolutionary committees in
Bulgaria. Captured by the Turks, he became a national hero when he was
hanged in 1873. In 1870 Karavelov founded the Bulgarian Revolutionary
Central Committee (BRCC) in Bucharest. The death of Levski temporarily
shattered the group, but the committee resumed its activities when
Georgi Benkovski joined its leadership in 1875. By this time, the
political atmosphere of the Balkans was charged with revolution, and the
Ottoman Empire looked increasingly vulnerable. Britain, Russia, and
Austria-Hungary were growing concerned about the implications of those
trends for the European balance of power. In 1875 Bosnia and Hercegovina
revolted successfully against the Turks, and the next year Serbia and
Montenegro attacked the Ottoman Empire.
The Final Move to Independence
In the early 1870s, the BRCC had built an intricate revolutionary
organization, recruiting thousands of ardent patriots for the liberation
struggle. Finally, in 1875 the committee believed that external
distractions had weakened the Ottoman Empire enough to activate that
struggle. Local revolutionary committees in Bulgaria attempted to
coordinate the timing and strategy of a general revolt. Armed groups
were to enter Bulgaria from abroad to support local uprisings, and
diversionary attacks on Ottoman military installations were planned.
Despite these efforts at coordination, the BRCC strategy failed.
Although planned as a general revolt, the September Uprising of 1875
occurred piecemeal in isolated locations, and several local
revolutionary leaders failed to mobilize any forces. The Turks easily
suppressed the uprising, but the harshness of their response attracted
the attention of Western Europe; from that time, the fate of Bulgaria
became an international issue.
Following the failure of the September Uprising, Benkovski
reorganized the BRCC and made plans for a new revolt. The April Uprising
of 1876 was more widespread, but it also suffered from poor
coordination. Poor security allowed the Turks to locate and destroy many
local groups before unified action was possible. Massacres at Batak and
other towns further outraged international opinion by showing the
insincerity of recent Turkish reform proposals. The deaths of an
estimated 30,000 Bulgarians in these massacres spurred the Bulgarian
national movement. An international conference in Constantinople
produced proposals to curb the Muslim fanaticism responsible for the
Bulgarian massacres and give local self-government to the Christians on
European territory in the empire. Two autonomous Bulgarian regions were
proposed, one centered at Sofia and the other at Turnovo. When the
sultan rejected the reforms, Russia declared war unilaterally in early
1877. This was Russia's golden opportunity to gain control of Western
trade routes to its southwest and finally destroy the empire that had
blocked this ambition for centuries. Shocked by the Turkish massacres,
Britain did not oppose Russian advances.
San Stefano, Berlin, and Independence
In eight months, Russian troops occupied all of Bulgaria and reached
Constantinople. At this high point of its influence on Balkan affairs,
Russia dictated the Treaty of San Stefano in March 1878. This treaty
provided for an autonomous Bulgarian state (under Russian protection)
almost as extensive as the First Bulgarian Empire, bordering the Black
and Aegean seas. But Britain and Austria-Hungary, believing that the new
state would extend Russian influence too far into the Balkans, exerted
strong diplomatic pressure that reshaped the Treaty of San Stefano four
months later into the Treaty of Berlin. The new Bulgaria would be about
onethird the size of that prescribed by the Treaty of San Stefano;
Macedonia and Thrace, south of the Balkans, would revert to complete
Ottoman control. The province of Eastern Rumelia would remain under
Turkish rule, but with a Christian governor.
Whereas the Treaty of San Stefano called for two years of Russian
occupation of Bulgaria, the Treaty of Berlin reduced the time to nine
months. Both treaties provided for an assembly of Bulgarian notables to
write a constitution for their new country. The assembly would also
elect a prince who was not a member of a major European ruling house and
who would recognize the authority of the Ottoman sultan. In cases of
civil disruption, the sultan retained the right to intervene with armed
force.
The final provisions for Bulgarian liberation fell far short of the
goals of the national liberation movement. Large populations of
Bulgarians remained outside the new nation in Macedonia, Eastern
Rumelia, and Thrace, causing resentment that endured well into the next
century. (Bulgarians still celebrate the signing of the Treaty of San
Stefano rather than the Treaty of Berlin as their national independence
day.) In late 1878, a provisional Bulgarian government and armed
uprisings had already surfaced in the Kresna and Razlog regions of
Macedonia. These uprisings were quelled swiftly by the Turks with
British support. During the next twenty-five years, large numbers of
Bulgarians fled Macedonia into the new Bulgaria, and secret liberation
societies appeared in Macedonia and Thrace. One such group, the Internal
Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO), continued terrorist
activities in the Balkans into the 1930s.
Bulgaria - DECADES OF NATIONAL CONSOLIDATION
Despite strong dissatisfaction with the frontiers imposed by the
European powers, a new Bulgarian state was born in 1878. And despite
early political uncertainty, the first thirty-four years of modern
Bulgaria were in many ways its most prosperous and productive.
Forming the New State
In 1879 a constituent assembly was duly convened in Turnovo. Partly
elected and partly appointed, the assembly of 230 split into
conservative and liberal factions similar to those that had existed
before independence. The liberals advocated continuing the alliance of
peasants and intelligentsia that had formed the independence movement,
to be symbolized in a single parliamentary chamber; the conservatives
argued that the Bulgarian peasant class was not ready for political
responsibility, and therefore it should be represented in a second
chamber with limited powers. The framework for the Turnovo constitution
was a draft submitted by the Russian occupation authorities, based on
the constitutions of Serbia and Romania. As the assembly revised that
document, the liberal view prevailed; a one-chamber parliament or subranie
would be elected by universal male suffrage. Between the annual fall
sessions of the subranie, the country would be run jointly by
the monarch and a council of ministers responsible to parliament. The
liberals who dominated the assembly incorporated many of their
revolutionary ideals into what became one of the most liberal
constitutions of its time. The final act of the Turnovo assembly was the
election of Alexander of Battenburg, a young German nobleman who had
joined the Russians in the war of 1877, to be the first prince of modern
Bulgaria.
From the beginning of his reign, Alexander opposed the liberal wing
in Bulgaria and the Turnovo constitution. After two years of conflict
with the liberal council of ministers headed by Dragan Tsankov,
Alexander received Russian backing to replace Tsankov. When the Russian
Tsar Alexander II was assassinated, Russian policy changed to allow a
grand national assembly to consider the constitutional changes desired
by Prince Alexander. The assassination had spurred conservatism in
Russia, and the Bulgarian liberals had alarmed the Russians by refusing
foreign economic aid in the early 1880s. To the dismay of the liberals,
Russia intervened in the election of the constitutional subranie,
frightening voters into electing a group that passed the entire package
of amendments. Liberal influence was sharply reduced by amendments
limiting the power of the subranie. But, because the
conservative approach to governing Bulgaria had little popular support,
Alexander made a series of compromises with liberal positions between
1881 and 1885. The Turnovo constitution was essentially restored by
agreement between Tsankov and the conservatives in 1883, and the
constitutional issue was resolved. In only the first two years of
Bulgaria's existence, two parliaments and seven cabinets had been
dissolved, but more stable times lay ahead.
By 1884 the conservative faction had left the government, but the
liberals split over the high price of purchasing the Ruse-Varna Railway
from the British, as required by the Treaty of Berlin. As on earlier
issues, the more radical faction sought to reduce the influence of the
European powers who had imposed the Treaty of Berlin. This group was led
by Petko Karavelov, brother of revolutionary leader Liuben Karavelov and
prime minister in the mid-1880s.
The most important issue of that period was Bulgaria's changing
relationship with Russia. Bulgarian hostility towards the Russian army,
refusal to build a strategic railway for the Russians through Bulgaria,
and poor relations between Prince Alexander and Tsar Alexander III of
Russia all contributed to increasing alienation. Because conservative
Russia now feared unrest in the Balkans, Karavelov tried to appease the
tsar by quelling the uprisings that continued in Macedonia. Radical
factions in Bulgaria were persuaded to lower their goals from annexation
of Macedonia and Thrace to a union between Bulgaria and Eastern Rumelia.
When a bloodless coup achieved this union in 1885, however, Russia
demanded the ouster of Prince Alexander and withdrew all Russian
officers from the Bulgarian army. Greece and Serbia saw their interests
threatened, and the latter declared war on Bulgaria.
