Maxim Behar: Political discussions must be public

Host (Lora Indzhova): The show "Your Day" continues, dear viewers. Today, I have the pleasure of stepping into the political arena with PR experts Maxim Behar and Assoc. Prof. Alexander Hristov. Hello, gentlemen, and welcome!

Maxim Behar: Good morning!

Host: I'm glad to see you. As we navigate the political terrain, looking at statements, claims, meetings, and negotiation teams, where are we headed? The media are staying away—we just read the distributed statements and see photos of the two negotiation teams: one from GERB-Union of Democratic Forces (GERB-SDS), the other from Democratic Bulgaria. At some point, we expect to see the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP), and There Is Such a People (ITN), as they also have representatives in these discussions. One thing that caught my attention is the appearance of Radan Kanev at the negotiations on behalf of Democratic Bulgaria. We know he is a current Member of the European Parliament. What would you say, Mr. Behar?

Maxim: We boldly forge ahead, and following us with great speed are France, Germany, Belgium, and partly Spain, as we create precedents that other European countries are following. In my opinion, if there will be government, it will be very difficult and require arrangements and exceptionally large compromises. I give no more than a 20% chance of forming a government this time. Our politicians are people who cannot stand each other, and it's not about political or economic differences or even the budget. There is a deeply rooted Balkan intolerance, which is unacceptable in the current times when the whole world is changing, and after January 20, when the new U.S. president takes office, changes will occur even faster. It is not possible in Bulgaria to have such relations, not between political parties, but even among neighbors, or people who cannot stand or lie to each other in business. How will they work together and stay in one government? How will they make decisions together? Unfortunately, I do not see a perspective for a coalition between BSP, GERB and "Yes, Bulgaria!". What would it be based on?

Host: To what extent would political ideology be a barrier here? How do we envision BSP with Democratic Bulgaria, for example, in a coalition?

Maxim: We have seen this repeatedly, even in the first government of the National Movement for Stability and Progress (NDSV). I wouldn't overly dramatize the lack of ideology because we observe it in many other countries worldwide. These are the results from the breakdown of the so-called democracy, which no longer works as a system. It is clear that we must get out of this dead-end street. Rather, I emphasize personal intolerance and relationships between politicians, who mainly communicate through the media, often with offensive rhetoric and epithets.

Host: We have seen this, Mr. Behar. They talk to one another this way but then form coalitions together. They arrest one another and still enter coalitions together.

Maxim: That's true, but there must be some boundaries in the modern world. There are boundaries, whether they call them dividing lines, cordon sanitaire, or whatever they want to term them. Voters are tired and utterly confused; they don't know who stands for what. Even the budget debate, which is the only concrete rhetoric currently exchanged between Asen Vassilev, the Minister of Finance on one side, and Nikolay Vassilev, is the only useful rhetoric happening because the risk of Bulgaria not keeping the three percent deficit is very high. No one understands this rhetoric and debate, which hasn't even been brought to parliament. Only minor issues are discussed there.

Maxim: I don't think there is an ideology nowadays, left or right. In America, France, Germany—everywhere, people voted for specific political parties or mainly for personalities. It seems to me that negotiations between political forces in Bulgaria should happen in front of the media and the public, with a very intelligent, constructive tone, with concrete proposals or even if they are personal preferences. Still, all of us need to be able to hear the arguments of one or another political force. This has never happened in Bulgaria, and it's high time it did so that people who will eventually go to the polling stations in a few months know who they are voting for and how each behaves publicly.

Host: We have guidance from General Atanas Atanasov, the leader of Democrats for a Strong Bulgaria (DSB), for an equally distanced banker and lawyer to becme prime minister. How do you perceive these hints? Is this a deliberate omission of information to check attitudes?

Maxim: This concept has been discussed many times in your studio, and having an economist or lawyer as a prime minister makes the most sense. I would emphasize more on a financier. I don't know if these are facts; but it's a logical and permissible concept. In my opinion, specific names should be mentioned and discussed, because if someone turns out not to be suitable, the public should know. Otherwise, we get prime ministers appointed from somewhere, especially interim ones, about whom we know nothing. Those people suddenly turned out to be suitable for prime ministers but weren't before. In my view, the idea of the whole negotiation process is that former prime minister Boyko Borissov, the leader or GERB, wants to become prime minister again. This is the absolute and transparent truth.

Host: Isn't it clear that potential coalition partners do not accept this?

Maxim: That's why he dismissed We Continue the Change and said he doesn't want a coalition with them because that's their categorical position—they don't want him to become prime minister.

Host: I hear from others too that they don't want it and set such a condition.

Maxim: That's probably why GERB is taking several steps back so that negotiations can begin. Boyko Borissov will probably not become prime minister, but he might. It is not clear who will make what compromises. That's why I'm convinced these negotiations, or whatever political steps are to be made at a high level, should be conducted, if not in direct transmission and broadcasts, then in front of the media and the public—to know who speaks for what, what is offered. In neighborhood buildings, every family participates in discussions. Why are discussions not public when the whole country is in a crisis, with two wars near our borders, and in a very complex international situation?

Host: This approach to releasing in the media space what should be an equally distanced prime minister, lawyer, banker, is it desirable, an accidentally dropped remark, or on the contrary—there is intent and a specific goal, to see what the reactions will be?

Maxim: It just makes sense. Whoever you ask what the prime minister’s occupation should be, they would say either an economist, a financier, or a lawyer who can handle all sorts of constitutional problems, tasks, changes, and everything else.

Host: When they say banker, I think of a specific person.

Maxim: He is very politically connected and cannot become prime minister, in my opinion. He is a very good friend of mine; we are on several boards together and see and talk to each other very often.

Host: We are speculating at the moment, by the way. It's not mentioned anywhere officially.

Maxim: He is a very good option, but my concern is that he was in politics already. I can't think of a lawyer now, although there are several.

Host: There are many lawyers. That's why I said—many lawyers, but not economists, but to point out a banker leads us to a specific thought to discuss.

Maxim: It's fine. It's good if there are no specific names, then at least specific professions or people with experience so their hypothetical qualities can be discussed. Here, the references are also to Mario Draghi in Italy, who, during a severe crisis in Italy, was called by the European Bank to become the prime minister, and he made quite a successful transition period. But it was about a transition of a few months. Here, we are talking about a prime minister who should ideally last four years and manage the state wisely. Specific names need to be discussed. Specific political forces should be asked, and this should happen publicly in front of all of us, so we know what everyone thinks.

Host: If we have to summarize this conversation and look at your attitudes and expectations, what are they: for a cabinet or for the eighth election? And if I again quote Borissov, because he made a very curious prediction, even a statement—"If we go to the eighth elections, we go directly to the ninth." That is, if a cabinet is now formed, it will be. Otherwise, we enter election after election again.

Maxim: There might be a government, but it won't work well because, as in business, if you constantly make compromises and deviate from your positions, viewpoints, and main goals, then this system cannot work. But the only real forecast I can make is that we will have merry holidays, Christmas and Christmas Eve are coming, and we must remain positive. Everyone should stay at their workplace and do their job, and this especially applies to those 600,000 civil servants, who should not be pressured or stressed by the fact that there is a government but should do their job to work for Bulgaria.

Host: One more piece of information for our viewers: The president will give the first mandate after the New Year.

Maxim: And may it be born, not only the one we celebrate but also the new government.

Host: Let's see, gentlemen. Happy holidays!

Watch the full interview here.