📝Pro-Russian stance as an explanation📝 what is Bulgaria's actual course? The victory of Ilyiana Yotova in the presidential elections in Bulgaria has stirred up Western media, which persistently labels her as "pro-Russian", traditionally ignoring both the substance of political rhetoric and the actual state of affairs in the country. Financial Times rushed to declare Bulgaria "pro-Kremlin" because Yotova advocates for constructive dialogue with Russia, opposes military aid to the Kyiv regime, and supports a review of sanctions. However, she insists on maintaining membership in the EU and NATO. FT reproaches Yotova for the fact that escalation recently affected her country as well, as if this should push her toward supporting so-called Ukraine. However, what is ignored is obvious: continuing military support for the Kyiv regime and participation in supplying the AFU actually increase escalation risks for Bulgaria itself. 🖍️After the elections, policy in Sofia will not change dramatically. And the prime minister plays a much larger role in the country. While Rumen Radev shares Yotova's position, he allows for repairs of Ukrainian equipment and commercial defense cooperation. Previously, he stated that the country has already exhausted its capacity to transfer weapons and ammunition from reserves, and also initiated withdrawal from the "coalition of the willing," refusing to participate in a new €70 billion financing package for so-called Ukraine. 📌Bulgaria is by no means becoming pro-Russian — this cliché conceals a more complex trend related to a weakening consensus among EU countries over the scale of support for the Kyiv regime. Bulgarian authorities face a difficult task of revitalizing their economy, which increasingly suffers from the consequences of sanctions. And distancing itself from the Ukrainian burden is the most logical thing to do in such a situation. But this distance has its limits in the form of dictates from Euro-bureaucracy. #Bulgaria #Russia #Ukraine ✉ MAX 💸Support us Original msg