EU member Bulgaria faces protests over adopting the euro
Bulgaria is expected to get a green light from Brussels in June to adopt the euro -- but the prospect is unsettling many citizens.
"If Bulgaria joins the eurozone, it will be like boarding the Titanic," Nikolai Ivanov, a retired senior official, told AFP at a recent protest calling for the country's currency -- the lev -- to be maintained.
Since January, opponents of Bulgaria adopting the common European currency have launched demonstrations and demanded a referendum on the issue, amid a torrent of disinformation.
Memories of a 1996-1997 economic crisis that saw 14 banks go bankrupt and hyperinflation of more than 300 percent also resurfaced, fuelling the opposition.
Several recent surveys showed nearly half of those questioned said they were opposed to Bulgaria joining the eurozone.
The debate has reignited anti-EU propaganda, and many of those opposed to adoption of the euro have taken to waving Russian flags.
Bulgaria, which joined the European Union in 2007, is the poorest nation in the bloc.
And "the poor are afraid of becoming even poorer", said Boriana Dimitrova, director of the Alpha Research institute.
That, coupled with a mistrust of institutions after years of instability, has created fertile conditions for the population of 6.4 million to fear economic change.
That fear has been stoked by some political groups, including the far-right Vazrazhdane party, which called for a new anti-euro rally on Saturday in the capital.
The country's pro-Russian president, Rumen Radev, made a surprise announcement in early May also calling for a referendum on the matter.
This week, he accused the government of not implementing needed measures to allow the "most vulnerable" to withstand the shock of euro adoption.
- Pro-EU voices struggling -
A third of Bulgarians faced the threat of poverty or social exclusion last year, according to Eurostat figures.
People particularly in small towns and rural areas are reluctant to adopt the single currency, with some of them having never travelled abroad and not used to international transactions.
Disinformation widely shared on social networks claims, falsely, that with the introduction of the euro, "Brussels will confiscate your savings to finance Ukraine".
Dimitrova told AFP that Radev was making "a well-calculated political move", appealing to a disillusioned segment of the electorate.
But his referendum proposal, deemed "unconstitutional", sparked an outcry from legal experts, and from Assembly Speaker Natalia Kiselova, who refused to put it to a vote.
Meanwhile, pro-European voices are struggling to be heard.
"In Sofia and the larger cities, the population -- wealthier, better educated and younger -- sees it as a logical next step in the European integration process," Dimitrova said.
Institutions and banks are already prepared, and the coins' design has been chosen, with the local two-euro coin showing off the inscription "God protect Bulgaria".
But in a sign of the lack of information and a feeling of inferiority that is still widespread in the country, "some people still ask me if the Bulgarian euro will even be valid in France or Germany", Dimitrova said.
str-rb-anb/jza/rmb/sco
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC Sports
19 minutes ago
- NBC Sports
NFLPA ponders eventual NFL push for European division
The NFL has been printing dollars for years. In time, it may be printing Euros. The NFL Players Association, we're told, is preparing for the NFL to eventually make a push for a four-team European division. Per a source with knowledge of the situation, NFLPA executive director Lloyd Howell has been actively discussing the pros and cons of putting multiple teams — and more than 200 union jobs — on another continent. And there are more than a few cons. Will players want to move to London or Germany or Spain or wherever? Living in a different country introduces a host of new issues, starting with the governmental structure and continuing with the taxation system, cost of living, the potential language barrier, and more. Then there's the draft. It's one thing to tell a 21-year-old who'd prefer to live in his hometown of Pittsburgh that he's moving to Seattle. It's another to tell a kid from Phoenix that he's packing for Frankfurt. From the league's perspective, there's no evidence that a plan is in place to put one or more teams in Europe in the foreseeable future. The goal for now is to expand the number of permissible international games under the Collective Bargaining Agreement from 10 to 16. That said, this year's decision to give the Vikings consecutive 'road' games in Dublin and London is, we've previously explained, the first effort to evaluate the impact of a multi-week foreign trip on a U.S.