The Bulgarian army won a brilliant victory over Serbia, with no
Russian aid, at the Battle of Slivnitsa. Although the victory was a
source of great national pride for Bulgaria, Russia continued to
withhold recognition of the union with Eastern Rumelia until Prince
Alexander abdicated. Finally, Russian-trained Bulgarian army officers
deposed the prince in August 1886.
The Stambolov Years
When Alexander left behind a three-man regency headed by Stefan
Stambolov, the Bulgarian government was as unstable as it was in its
first year. A Russian-educated liberal, Stambolov became prime minister
in 1887 and ceased tailoring Bulgarian policy to Russian requirements.
The tsar's special representative in Bulgaria returned to Russia after
failing to block a subranie called to nominate a new prince.
Russo-Bulgarian relations remained chilly for the next ten years, and
this break further destabilized Bulgarian politics and society.
Stambolov brutally suppressed an army uprising in 1887 and began seven
years of iron control that often bypassed the country's democratic
institutions but brought unprecedented stability to Bulgaria. Meanwhile,
Ferdinand of SaxeCoburg -Gotha, a Catholic German prince, accepted the
Bulgarian throne in August 1887.
Independence from the Ottoman Empire brought drastic economic and
social changes to Bulgaria at the end of the nineteenth century.
Industrialization proceeded rapidly (thirty-six major factories opened
between 1878 and 1887), and a new class of industrial labor formed from
displaced artisans and agricultural workers. Harsh working conditions
led the urban poor to the cause of socialism, and in 1891 the Social
Democratic Party was formed. (Later transformation of one of its
factions into the Bulgarian Communist Party made that organization the
oldest communist party in the world.) Town-centered trade and the guild
structure were swept away by an influx of West European commerce to
which Bulgaria had been opened by the terms of the Treaty of Berlin.
Despite industrialization, Bulgaria remained primarily an
agricultural country. Liberation eliminated the Ottoman feudal
landholding system. Bulgarian peasants were able to buy land cheaply or
simply occupy it after Turkish landlords left, and a system of
village-based small landholding began. Agricultural production rose in
spite of heavy government land taxes. Many peasants were forced into the
urban work force by taxes or high interest on borrowings for land
purchase. Until the end of the nineteenth century, the vast majority of
the Bulgarian population were small landholders or independent small
tradesmen.
Russia and the other great powers did not recognize Ferdinand as
rightful prince of Bulgaria until 1896. Supporters of Prince Alexander
who remained in power used this failure as a weapon against the policies
of Ferdinand and Stambolov. In 1890 a widespread plot against the
government was discovered. As before, the basis of the plot was
dissatisfaction with Stambolov's refusal to intercede with the Turks on
behalf of Macedonian independence. In a masterful diplomatic stroke,
Stambolov represented the insurrection to the Turks as an example of
potential chaos that could be avoided by minor concessions. Fearing the
Balkan instability that would follow an overthrow of Ferdinand, the
Turks then ceded three major Macedonian dioceses to the Bulgarian
exarchate. Stambolov thus gained solid church support and an
overwhelming victory in the 1890 election, which legitimized his
government among all Bulgarian factions and reduced the threat of
radical plots.
In the next years, Stambolov and the People's Liberal Party he had
founded in 1886 exerted virtually dictatorial power to suppress extreme
nationalism and opposing parties and create conditions for economic
growth. After the 1886 coup, the army was strictly controlled. Voters
were intimidated to ensure the reelection of incumbent officials, and
political patronage grew rampant. Using his own and Ferdinand's ties
with Germany and Austria-Hungary, Stambolov built a capitalist Bulgarian
economic system on foreign loans, protectionism, an expanded industrial
and transport infrastructure, and a strict tax system for capital
accumulation. Especially important to the Bulgarian economy were
completion of the Vienna-to-Constantinople Railway through Bulgaria in
1888 and the Burgas-Yambol Railway in the early 1890s. Stambolov derived
strong political support from the entrepreneurs who benefited from his
industrial policy. The Stambolov era marked the victory of executive
over legislative power in the Bulgarian political system.
Legitimacy of the Bulgarian throne remained an important symbolic
issue in the early 1890s, and the threat of assassination or overthrow
of the prince remained after Stambolov consolidated his power.
Therefore, Stambolov found a Catholic wife for Ferdinand and maneuvered
past Orthodox Church objections in 1893 to ensure Ferdinand an heir that
would stabilize the throne. That heir, Boris, was born the next year.
Meanwhile, Stambolov's autocratic maneuvering and tough policies won him
many enemies, especially after the stabilization of the early 1890s
appeared to make such tactics unnecessary. In 1894 Ferdinand dismissed
his prime minister because the prince sought more power for himself and
believed that Stambolov had become a political liability. The next year,
Macedonian radicals assassinated Stambolov.
The Rule of Ferdinand
The new administration was mainly conservative, and Ferdinand became
the dominant force in Bulgarian policy making. His position grew
stronger when Russia finally recognized him in 1896. The price for
recognition was the conversion of Prince Boris to Orthodoxy from
Catholicism. The Russian attitude had changed for two reasons: Alexander
III had died in 1894, and new Turkish massacres had signaled a collapse
of the Ottoman Empire that would threaten Russian and Bulgarian
interests alike. In the next twenty years, no strong politician like
Stambolov emerged, and Ferdinand was able to accumulate power by
manipulating factions. Several liberal and conservative parties, the
descendants of the two preliberation groups, held power through 1912 in
a parliamentary system that seldom functioned according to the
constitution. The Bulgarian Social Democratic Party took its place in
the new political order, advocating class struggle, recruiting members
from the working class, and organizing strikes.
After relations with Russia had been repaired, Bulgaria's
international position stabilized, allowing the economy to continue
growing undisturbed until 1912. In this period, the government continued
active intervention in agriculture and industry; it promoted new
agricultural methods that improved the yield from fertile lands still
being reclaimed from the Turks in 1900. Bulgarian economic growth
continued growing because of a combination of factors: borrowing from
West European industrial countries, a strong banking system, and a
generally sound investment policy. Between 1887 and 1911, the number of
industrial plants grew from 36 to 345. But the government's financial
policy greatly increased the national debt, which by 1911 was three
times the national budget and required 20 percent of the budget for
interest payment. New land taxes and grain tithes were levied in the
1890s, leading to peasant revolts. In 1899 the Bulgarian Agrarian Union
was founded, the result of a decade of growing rural discontent and
resentment against the intellectual and governing class. Within two
years, the union had evolved into an official party, the Bulgarian
Agrarian National Union (BANU), which was accepted by most Bulgarian
peasants as truly representing their interests. Soon, Bulgarian
politicians viewed BANU as the most potent political group in the
country.
The Macedonian Issue
Macedonian unrest continued into the twentieth century. Between 1894
and 1896, the government of Konstantin Stoilov reversed Stambolov's
policy of controlling Macedonian extremists. When he sought to negotiate
with the Turks for territorial concessions in Macedonia at the end of
the century, Stoilov found that he could not control IMRO. By 1900 that
group, which advocated Macedonian autonomy over the standard Bulgarian
policy goal of annexation, had gained control of the Macedonian
liberation movement inside Bulgaria. Russia and the Western powers now
held Ferdinand responsible for all disruptions in Macedonia, causing
suspicion of all Bulgarian activity in the Balkans. Greece and Serbia
also laid claim to parts of Macedonia, giving them vital interests in
the activities of IMRO as well. In 1902 Russia and Austria-Hungary
forced Serbia and Bulgaria to cut all ties with IMRO.
In 1903 Macedonian liberation forces staged a widespread revolt, the
Ilinden-Preobrazhensko Uprising. Despite strong public support for the
Macedonian cause, Bulgaria sent no help, and the Turks again suppressed
opposition with great violence. Large numbers of refugees now entered
Bulgaria from Macedonia.
In the next four years, Austria-Hungary and Russia sought a formula
by which to administer Macedonia in a way satisfactory to Bulgarian,
Serbian, and Greek interests and approved by Constantinople. Although
nominal agreement was reached in 1905, Serbian, Greek, and Bulgarian
sympathizers clashed in Macedonia in 1906 and 1907. After the death of
its leader Gotse Delchev in the 1903 uprising, IMRO's influence
decreased. Bulgarian public sympathy for the Macedonian cause also
diminished, and by 1905 the government's attention turned to internal
matters.
