FOR OVER forty years Simon II of Bulgaria was denigrated by the communists as an “enemy of the people”. Today he is the darling of the Bulgarian people. His victory in Sunday’s elections makes him the first of East Europe’s exiled monarchs to regain power. That in itself is remarkable. What is equally remarkable is that he — Bulgaria’s former czar — holds power in a country that is still a republic with someone else as president and head of state.
Of course, he hopes that will change. His victory could be interpreted as a sign of desperation by Bulgarians — turning to the past in the hope of a better future. That is the cynic’s view, although there is undoubtedly a small element of truth here. If everything had been working well in Bulgaria, there would have been no royal landslide. What is equally true is that the once and future king has taken a tremendous burden of expectation upon his shoulders.
Some of the general themes of his campaign — membership of NATO and the EU — will be within Bulgaria’s grasp by the time of the next elections. Others — economic growth and an end to corruption — will be more difficult to achieve. It is going to take a lot more than good intentions to sort out Bulgaria’s disastrous economy; and whether that can happen within the lifetime of one parliament is another matter. If not, public enthusiasm for him could vanish as quickly as it has grown. But it would be a mistake to see the vote for Simon II in purely economic terms, and therefore be pessimistic about the future. In voting for him, the Bulgarians have embraced tradition rather than the past, because it is their tradition and not someone else’s.
More importantly Simon has other points going for him. He is charismatic and, as the election campaign demonstrates, blessed with a shrewd political instinct. Nor should it be forgotten that he will not be in government. He will simply choose it. That will put him at one step removed from any political comeback in time of public disillusionment with government, although life would certainly be easier for him if he were to get the business of a referendum to restore the monarchy over and done with as soon as possible. To dismiss him as a failure in advance, as some European newspapers have sadly done, is to misunderstand what this election has been about.
Bulgarians want a bright economic future but they also want a leader whom they can admire, who offers more than mere economic policies. Simon, in the role of constitutional monarch, fits the profile. Even if the economy continues in the doldrums, his presence will give the country a stability and an international respectability which has been noticeably lacking during the last ten years. He says he chose to enter the fray because following the failure of successive post-communist governments to sort out Bulgaria’s mess, he had seen a disturbing disillusionment with democracy, reflected in increasing abstentions in elections and growing nostalgia for the old communist regime. He wanted to stand against that and against corruption and apathy. He has succeeded, and in doing so, has done what a monarch does best: He has rallied his people and given them vision and hope for the future.