-based team. If/when team(s) are in Europe, that's how it will go. In lieu of traveling across the Atlantic Ocean twice in a given season, teams will get their European games played during the same trip. One basic question, if the league were to put four teams in Europe, is where the teams will come from. Expansion, as to all four teams, is a possibility. Making that option more attractive is the price that a new owner would pay the other owners for a team. Right now, an expansion fee of $10 billion per team wouldn't be crazy. Four teams means $40 billion, which also means $1.25 billion for each existing owner. Another question becomes where a four-team European division would be placed. Currently, the league has four eight-team divisions. Adding four teams would result in four five-team divisions and four four-team divisions. One obvious goal, in order to minimize travel, would be to put the four European teams (and their two games per year against each other) in the same four-team division. But that division would have to be placed in either the AFC or the NFC. That would create a potentially significant burden on the other teams in the European division's conference — especially if the European division's champion wins the No. 1 seed in the conference. Then there's the reality that the three California-based teams, along with the Seahawks, Cardinals, Raiders, and Broncos, could be facing ridiculously long trips for playoff games. Likewise, the European teams could be facing the same kind of postseason travel realities. One fairly obvious solution would be to restructure the league to put the Rams, 49ers, Seahawks, Cardinals, Raiders, Broncos, Chargers, and one other midwestern team (Cowboys, Texans, Chiefs, Saints, or Vikings) in two divisions of the same conference — with the European division in the other conference. Regardless, it's not just another effort to generate short-term interest and media coverage during the annual European games. Yes, the league has a habit of dangling carrots (e.g., London Super Bowl!) when it's time to move the needle in England. But it's possible that some of the more outlandish possibilities aren't simply aimed at creating headlines. In 2022, Commissioner Roger Goodell mentioned the possibility of a four-team division during a pre-London game hype session. Although he has since pivoted his focus to 16 international regular-season games, it's not an either-or alternative. It's quite possibly a stepping stone.
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Poland votes in tight presidential election between pro-EU candidate and nationalist rival
Voters in Poland have been casting their ballots in the country's presidential election - with the outcome believed to be on a knife-edge. Warsaw mayor Rafal Trzaskowski, who is a liberal pro-EU candidate, is battling conservative historian Karol Nawrocki, who draws inspiration from Donald Trump and his Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement. The vote is being closely watched in neighbouring Ukraine as well as in Russia, the European Union and the United States. The result will mean Poland either cements its place in the EU's mainstream or takes a more nationalist path like MAGA. Mr Trzaskowski, from the ruling centrists Civic Coalition (KO), has a narrow lead in the opinion polls over Mr Nawrocki, who is backed by the right-wing Law and Justice party (PiS). But the lead is within the margin of error. How do the candidates differ? Mr Trzaskowski has said strong ties with both Brussels and Washington DC are vital for his country's security, but Mr Nawrocki, who met President Trump in the White House in May, puts relations with the US first. Both candidates agree that Poland has to continue supporting Ukraine in its fight against Russia's full-scale invasion that started in February 2022. But while Mr Trzaskowski sees Ukraine's future NATO membership as key for Poland's security, his election opponent recently said he would not ratify it as president, as this could draw the alliance into a war with Russia. Mr Trzaskowski, 53, has vowed to restore judicial independence, ease abortion restrictions, introduce civil partnerships for LGBT couples, and promote better ties with European partners. Mr Nawrocki, 42, has positioned himself as a defender of traditional Polish values, sceptical of the EU and aligned with US conservatives. His supporters believe Mr Trzaskowski, with his pro-EU views, would hand over control of key Polish affairs to larger European powers like France and Germany. Read more from Sky News:Two dead and hundreds of arrests after PSG win What happened in the first round? The run-off follows a tightly contested first round on 18 May, in which Mr Trzaskowski won just over 31% while Mr Nawrocki got almost 30%, as 11 other candidates were knocked out. With conservative President Andrzej Duda completing his second and final term, the new president will have significant influence over whether Prime Minister Donald Tusk's centrist government can carry out its agenda. Parliament holds most of the power in Poland - but the president can veto laws. The polls are due to close at 9pm local time (8pm UK time), with exit polls coming out soon after. The electoral commission has said it hopes the final results will be announced on Monday morning or the afternoon.