Inspired by the 1905 uprisings in Russia, a series of riots and
demonstrations between 1905 and 1908 were a reaction by workers, the
poor, and some of the intelligentsia to several issues: domestic
repression, government corruption, and the handling of the Macedonian
issue. In 1906 anti-Greek riots and destruction of Greek property were
ignited in some parts of Bulgaria by Greek claims to Macedonia. In spite
of heavy fines and prohibitions against striking, a rail strike occurred
in 1906, and in 1907 Prime Minister Nikola Petkov was assassinated.
Full Independence
The strikes and demonstrations remained isolated and had little
practical effect, so Ferdinand remained in firm control. In 1908 the
Young Turks, an energetic new generation of reformers, gained power in
the Ottoman Empire. Their ascendancy temporarily restored the
international self-confidence of the empire and threatened a renewed
Turkish influence in the Balkans. To protect the territory it occupied
in Bosnia and Hercegovina, Austria-Hungary annexed those regions. While
the Turks were preoccupied with that situation, Ferdinand nationalized
the Bulgarian section of his main international rail line and declared
himself tsar of a fully independent Bulgaria. The Western powers, again
seeing the threat of Ottoman collapse, were appeased by Russian-arranged
financial compromises that saved face for the Turks. But tension between
Bulgaria and Turkey increased dramatically after Ferdinand's
declaration.
The arbitrary nature of Ferdinand's declaration also brought loud
criticism from democratic-minded Bulgarian factions. Nonetheless, the
grand national assembly held at Turnovo in 1911 to incorporate the terms
of independence into the constitution, ratified Ferdinand's title and
expanded his power in conducting foreign affairs.
By 1911 the BANU, led by Aleksandur Stamboliiski, had become the
largest and most vocal opposition faction. Although the BANU never
gained more than 15 percent of a national vote before World War I, the
party had a large, unified following in the peasant class victimized by
poor harvests, usurious interest rates, and high taxes. Stamboliiski's
political philosophy put the peasant and rural life ahead of all other
classes and lifestyles. Hating bureaucrats and urban institutions, he
proposed a government that would provide representation by profession
rather than party, to ensure a permanent peasant majority. His goal was
to establish a peasant republic that would replace the conventional
parliamentary apparatus established at Turnovo. The BANU was a
controversial and powerful force in Bulgarian politics for the next two
decades.
Bulgaria - THE BALKAN WARS
The settlement of the Second Balkan War had also inflamed Bosnian
nationalism. In 1914 that movement ignited an AustrianSerbian conflict
that escalated into world war when the European alliances of those
countries went into effect.
Prewar Bulgarian Politics
Supported by Ferdinand, the government of Prime Minister Vasil
Radoslavov declared neutrality to assess the possible outcome of the
alliances and Bulgaria's position relative to the Entente (Russia,
France, and Britain) and the Central Powers (AustriaHungary and
Germany). From the beginning, both sides exerted strong pressure and
made territorial offers to lure Bulgaria into an alliance. Ferdinand and
his diplomats hedged, waiting for a decisive military shift in one
direction or the other. The Radoslavov government favored the German
side, the major opposition parties favored the Entente, and the
agrarians and socialists opposed all involvement. By mid-1915 the
Central Powers gained control on the Russian and Turkish fronts and were
thus able to improve their territorial offer to Bulgaria. Now victory
would yield part of Turkish Thrace, substantial territory in Macedonia,
and monetary compensation for war expenses. In October 1915, Bulgaria
made a secret treaty with the Central Powers and invaded Serbia and
Macedonia.
Early Successes
Catching the Entente by surprise, Bulgarian forces pushed the Serbs
out of Macedonia and into Albania and occupied part of Greek Macedonia
by mid-1916. British, French, and Serbian troops landed at Salonika and
stopped the Bulgarian advance, but the Entente's holding operation in
Greece turned into a war of attrition lasting from late 1916 well into
1917. This stalemate diverted 500,000 Entente troops from other fronts.
Meanwhile, Romania had entered the war on the Entente side in 1916.
Bulgarian and German forces pushed the poorly prepared Romanians
northward and took Bucharest in December 1916. The Bulgarians then faced
Russia on a new front in Moldavia (the part of Romania bordering
Russia), but little action took place there.
Stalemate and Demoralization
Once the Bulgarian advance into Romania and Greece halted, conditions
at the front deteriorated rapidly and political support for the war
eroded. By 1916 poor allocation of supplies created shortages for both
civilians and soldiers, and a series of government reorganizations
provided no relief. By 1917 the military stalemate and poor living
conditions combined with news of revolution in Russia to stir
large-scale unrest in Bulgarian society. The agrarians and socialist
workers intensified their antiwar campaigns, and soldiers' committees
formed in army units. Bolshevik antiwar propaganda was widely
distributed in Bulgaria, and Russian and Bulgarian soldiers began
fraternizing along the Moldavian front. In December 1917, Dimitur
Blagoev, founder and head of the Social Democratic Party, led a meeting
of 10,000 in Sofia, demanding an end to the war and overthrow of the
Bulgarian government. A wave of unrest and riots, including a
"women's revolt" against food and clothing shortages, swept
through the country in 1918.
The government position weakened further when the Treaty of
Bucharest, which divided the territory of defeated Romania among the
central powers, left part of the disputed Romanian territory of Dobruja
outside Bulgarian control. Having failed to secure even the least
important territory promised by its war policy, the Radoslavov
government resigned in June 1918. The new prime minister, Aleksandur
Malinov, tried to unite the country by appointing the agrarian
Aleksandur Stamboliiski to his cabinet. But Malinov had vowed to fight,
and the BANU leader refused the post as long as Bulgaria remained in the
war. By September the Bulgarian army was thoroughly demoralized by
antiwar propaganda and harsh conditions. A battle with the British and
French at Dobro Pole brought total retreat, and in ten days Entente
forces entered Bulgaria. On September 29, the Bulgarians signed an
armistice and left the war.
Capitulation and Settlement
The retreat from Dobro Pole brought a soldier revolt that was crushed
by German troops near Sofia. But the parties in power forced Ferdinand
to abdicate at the end of September because they feared full-scale
revolution and blamed the tsar for the country's chaotic state.
Ferdinand's son Boris was named tsar, becoming Boris III. The immediate
cause of social upheaval ended with the armistice, but shortages and
discontent with the Bulgarian government continued. An ineffective
coalition government ruled for the next year, then a general election
was called. Meanwhile, Bulgaria was again left far short of the
territorial goals for which it had declared war. In the Treaty of
Neuilly-sur-Seine (November 1919), Thrace was awarded to Greece,
depriving Bulgaria of access to the Aegean Sea. The newly formed Kingdom
of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes took Macedonian territory adjoining
its eastern border, and Southern Dobruja went to Romania.
The treaty limited the postwar Bulgarian Army to a small volunteer
force; Yugoslavia, Romania, and Greece were to receive reparations in
industrial and agricultural goods; and the victorious Allies were to
receive monetary reparations for the next thirty-seven years. On the
other hand, the payment schedule was significantly improved in 1923, and
Bulgaria's loss of 14,100 square kilometers was much less than the
territorial losses of its wartime allies. Nationalist resentment and
frustration grew even stronger because of this outcome, however, and
Bulgaria remained close to Germany throughout the interwar period.
Bulgaria - Stamboliiski
The period after World War I was one of uneasy political coalitions,
slow economic growth, and continued appearance of the Macedonia problem.
Although social unrest remained at a high level, Boris kept firm control
of his government as World War II approached.
Stamboliiski and Agrarian Reform
The 1919 election reflected massive public dissatisfaction with the
war reparations, inflation, and rising taxes that prolonged the chaotic
living conditions of the war. The socialist and agrarian parties
tightened their organizations and increased membership. The left wing of
the Bulgarian Workers' Socialist-Democratic Party (BWSDP) numbered only
25,000 in 1919, and the BANU emerged as the largest party in the
country. The BANU received 28 percent of the 1919 vote, giving it a
plurality but not a majority in the new subranie. Stamboliiski
sought to include the Bulgarian Communist Party (BCP)--which had
finished second in the election-- and the BWSDP in a coalition
government. (The BCP and the BWSDP were the two factions of the
Bulgarian communist movement that had sprung from the Social Democratic
Party founded in 1891; they would remain separate until the former was
disbanded after World War II.) Stamboliiski could not permit the two
factions the control they desired, however, so they refused
participation.
The postwar governing coalition thus included only factions to
Stamboliiski's right. The first major test for the Stamboliiski
government was a transport strike that lasted from December 1919 until
February 1920. Fomented by the communists and the social democrats and
joined by urban workers and middle-class Bulgarians, the striker
protests were quelled harshly by the army and the Orange Guard, a
quasi-military force that Stamboliiski formed to counter mass
demonstrations by the parties of the left.
Suppression of the strike, mobilization of the peasant vote, and
intimidation at the polls gave the BANU enough support to win the
parliamentary election of 1920 over the communists and form a
non-coalition government. Tsar Boris and much of the Bulgarian middle
class preferred the agrarians to the communists and social democrats,
whom they feared much more. Stamboliiski immediately began drastic
economic reforms. He abolished the merchants' trade monopoly on grain,
replacing it with a government consortium; broke up large urban and
rural landholdings and sold the surplus to the poor; enacted an
obligatory labor law to ease the postwar labor shortage; introduced a
progressive income tax; and made secondary schooling compulsory. All
aspects of the radical reform policy aimed at ridding society of
"harmful" classes of society such as lawyers, usurers, and
merchants, distributing capital and obligations more evenly through
society, and raising the living standards of the landless and poor
peasants.
In foreign policy, Stamboliiski officially abandoned Bulgaria's
territorial claims, which he associated with a standing army, monarchy,
large government expenditures, and other prewar phenomena that the
agrarians deemed anachronistic. After the war, no major power was
available to protect Bulgarian interests in the Balkans. For this
reason, the traditional approach to foreign policy was discarded in
favor of rapprochement with all European powers and the new government
of Kemal Atat�rk in Turkey, membership in the League of Nations, and
friendship with the new Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes
(later the Kingdom of Yugoslavia). Relations with Turkey were greatly
improved by Bulgarian support of Atat�rk's revolutionary Turkish
Republic in 1920.
Reconciliation with Yugoslavia was a necessary step toward
Stamboliiski's ultimate goal of a multiethnic Balkan peasant federation.
Improved Yugoslav relations required a crackdown on the powerful
Macedonian extremist movement. Accordingly, Stamboliiski began a
two-year program of harsh suppression of IMRO in 1921; in 1923
Yugoslavia and Bulgaria agreed at the Nis Convention to cooperate in
controlling extremists.
The Fall of Stamboliiski
Led by a large Macedonian group in Sofia, the strong nationalist
elements remaining in Bulgaria found the new pacifist policy alarming.
The urban working class, unaided by agrarian reforms, gravitated to the
communists or the socialist workers. Inflation and industrial
exploitation continued. Many of Stamboliiski's subordinates inflamed
social tensions by taking very dogmatic positions in favor of peasant
rights. The Bulgarian right, silent since the war, reorganized into a
confederation called the National Alliance. Stamboliiski's Orange Guard
jailed the leaders of that group in 1922, temporarily stopping its
momentum. Meanwhile, in late 1922 and early 1923, Macedonian
nationalists occupied Kiustendil along the Yugoslav border and attacked
government figures to protest rapprochement with Yugoslavia and Greece.
Stamboliiski responded with mass arrests, an accelerated campaign
against IMRO terrorism, a purge of his own fragmented and notoriously
corrupt party, and a new parliamentary election. These dictatorial
measures united the agrarians' various opponents (IMRO, the National
Alliance, army factions, and the social democrats) into a coalition led
by Aleksandur Tsankov. The communists remained outside the group.
Bulgaria's Western creditors would not protect a government that had
rejected their reparations policy. In June 1923, Stamboliiski was
brutally assassinated by IMRO agents, and the conspirators shortly took
control of the entire country with only scattered and ineffectual
agrarian resistance.
Bulgaria - The Tsankov and Liapchev Governments
Political Disorder and Diplomatic Isolation
The world economic crisis that began in 1929 devastated the Bulgarian
economy: The social tensions of the 1920s were exacerbated when 200,000
workers lost their jobs, prices fell by 50 percent, dozens of companies
went bankrupt, and per capita income among peasants was halved between
1929 and 1933. A wave of strikes hit Bulgaria in 1930-31, and in 1931
the Liapchev government was defeated in what would be the last open
election with proportional representation of parliamentary seats.
Liapchev's coalition fell apart, his defeat hastened by the rise of a
supra-party organization, Zveno--a small coalition with connections to
most of the major Bulgarian parties and to fascist Italy. The main goal
of Zveno was to consolidate and reform existing political institutions
so that state power could be exerted directly to promote economic
growth. After 1931 Zveno used the economic crisis to instill this idea
in the Bulgarian political system. In 1931 the new government coalition,
the People's Bloc, readmitted the BANU in an attempt to reunite
Bulgarian factions. But the BANU had become factionalized and isolated;
its representatives in the coalition largely pursued political spoils
rather than the interests of their peasant constituency.
Meanwhile, the Macedonian situation in the early 1930s blocked
further attempts to heal Balkan disputes. Four Balkan conferences were
held to address the Macedonian problem; but Bulgaria, fearing IMRO
reprisals, steadfastly refused to drop territorial demands in Macedonia
or quell Macedonian terrorist activities in the region. Such activities
had continued under all Bulgaria's postwar governments, but the People's
Bloc was especially inept in controlling them. The situation eventually
led to the Balkan Entente of 1934, by which Yugoslavia, Greece, Turkey,
and Romania pledged to honor existing borders in the Balkans. For
Bulgaria the isolation inflicted by this pact was a serious diplomatic
setback in southeastern Europe.
In 1932 Aleksandur Tsankov founded Bulgaria's first serious fascist
party, the National Socialist Movement, which imitated the methods of
Hitler's Nazi party. Although Tsankov's party never attracted a large
following, its activities added to the chaotic fragmentation that forced
the People's Bloc from power in May 1934.
Fragmentation of the People's Bloc coalition and the threat posed by
the Balkan Entente led Zveno and various military factions to stage a
right-wing coup. Under the leadership of Colonel Damian Velchev and
Kimon Georgiev, the new prime minister, the new government began taking
dictatorial measures. The government also took immediate steps to
improve relations with Yugoslavia and made overtures to Britain and
France. Diplomatic relations resumed with the Soviet Union in 1934,
despite a marked increase in internal repression of communists and
suspected communists. A concerted drive by the Bulgarian military
against IMRO permanently reduced the power of that organization, which
by 1934 had exhausted most of its support in Bulgarian society. The fact
that sponsorship of Balkan terrorism finally ceased to hinder Bulgarian
foreign policy was the single lasting contribution of the
Velchev-Georgiev government.
The Zveno group abolished all political parties, citing the failure
of such institutions to provide national leadership. The press was
muzzled. Henceforeward the state would be authoritarian and centralized;
the subranie would represent not political parties but the
classes of society: peasants, workers, artisans, merchants, the
intelligentsia, bureaucrats, and professionals. Velchev also proposed a
wide-ranging program of social and technical modernization. In 1935,
however, Tsar Boris III became an active political force in Bulgaria for
the first time. Disillusioned by the results of the 1934 coup, Boris
took action to regain his power, which the new regime had also
curtailed. Boris used military and civilian factions alarmed by the new
authoritarianism to maneuver the Zveno group out of power and declare a
royal dictatorship.
The Royal Dictatorship
In the years following 1935, Boris relied on a series of
uncharismatic politicians to run Bulgaria, weaken the political power of
Zveno and the military, and keep other factions such as the BANU, the
communists, and the national socialists from forming alliances against
him. Boris chose not to restore the traditional political supremacy of
the subranie and ignored demands by many public figures to
write a new Bulgarian constitution. In 1936 a broad coalition, the
People's Constitutional Bloc, brought together nearly all leftist and
centrist factions in a nominal opposition that had the blessing of the
tsar. Boris delayed holding a national election until 1938. At that
time, only individual candidates were allowed in a carefully controlled
election procedure that excluded party candidate lists. Boris claimed
that domination of the new subranie by pro-government
representatives justified his nonparty system, although the People's
Constitutional Bloc seated over sixty delegates. Elections in the next
two years were strictly limited in order to maintain Boris's control
over his parliament.
Bulgaria - The Interwar Economy
As in the case of World War I, Bulgaria fought on the losing German
side of World War II but avoided open conflict with the Russian/Soviet
state. Again the strains of war eroded public support and forced the
wartime Bulgarian government out of office. But World War II heralded a
drastic political change and a long era of totalitarian governance.