Buzz Feed
35 minutes ago
- Buzz Feed
The End Of Trump And Putin's Political Romance
Historically, President Donald Trump and Russia's President Vladimir Putin have enjoyed a very special relationship ― at least if you're viewing it through Trump's perspective. As far back as 2013, Trump was envisioning a friendship with the Russian authoritarian leader, whose allegiance to Trump has proved more ambiguous through the years. 'Do you think Putin will be going to The Miss Universe Pageant in November in Moscow — if so, will he become my new best friend?' Trump, the beauty pageant's then-owner, tweeted in June 2013. Later, Trump praised Putin as 'a big hero in Russia' and 'a man so highly respected within his own country and beyond.' (CNN has a more exhaustive list of Trump's effusive remarks about Putin, if you're into that sort of thing) Putin has spoken admiringly of Trump here and there, including a compliment about Trump behaving like a 'real man' after an assassination attempt last year. But many, including former U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton, believe Putin sees Trump as 'an easy mark' on the global stage. 'As a former KGB agent, Putin knows exactly how to manipulate him,' Bolton told the Kyiv Independent in March. (Of course, all of this is complicated by multiple investigations that have documented Russia's interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, which Trump won. Putin has denied any tampering.) That very brief history brings us to the current day: Nearly four months into his second term, Trump's arguably one-sided bromance with Putin has apparently soured. Trump has become increasingly disillusioned with his political BFF as Putin continues to refuse to negotiate a ceasefire with Ukraine. 'I am not happy with the Russian strikes on KYIV. Not necessary, and very bad timing. Vladimir, STOP!' Trump wrote in a widely mocked Truth Social post last month. On Sunday, after Putin launched the largest aerial attack of Moscow's three-year full-scale war on Ukraine, Trump again criticized the Russian leader. 'I've always had a very good relationship with Vladimir Putin of Russia, but something has happened to him. He has gone absolutely CRAZY!' Trump wrote on Truth Social. 'He is needlessly killing a lot of people, and I'm not just talking about soldiers. Missiles and drones are being shot into Cities in Ukraine, for no reason whatsoever.' Then came Putin's response, which couldn't have gone over well with Trump. Trump seemed to be experiencing 'emotional overload,' the Kremlin mused ― the geopolitical equivalent of telling your wife she sounds crazy in the middle of an argument. What's going on with these two? Is the honeymoon stage over? Was there ever much of a bromance to begin with? To untangle all of this, we reached out to Tracy Ross, a couples therapist in New York City, who characterized Trump and Putin as very much a toxic couple. For years, Trump unhealthily idealized and even seemed to aspire to be like the Russian strongman leader, Ross said. It didn't seem to register for Trump that the relationship was unrequited. 'He seemed to exhibit denial in order to maintain his version of who Putin is and what their relationship was,' she said. 'Trump acted like someone with blinders on – rose-colored glasses, defending Putin's intentions and reasoning.' The way he continuously expresses alignment with Putin's positions — even making the audacious claim that Ukraine started the war ― mirrors an unhealthy relationship dynamic (not to mention, puts the U.S. at risk). 'The stakes are different but the dynamics are similar,' Ross said. 'In a toxic or unhealthy relationship dynamic, one person ignores, justifies or reasons away the behavior of the other that is damaging and even destructive.' Trump held tightly to his trumped-up, idealized version of Putin because he believed he was equally admired and respected by the other man, and that his loyalty would allow him to influence Putin's actions. That doesn't seem to be the case, which may come as a surprise to Trump, but not to outsiders, which — again — mirrors an unhealthy relationship dynamic 'when the world sees what you don't because you are too far in it, or invested in your version until something breaks through the denial,' Ross said. While it does appear that Trump is finally waking up when it comes to all things Vlads, the tone he's taking lately is the opposite of strong or statesmanly. Those Truth Social posts speak to Trump's insecurity and need for approval and validation. 'The 'Vladimir, STOP!' statement is oddly childish and groveling,' Ross said. 'It's the way you would speak to someone you are very familiar with and close to. He's trying to express his disapproval and yet hoping to maintain the perceived relationship, the emotional attachment he has to Putin.' It won't be effective, because Putin doesn't need the approval and validation the way Trump does, Ross said. The Kremlin's 'emotional overload' comment is a classic deflective response. It's textbook gaslighting, but then again, so was Trump calling his buddy 'absolutely CRAZY' earlier this week. 'Neither one is taking any accountability or trying to gain clarity,' Ross said. 'If this were a therapy setting, we would work on being interested in how they are impacting one another, trying to get them each to take responsibility instead of escalating, and trying to find resolution instead of upping the ante and continuing to place blame,' she explained. In a marriage, these kinds of petty and small interactions would only lead to more fission. In a geopolitical bromance, the same could be said ― but then it wasn't much of a bromance to begin with. 'Friendship requires reciprocity, taking each others' feelings and points of view into account, a back and forth, a give and take, and mutual respect and regard,' she said. The Trump-Putin rapport always felt asymmetrical and politically imbalanced, with Putin gripping the lion's share of the power. 'Trump often praised or defended Putin, while Putin remained measured or even condescending. There was admiration but it was one-sided,' Ross said. 'Given that this was more of a fantasy bond than an actual bond, a friendship reconciliation is unlikely to happen.' HuffPost.