The Passive Alliance
Having failed to remain neutral, Boris entered a passive alliance
with the Axis powers. The immediate result was Bulgarian occupation (but
not accession) of Thrace and Macedonia, which Bulgarian troops took from
Greece and Yugoslavia respectively in April 1941. Although the
territorial gains were initially very popular in Bulgaria, complications
soon arose in the occupied territories. Autocratic Bulgarian
administration of Thrace and Macedonia was no improvement over the
Greeks and the Serbs; expressions of Macedonian national feeling grew,
and uprisings occurred in Thrace. Meanwhile, the Germans pressured
Bulgaria to support the eastern front they had opened by invading the
Soviet Union in June 1941. Boris resisted the pressure because he
believed that Bulgarian society was still sufficiently Russophile to
overthrow him if he declared war. After the Japanese attack on Pearl
Harbor ended United States neutrality, Bulgaria declared war on Britain
and the United States, but continued diplomatic relations with the
Soviet Union throughout World War II. Acceleration of domestic war
protests by the BCP in 1941 led to an internal crackdown on dissident
activities of both the right and left. In the next three years,
thousands of Bulgarians went to concentration and labor camps.
The German eastern front received virtually no aid from Bulgaria, a
policy justified by the argument that Bulgarian troops had to remain at
home to defend the Balkans against Turkish or Allied attack. Hitler
reluctantly accepted this logic. Boris's stubborn resistance to
committing troops was very popular at home, where little war enthusiasm
developed. Nazi pressure to enforce anti-Jewish policies also had little
support in Bulgarian society. Early in the war, laws were passed for
restriction and deportation of the 50,000 Bulgarian Jews, but
enforcement was postponed using various rationales. No program of mass
deportation or extermination was conducted in Bulgaria.
Wartime Crisis
In the summer of 1943, Boris died suddenly at age 49, leaving a
three-man regency ruling for his six-year-old son, Simeon. Because two
of the three regents were figureheads, Prime Minister Bogdan Filov, the
third regent, became de facto head of state in this makeshift structure.
The events of 1943 also reversed the military fortunes of the Axis,
causing the Bulgarian government to reassess its international position.
Late in 1943, the Allies delivered the first of many disastrous air
raids on Sofia. The heavy damage sent a clear message that Germany could
not protect Bulgaria from Allied punishment. Once the war had finally
intruded into Bulgarian territory, the winter of 1943-44 brought severe
social and economic dislocation, hunger, and political instability. The
antiwar factions, especially the communists, used urban guerrilla
tactics and mass demonstrations to rebuild the organizational support
lost during the government crackdown of 1941. Partisan activity, never
as widespread as elsewhere in the Balkans during the war, increased in
1944 as the Red Army moved westward against the retreating Germans. To
support antigovernment partisan groups, in 1942 the communists had
established an umbrella Fatherland Front coalition backing complete
neutrality, withdrawal from occupied territory, and full civil
liberties.
Early in 1944, Bulgarian officials tried to achieve peace with the
Allies and the Greek and Yugoslav governments-in-exile. Fearing the
German forces that remained in Bulgaria, Filov could not simply
surrender unconditionally; meanwhile, the Soviets threatened war if
Bulgaria did not declare itself neutral and remove all German armaments
from Bulgaria's Black Sea coast. Unable to gain the protection of the
Allies, who had now bypassed Bulgaria in their strategic planning,
Bulgaria was caught between onrushing Soviet forces and the last gambits
of the retreating Nazis. At this point, the top priority of Bulgarian
leaders was clearing the country of German occupiers while arranging a
peace with the Allies that would deprive Soviet forces of an excuse to
occupy Bulgaria. But in September 1944, the Soviet Union unexpectedly
declared war on Bulgaria, just as the latter was about to withdraw from
the Axis and declare war on Germany.
The Soviet Occupation
When Soviet troops arrived in Bulgaria, they were welcomed by the
populace as liberators from German occupation. On September 9, 1944,
five days after the Soviet declaration of war, a Fatherland Front
coalition deposed the temporary government in a bloodless coup. Headed
by Kimon Georgiev of Zveno, the new administration included four
communists, five members of Zveno, two social democrats, and four
agrarians. Although in the minority, the communists had been the driving
force in forming the coalition as an underground resistance organization
in 1942. The presence of the Red Army, which remained in Bulgaria until
1947, strengthened immeasurably the communist position in dealing with
the Allies and rival factions in the coalition. At this point, many
noncommunist Bulgarians placed their hopes on renewed relations with the
Soviet Union; in their view, both Germany and the Allies had been
discredited by the events of the previous fifteen years. In 1945 the
Allies themselves expected that a benign Soviet Union would continue the
wartime alliance through the period of postwar East European
realignment.
The armistice signed by Bulgaria with the Soviet Union in October
1944 surrendered all wartime territorial gains except Southern Dobruja;
this meant that Macedonia returned to Yugoslavia and Thrace to Greece.
The peace agreement also established a Soviet-dominated Allied Control
Commission to run Bulgaria until conclusion of a peace treaty. Overall
war damage to Bulgaria was moderate compared to that in other European
countries, and the Soviet Union demanded no reparations. On the other
hand, Bulgaria held the earliest and most widespread war crimes trial in
postwar Europe; almost 3,000 were executed as war criminals. Bulgaria
emerged from the war with no identifiable political structure; the party
system had dissolved in 1934, replaced by the pragmatic balancing of
political factions in Boris's royal dictatorship. This condition and the
duration of the war in Europe eight months after Bulgaria's surrender
gave the communists ample opportunity to exploit their favorable
strategic position in Bulgarian politics.
Bulgaria - COMMUNISM
Initial Maneuvering
In the months after the surrender, the communist element of the
Fatherland Front gradually purged opposition figures, exiled Tsar Simeon
II, and rigged elections to confirm its power. In December 1945, a
conference of foreign ministers of the United States, Britain, and the
Soviet Union theoretically allocated two seats to the newly consolidated
opposition BANU in the Bulgarian Council of Ministers, but BANU leaders
demanded an immediate national election and removal of communist
ministers. Because the BANU was now a unified party with substantial
political backing, these demands created a governmental stalemate with
the Fatherland Front for one year. In a national referendum in September
1946, however, an overwhelming majority voted to abolish the monarchy
and proclaim Bulgaria a people's republic.
The next month, a national election chose a subranie to
draft a new constitution. In a widely questioned process, Fatherland
Front candidates won 70 percent of the votes. At this point, however,
opposition to the front remained strong, as communist power grew
steadily. In early 1947, opposition to aggressive communist tactics of
confiscation and collectivization generated a loose anticommunist
coalition within and outside the Fatherland Front, under BANU leader
Nikola Petkov. The power struggle, which centered on the nature of the
new constitution, reached its peak when the Paris peace treaty of
February 1947 required that Soviet forces and the Allied Control
Commission leave Bulgaria immediately. Once the United States ratified
its peace treaty with Bulgaria in June 1947, the communist-dominated
Fatherland Front arrested and executed Petkov and declared Bulgaria a
communist state. Petkov's coalition was the last organized domestic
opposition to communist rule in Bulgaria until 1989.
After 1946 Fatherland Front governments maintained nominal
representation of noncommunist parties. But those parties increasingly
bowed to the leadership of communist Prime Minister Georgi Dimitrov, who
had been appointed in 1946. After two years of postwar turmoil,
Bulgarian political and economic life settled into the patterns set out
by the new communist constitution (referred to as the Dimitrov
Constitution) ratified in December 1947. Dimitrov argued that previous
Bulgarian attempts at parliamentary democracy were disastrous and that
only massive social and economic restructuring could ensure stability.
By the end of 1947, Bulgaria had followed the other East European states
in refusing reconstruction aid from the Marshall Plan and joining the
Communist Information Bureau. In 1948 the Fatherland Front was
reorganized into an official worker-peasant alliance in accordance with
Cominform policy. In December 1947, BANU leader Georgi Traikov had
repudiated traditional agrarian programs; after a thorough purge that
year, his party retained only nominal independence to preserve the
illusion of a two-party system. All other opposition parties disbanded.
The Dimitrov Constitution
Dimitrov guided the framing of the 1947 constitution on the model of
the 1936 constitution of the Soviet Union. The Bulgarian document
guaranteed citizens equality before the law; freedom from
discrimination; a universal welfare system; freedom of speech, the
press, and assembly; and inviolability of person, domicile, and
correspondence. But those rights were qualified by a clause prohibiting
activity that would jeopardize the attainments of the national
revolution of September 9, 1944. Citizens were guaranteed employment but
required to work in a socially useful capacity. The constitution also
prescribed a planned national economy. Private property was allowed, if
its possession was not "to the detriment of the public good."
By the end of 1947, all private industry had been confiscated and
financial enterprises nationalized in the culmination of a gradual
government takeover that began in 1944. The first two-year plan for
economic rehabilitation began in 1947.
Chervenkov and Stalinism in Bulgaria
In 1948 the newly formed Soviet empire in Eastern Europe was
threatened by a split between Yugoslav President Josip Broz Tito and
Soviet leader Joseph V. Stalin. After expelling Yugoslavia from the
Cominform, Stalin began exerting greater pressure on the other East
European states, including Bulgaria, to adhere rigidly to Soviet foreign
and domestic policy. He demanded that the communist parties of those
countries become virtual extensions of the Communist Party of the Soviet
Union (CPSU) by purging all opposition figures. The Bulgarian government
curtailed religious freedom by forcing Orthodox clergy into a Union of
Bulgarian Priests in 1948, taking control of Muslim religious
institutions, and dissolving Bulgarian branches of Roman Catholic and
Protestant churches in 1949. The most visible political victim of the
new policy was Traicho Kostov, who with Georgi Dimitrov and Vasil
Kolarov had led the BCP to power in 1944. Accused by Dimitrov of
treason, Kostov was shot in December 1949. Dimitrov died before Kostov's
execution, Kolarov soon afterward. To fill the power vacuum left by
those events, Stalin chose Vulko Chervenkov, a trusted prot�g�.
Chervenkov would complete the conversion of the BCP into the type of
one-man dictatorship that Stalin had created in the Soviet Union.
Chervenkov assumed all top government and party positions and quickly
developed a cult of personality like that of his Soviet mentor. At
Stalin's command, Chervenkov continued purging party members from 1950
until 1953, to forestall in Bulgaria the sort of Titoist separatism that
Stalin greatly feared. Rigid party hierarchy replaced the traditional
informal structures of Bulgarian governance, and the purges eliminated
the faction of the BCP that advocated putting Bulgarian national
concerns ahead of blind subservience to the CPSU.
The Chervenkov period (1950-56) featured harsh repression of all
deviation from the party line, arbitrary suppression of culture and the
arts along the lines of Soviet-prescribed socialist realism, and an
isolationist foreign policy. By early 1951, Chervenkov had expelled one
in five party members, including many high officials, in his campaign
for complete party discipline. In 1950 a new agricultural
collectivization drive began. In spite of intense peasant resistance,
the collectivization drive continued intermittently until the process
was virtually complete in 1958.
Foreign and Economic Policies
The independent course taken by Tito's Yugoslavia in 1948 caused
Bulgaria to seal the Yugoslav border; a 1953 Balkan Pact among Greece,
Yugoslavia, and Turkey further isolated Bulgaria, which by that time had
cut all relations with Western countries. The Soviet Union now was
Bulgaria's only ally. It supplied military and economic advisers and
provided the model for Bulgarian social services, economic planning, and
education in the early 1950s. Over 90 percent of Bulgarian exports and
imports involved Soviet partnership, although the Soviets often paid
less than world prices for Bulgarian goods. Because the primitive,
mainly agricultural Bulgarian economy closely resembled that of the
Soviet Union, Soviet-style centralized planning in five-year blocks had
more immediate benefits there than in the other European states where it
was first applied in the early 1950s.
After Stalin
The death of Joseph Stalin in March 1953 had strong repercussions in
Bulgaria. By that time, Chervenkov had already moved slightly away from
hard-line Stalinist domestic repression and international isolation, but
the lack of clear ideological guidance from post-Stalin Moscow left him
in an insecure position. Official approval in 1951 of Dimitur Dimov's
mildly heretical novel Tiutiun (Tobacco) had loosened somewhat
the official constraints on literature and other cultural activities. In
1953 Bulgaria resumed relations with Greece and Yugoslavia, some
political amnesties were granted, and planners discussed increasing
production of consumer goods and reducing the prices of necessities. At
the Sixth Party Congress in 1954, Chervenkov gave up his party
leadership but retained his position as prime minister. Todor Zhivkov,
leader of the postwar generation of Bulgarian communist leaders, assumed
the newly created position of first secretary of the party Central
Committee. Several purged party leaders were released from labor camps,
and some resumed visible roles in the party hierarchy.
In spite of the 1954 party shifts, Chervenkov remained the
unchallenged leader of Bulgaria for two more years. The economic shift
away from heavy industry toward consumer goods continued in the
mid-1950s, and direct Soviet intervention in Bulgarian economic and
political life diminished. By 1955, some 10,000 political prisoners had
been released. In an attempt to win political support from the peasants,
Chervenkov eased the pace of collectivization and increased national
investment in agriculture. However, events in the Soviet Union ended
this brief period of calm.
The Fall of Chervenkov
In 1955 the Belgrade Declaration restored Soviet-Yugoslav friendship
and reinstated Tito to the fraternity of world communist leaders.
Because Chervenkov had branded Tito and the Yugoslavs as arch-villains
during his rise to power, this agreement eroded his position. Then, in
February 1956, Nikita S. Khrushchev denounced Chervenkov's patron Stalin
and Stalin's cult of personality at the twentieth congress of the CPSU.
Unwilling to stray from the Soviet party line, the BCP also condemned
the cult of personality (and, implicitly, Chervenkov's
authoritarianism), advocating instead collective leadership and
inner-party democracy. In his 1956 report to party leaders, Zhivkov
expressed this condemnation and promised that the party would make
amends for past injustices--a clear reference to the fate of Kostov and
Chervenkov's other purge victims in the party. Having had his entire
regime repudiated by the party leader, Chervenkov resigned. Zhivkov, who
had thus far remained below Chervenkov in actual party power, now
assumed the full powers of his party first secretary position. The 1956
April Plenum became the official date of Bulgarian de-Stalinization in
party mythology; after that event, the atmosphere of BCP politics
changed significantly.
Intellectual Life
The thaw in Bulgarian intellectual life had continued from 1951 until
the middle of the decade. Chervenkov's resignation and the literary and
cultural flowering in the Soviet Union encouraged the view that the
process would continue, but the Hungarian revolution of fall 1956
frightened the Bulgarian leadership away from encouragement of dissident
intellectual activity. In response to events in Hungary, Chervenkov was
appointed minister of education and culture; in 1957 and 1958, he purged
the leadership of the Bulgarian Writers' Union and dismissed liberal
journalists and editors from their positions. His crackdowns effectively
ended the "Bulgarian thaw" of independent writers and artists
inspired by Khrushchev's 1956 speech against Stalinism. Again mimicking
the Soviet party, which purged a group of high officials in 1957, the
BCP dismissed three party leaders on vague charges the same year. Among
those removed was deputy prime minister Georgi Chankov, an important
rival of Zhivkov. The main motivation for this purge was to assure the
Soviet Union that Bulgarian communists would not fall into the same
heretical behavior as had the Hungarian party in 1956. Through the
political maneuvers of the mid-1950s, Todor Zhivkov enhanced his
position by identifying with the "Bulgarian" rather than
"Soviet" branch of the BCP at the same time as he aligned
himself with the new anti-Stalinist faction in the Soviet Union. He
established especially close ties with Khrushchev at this time.
Domestic Policy and Its Results
Most aspects of life in Bulgaria continued to conform strongly to the
Soviet model in the mid-1950s. In 1949 the Bulgarian educational system
had begun a restructuring process to resemble the Soviet system, and the
social welfare system followed suit. In the mid-1950s, Soviet-style
centralized planning produced economic indicators showing that
Bulgarians were returning to their prewar lifestyle in some respects:
real wages increased 75 percent, consumption of meat, fruit, and
vegetables increased markedly, medical facilities and doctors became
available to more of the population, and in 1957 collective farm workers
benefited from the first agricultural pension and welfare system in
Eastern Europe.
In 1959 the BCP borrowed from the Chinese the phrase "Great Leap
Forward" to symbolize a sudden burst of economic activity to be
injected into the Third Five-Year Plan (1958-1962), whose original scope
was quite conservative. According to the revised plan, industrial
production would double and agricultural production would triple by
1962; a new agricultural collectivization and consolidation drive would
achieve great economies of scale in that branch; investment in light
industry would double, and foreign trade would expand. Following the
Chinese model, all of Bulgarian society was to be propagandized and
mobilized to meet the planning goals. Two purposes of the grandiose
revised plan were to keep Bulgaria in step with the Soviet bloc, all of
whose members were embarking on plans for accelerated growth, and to
quell internal party conflicts. Zhivkov, whose "theses" had
defined the goals of the plan, purged Politburo members and party rivals
Boris Taskov (in 1959) and Anton Yugov (in 1962), citing their criticism
of his policy as economically obstructionist. Already by 1960, however,
Zhivkov had been forced to redefine the impossible goals of his theses.
Lack of skilled labor and materials made completion of projects at the
prescribed pace impossible. Harvests were disastrously poor in the early
1960s; peasant unrest forced the government to raise food prices; and
the urban dissatisfaction that resulted from higher prices compounded a
crisis that broke in the summer of 1962. Blame fell on Zhivkov's
experiments with decentralized planning, which was totally abandoned by
1963.
Bulgaria - THE ZHIVKOV ERA
Beginning in 1961, Todor Zhivkov skillfully retained control of the
Bulgarian government and the BCP. His regime was a period of
unprecedented stability, slavish imitation of Soviet policies, and
modest economic experimentation.
Zhivkov Takes Control
Zhivkov was able to weather the social unrest of 1962 by finding
scapegoats, juggling indicators of economic progress, and receiving help
from abroad. In 1961 Khrushchev had once again denounced Stalin,
requiring similar action in the loyal Soviet satellites. In October
Chervenkov, who had retained considerable party power, was ousted from
the Politburo as an unrepentant Stalinist and obstructor of Bulgarian
economic progress. When Khrushchev visited Bulgaria in 1962, the Soviet
leader made clear his preference for Zhivkov over other Bulgarian party
leaders. Within months Yugov had lost his party position and Chervenkov
was expelled from the party. Thus, in spite of disastrously unrealistic
economic experimentation of the sort that contributed to Khrushchev's
ouster in 1964, Zhivkov had greatly strengthened his position as party
first secretary by the time his Soviet patron had fallen.
In the early 1960s, Zhivkov improved ties with the Bulgarian
intelligentsia by liberalizing censorship and curbing the state security
forces. He also mended relations with the agrarians by granting
amnesties to BANU members and appointing the leader of the party as head
of state. These measures gave Zhivkov a political base broad enough to
survive the fall of Khrushchev, but they did not prevent an army plot
against him in 1965. Zhivkov used the plot as a reason to tighten
control over the army and move security functions from the Ministry of
the Interior to a new Committee of State Security, under his personal
control. Several other plots were reported unofficially in the late
1960s, but after 1962 Zhivkov's position as sole leader of Bulgaria went
without serious challenge.
Zhivkov's Political Methodology
In the 1960s, Zhivkov moved slowly and carefully to replace the
deeply entrenched Old Guard in party positions. He believed that only an
energetic, professional party cadre could lead Bulgaria effectively.
Therefore, he gradually moved a younger group, including his daughter
Liudmila Zhivkova and future party leader Aleksandur Lilov, into
positions of power. At the same time, he juggled party positions enough
to prevent any individual from becoming a serious rival. Unlike
Chervenkov, with his Stalinist personality cult, Zhivkov cultivated an
egalitarian persona that kept him in contact with the Bulgarian people.
Unlike contemporaneous communist leaders in other countries, Zhivkov
displayed a sense of humor even in formal state speeches. Because of the
strong tradition of egalitarianism in Bulgarian political culture, the
contrast of his approach with that of Chervenkov served Zhivkov very
well.
The Constitution of 1971
In 1968 the Prague Spring outbreak of heretical socialism in
Czechoslovakia caused the BCP to tighten control over all social
organizations, calling for democratic centrism and elimination of
unreliable elements from the party. This policy kept the BCP on a
unified path in complete support of Soviet interests; it also led to a
new Bulgarian constitution and BCP program in 1971. Approved by the
Tenth Party Congress and a national referendum, the 1971 constitution
detailed for the first time the structure of the BCP (highly
centralized, in keeping with policy after 1968) and its role in leading
society and the state. BANU was specified as the partner of the BCP in
the cooperative governing of the country. A new State Council was
created to oversee the Council of Ministers and exercise supreme
executive authority. In 1971 Zhivkov resigned as prime minister to
become chairman of the State Council, a position equivalent to Bulgarian
head of state. The new constitution also defined four forms of property:
state, cooperative, public organization, and private. Private property
was limited to that needed for individual and family upkeep.
Foreign Affairs in the 1960s and 1970s
In the first decade of the Zhivkov regime, Balkan affairs remained
central to Bulgarian foreign policy, and relations with the Soviet Union
remained without significant conflict. Because the Soviet Union showed
relatively little interest in the Balkans in the 1950s and 1960s,
Bulgaria was able to improve significantly its relations with its
neighbors. In 1964 an agreement with Greece ended the long postwar
freeze caused by Greek membership in the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization. Bulgaria paid partial wartime reparations to Greece, and
relations were normalized in culture, trade, and communications after
the initial agreement. Turkish-Bulgarian relations were hindered by
irritation over the Turkish minority issue: throughout the postwar
period, wavering Bulgarian policy on internal treatment and emigration
of Bulgarian Turks was the chief obstacle to rapprochement, although
bilateral agreements on emigration and other issues were reached in the
1960s and 1970s.
Relations with Yugoslavia also were strained in the postwar years.
The age-old Macedonian dispute was the principal reason that Yugoslavia
remained untouched by Zhivkov's Balkan d�tente policy. In the
mid-1960s, Tito and Zhivkov exchanged visits, but by 1967 official
Bulgarian spokesmen were again stressing the Bulgarian majority in
Yugoslav-ruled Macedonia, and a new decade of mutually harsh propaganda
began. Although the polemic over Macedonia continued through the 1980s,
it served both countries mainly as a rallying point for domestic
political support, and Bulgaria avoided taking advantage of Yugoslav
vulnerabilities such as the unrest in the province of Kosovo. In the
early 1980s, much of Bulgaria's anti-Yugoslav propaganda aimed at
discrediting heretical economic policy applications (feared by every
orthodox communist neighbor of Yugoslavia) in Yugoslav Macedonia. In
1981 Zhivkov called for establishment of a Balkan nuclear-free zone that
would include Romania, Greece, Turkey, and Yugoslavia. The concept was
notable not because of its practical implications (Bulgaria was
generally unsupportive of regional cooperation, and the potential
participants had strongly differing international positions), but as a
Soviet device to remove NATO nuclear weapons from Greece and Turkey at a
time of superpower tension over European weapons installations.
In the 1970s, Zhivkov actively pursued better relations with the
West, overcoming conservative opposition and the tentative,
tourism-based approach to the West taken in the 1960s. Emulating Soviet
d�tente policy of the 1970s, Bulgaria gained Western technology,
expanded cultural contacts, and attracted Western investments with the
most liberal foreign investment policy in Eastern Europe. Between 1966
and 1975, Zhivkov visited Charles de Gaulle and the pope and established
full diplomatic relations with the Federal Republic of Germany (West
Germany). As in 1956 and 1968, however, Soviet actions altered
Bulgaria's position. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in late 1979,
which Bulgaria supported vigorously, renewed tension between Bulgaria
and the West. Bulgarian implication in the attempted assassination of
Pope John Paul II in 1981 exacerbated the problem and kept relations
cool through the early 1980s.
Bulgaria also followed the Soviet example in relations with Third
World countries, maintaining the image of brotherly willingness to aid
struggling victims of Western imperialism. Student exchanges already
were common in the 1960s, and many Bulgarian technicians and medical
personnel went to African, Asian, and Latin American countries in the
1970s and 1980s. Cultural exchange programs targeted mainly the young in
those countries. Between 1978 and 1983, Zhivkov visited seventeen
Third-World countries and hosted leaders from at least that many.
Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, Bulgaria gave official military
support to many national liberation causes, most notably in the
Democratic Republic of Vietnam, (North Vietnam), Indonesia, Libya,
Angola, Afghanistan, the Horn of Africa, and the Middle East. In 1984
the 9,000 Bulgarian advisers stationed in Libya for military and
nonmilitary aid put that country in first place among Bulgaria's
Third-World clients. Through its Kintex arms export enterprise, Bulgaria
also engaged in covert military support activities, many of which were
subsequently disclosed. In the 1970s, diplomatic crises with Sudan and
Egypt were triggered by Bulgarian involvement in coup plots. Repeated
discoveries of smuggled arms shipments from Bulgaria to Third-World
countries gave Bulgaria a reputation as a major player in international
arms supply to terrorists and revolutionaries. Arms smuggling into
Turkey periodically caused diplomatic problems with that country in the
1970s.
Domestic Policy in the 1960s and 1970s
Zhivkov's domestic policy in the late 1960s and 1970s emphasized
increased production by Bulgaria's newly completed base of heavy
industry, plus increased consumer production. The industrial base and
collectivization of Bulgarian agriculture had been achieved largely by
emulating Khrushchev's approaches in the early 1960s; but after
Khrushchev fell, Zhivkov experimented rather freely in industrial and
agricultural policy. A 1965 economic reform decentralized decision
making and introduced the profit motive in some economic areas. The
approach, a minor commitment to "planning from below" in
imitation of Yugoslavia's self-management program, was abandoned in
1969. Taking its place, a recentralization program gave government
ministries full planning responsibility at the expense of individual
enterprises.
Meanwhile, a new program for integration and centralization of
agriculture was born in 1969. The agricultural-industrial complex
(agropromishlen kompleks--APK) merged cooperative and state farms and
introduced industrial technology to Bulgarian agriculture. In the 1970s
the APK became the main supporting structure of Bulgarian agriculture.
The social and political goal of this program was to homogenize
Bulgarian society, ending the sharp dichotomy that had always existed
between rural and town populations and weakening the ideological force
of the BANU. If the traditional gulf between Bulgarian agricultural and
industrial workers were eliminated, the BCP could represent both groups.
Despite this large-scale reorganization effort, the Bulgarian tradition
of small peasant farming remained strong into the 1980s.
In keeping with the d�tente of the 1970s, Bulgaria sought
independent trade agreements with the West throughout that decade, to
furnish technology and credit not available within the Council for
Mutual Economic Assistance. Economic cooperation and license agreements
were signed with several West European countries, most notably West
Germany. Although the Western demand for Bulgarian goods remained
generally low and Western commodities proved unexpectedly expensive in
the late 1970s, Bulgaria's expansion of Western trade in that decade was
unusually high for a Comecon member nation.
The Political Atmosphere in the 1970s
Through the mid-1970s, Zhivkov continued balancing the older and
younger generations and the reformist and conservative factions in his
party, with only occasional purges of key officials. But in 1977, the
purge of liberal Politburo member Boris Velchev introduced a massive
reorganization of provincial party organizations that ousted 38,500
party members. This move was designed to limit the atmosphere of
liberalization that had followed the 1975 Helsinki Accords. That mood
and an economic crisis caused by oil shortages in the 1970s aroused
discontent and demonstrations in Bulgaria in the late 1970s.
At the end of the decade, two more crises confronted Zhivkov: in 1978
the murder of exiled writer Georgi Markov was widely attributed to
Bulgarian State Security, damaging the country's international image;
and in 1980 the Polish Solidarity movement alarmed the entire Soviet
Bloc by attracting an active anticommunist following in a key Warsaw
Pact country. Although the magnitude of Bulgarian social discontent was
much less than that in Poland, the BCP ordered production of more
consumer goods, a reduction of party privileges, and limited media
coverage of Poland in the early 1980s as an antidote to the "Polish
infection."
Meanwhile, in 1980 Zhivkov had improved his domestic position by
appointing his daughter Liudmila Zhivkova as chair of the commission on
science, culture, and art. In this powerful position, Zhivkova became
extremely popular by promoting Bulgaria's separate national cultural
heritage. She spent large sums of money in a highly visible campaign to
support scholars, collect Bulgarian art, and sponsor cultural
institutions. Among her policies was closer cultural contact with the
West; her most visible project was the spectacular national celebration
of Bulgaria's 1,300th anniversary in 1981. When Zhivkova died in 1981,
relations with the West had already been chilled by the Afghanistan
issue, but her brief administration of Bulgaria's official cultural life
was a successful phase of her father's appeal to Bulgarian national
tradition to bind the country together.
Bulgaria in the 1980s
Despite the resumption of the Cold War, by 1980 several longstanding
problems had eased in Bulgaria. Zhivkova had bolstered national pride
and improved Bulgaria's international cultural image; Zhivkov had eased
oppression of Roman Catholics and propaganda against the Bulgarian
Orthodox Church in the 1970s, and used the 1,300th anniversary of the
Bulgarian state for formal reconciliation with Orthodox church
officials; the Bulgarian media covered an expanded range of permissible
subject matter; Bulgaria contributed equipment to a Soviet space probe
launched in 1981, heralding a new era of technological advancement; and
the New Economic Model (NEM), instituted in 1981 as the latest economic
reform program, seemingly improved the supply of consumer goods and
generally upgraded the economy.
However, Zhivkova's death and East-West tensions dealt serious blows
to cultural liberalization; by 1984 the Bulgarian Writers' Conference
was calling for greater ideological content and optimism in literature.
Once fully implemented in 1982, NEM was unable to improve the quality or
quantity of Bulgarian goods and produce. In 1983 Zhivkov harshly
criticized all of Bulgarian industry and agriculture in a major speech,
but the reforms generated by his speech did nothing to improve the
situation. A large percentage of high-quality domestic goods were
shipped abroad in the early 1980s to shrink Bulgaria's hard-currency
debt, and the purchase of Western technology was sacrificed for the same
reason, crippling technical advancement and disillusioning consumers. By
1984 Bulgaria was suffering a serious energy shortage because its
Soviet-made nuclear power plant was undependable and droughts reduced
the productivity of hydroelectric plants. Like the cutback in technology
imports, this shortage affected all of Bulgarian industry. Finally,
Bulgarian implication in the plot to assassinate Pope John Paul II in
1981 and in international drugs and weapons trading impaired the
country's international image and complicated economic relations with
the West.
The problem of the Turkish minority in Bulgaria continued into the
1980s. Because birth rates among the Turks remained relatively high
while Bulgarians approached a zero-growth birth rate in 1980, Bulgarian
authorities sought to mitigate the impact of growing Turkish enclaves in
certain regions. While Bulgaria discontinued its liberal 1969 emigration
agreement with Turkey (presumably to prevent a shortage of unskilled
labor resulting from free movement of Turkish workers back to their
homeland), in 1984 Bulgaria began a massive campaign to erase the
national identity of Turkish citizens by forcing them to take Bulgarian
names. Official propaganda justified forced assimilation with the
assertion that the only "Turks" in Bulgaria were descended
from the Bulgarians who had adopted Islam after the Ottoman occupation
in the fourteenth century. This campaign brought several negative
results. Bulgaria's international image, already damaged by events in
the early 1980s, now included official discrimination against the
country's largest ethnic minority. The resumption of terrorist attacks
on civilians, absent for many years, coincided with the new policy. And
Bulgaria's relations with Turkey, which had improved somewhat after a
visit by Turkish President Kenan Evren to Bulgaria in 1982, suffered
another setback.
Bulgaria's close reliance on the Soviet Union continued into the
1980s, but differences began to appear. Much of Zhivkov's success had
come from the secure support of Nikita Khrushchev's successor, Leonid
Brezhnev, with whom Zhivkov had a close personal relationship. By
contrast, relations between Zhivkov and Brezhnev's successor, Iurii V.
Andropov, were tense because Zhivkov had supported Andropov's rival
Konstantin Chernenko as successor to Brezhnev. The advent of Mikhail S.
Gorbachev as Soviet party leader in 1985 defined a new generational
difference between Soviet and Bulgarian leadership. Gorbachev
immediately declared that Bulgaria must follow his example in party
reform if traditional relations were to continue.
By this time, the image of the BCP had suffered for several years
from well-publicized careerism and corruption, and from the remoteness
and advancing age of the party leadership (Zhivkov was seventy-four in
1985). The state bureaucracy, inordinately large in Bulgaria since the
first post-liberation government of 1878, constituted 13.5 percent of
the total national work force in 1977. Periodic anticorruption campaigns
had only temporary effects. The ideological credibility of the party
also suffered from the apparent failure of the NEM, whose goals were
being restated by 1984. Although the BCP faced no serious political
opposition or internal division in the early 1980s, the party launched
campaigns to involve Bulgarian youth more fully in party activities. But
these efforts had little impact on what party leaders perceived as
serious and widespread political apathy. Thus, by 1985 many domestic and
international signs indicated that the underpinning of the long, stable
Zhivkov era was in precarious condition.