site.btaRe-elected EP President Metsola Is a Good Friend of Bulgaria, MEP Emil Radev Says

MEP Emil Radev (EPP) says the re-elected President of the European Parliament (EP), Roberta Metsola is "a good friend of Bulgaria". With the votes of 562 MEPs in Strasbourg on Tuesday, she received support to lead Europe's legislature for the next two and a half years. 

"Mrs Metsola is a unifier. We have seen that she received a huge number of votes from all political families. Bulgaria has always counted on her and she has proved it in the last two mandates that she always supports Bulgaria. Both on its way to Schengen, and in its battles to secure its external border, and in the battles for the rose oil. So this is a good sign", Emil Radev said in a BTA interview minutes after her re-election.

The politician described the new European Parliament as divided and urged his fellow Bulgarian MEPs to be united on issues of importantance for this country, including Schengen.

Asked if he sees a risk for Bulgaria's entry in Schengen for land travel to be shelved over the political instability in Bulgaria, Radev said that "everything depends on whether there is someone to defend the Bulgarian position at the government level". "Our partners in the Council want to talk to a prime minister or a government that has a horizon of more than two months. It is very important who will be at the head of the state, of the government and what policy they will pursue with their Austrian counterparts", Radev stressed.

Below is the full text of the interview with Emil Radev.

Mr Radev, thank you for accepting BTA's invitation to do this interview in the first hours of the first plenary session of the new European Parliament and minutes after the re-election of EP President Metsola. Is this a good sign for Bulgaria?

Yes, it is a good sign, because, first, Roberta Metsola was elected with a huge majority. She is a very good friend of Bulgaria. Bulgaria has always counted on her and she has proved it in the last two mandates that she always supports Bulgaria. Both on its way to Schengen entry, and in its battles to secure its external border, and in the battles for the rose oil. So this is a good sign. Ms Metsola is a unifier. We have seen that she received a huge number of votes from all political families. I hope that she will be able to bring the European Parliament together and make it more united in the future, even though it is quite divided this term. But I hope that she will work fully in Parliament in the interests of European citizens. Especially in days when the challenges facing the European Union are enormous - war, migration, economic crisis, trade wars, etc.  

You say that this European Parliament is more divided. In fact, experts and analysts themselves have described it as "more colourful", "more right-wing", and some of us have even made statements to the effect that there are fewer friends of Russia in it. In this environment, will it not be more difficult for Bulgaria to defend its interests? 

I do not see what will change in the pro-European majority, because we have one again. The European People's Party is a unifier in this more European majority. Our delegation in the European People's Party is very well represented. We have the support of the largest political force. I hope that my colleagues in the Bulgarian delegation from the other political parties will also make sure that their political families support Bulgaria, because we have important battles ahead of us. By the end of the year, there should be developments on [Bulgaria's efforts to gain entry in] Schengen for land travel. The European Parliament has always stood behind Bulgaria, and in the last month of the previous mandate we also voted a resolution on which I was rapporteur for the European People's Party. At that time, the European Parliament overwhelmingly called once again for Bulgaria and Romania to be admitted to Schengen by land this semester. We can see that we have the support of the European Commission. So I hope that we will have the full support of the European Parliament, as has been the case so far. But I very much hope that my colleagues from the other political parties, just as in the last mandate, will find common ground and that when we defend the undisputed interests of Bulgaria, such as Schengen, such as Bulgarian rose oil, when we defended Bulgarian carriers as regards the Mobility Package, I think that these issues should unite the entire Bulgarian delegation and show that we are united. And then we will have success here in the European Parliament. 

Do you think this is achievable against the backdrop of the ongoing political instability in Bulgaria? Do you not run the risk of not speaking with one voice and of undermining the trust of European partners in us?

Unfortunately, on the diplomatic front, over the last three or four years Bulgaria has lost a lot of ground. I remember the times of the Bulgarian presidency when we dictated the European agenda, when the leaders of the member states gathered in Sofia, in Varna. What followed after that was a timelessness. We are seeing the results of this timelessness. We do not have a strong position in the Council. Our partners in the Council want to talk to a prime minister or a government that has a horizon of more than two months. We see that we are not able to break through either with the Recovery Plan, and 2026 is approaching, the deadline for receiving this money is approaching, and there are 10 billion grants. We are stuck with the programs. We have a 4.2% to 4.6% rate of utilization on average across the different programmes, when in the last programming period we got 95% of the EU money that was earmarked for us. Now, halfway through the programming period, 4.5%. This money is not reaching Bulgarian citizens, Bulgarian municipalities and Bulgarian businesses, and this makes Bulgaria much less competitive. 

Who is to blame for this situation? 

It is the lack of a stable government and of people who understand the problems of the country. Because we have seen people who came, catered to their narrow party interests, but could not achieve anything in the interests of Bulgaria, neither here in the European Union nor abroad. The country is slipping. And we need to put in place really professional and proven people who know how the EU mechanisms work. People who are good diplomats, not amateurs. 

Is there a risk that we will grind to a halt on Schengen by land?

We can see that we have the support of the European Parliament, we have the support of the European Commission and the Commissioner for Home Affairs has just recently reaffirmed that the European Commission is behind Bulgaria and Romania in their battle to join Schengen by land. We are waiting for the elections in Austria. We are waiting for the elections in the autumn. From then on, we should have more room for manoeuvre. We see that the Hungarian Presidency has made the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to Schengen a priority. So we have the prerequisites to act. It all depends on whether there is someone to defend the Bulgarian position at government level and, unfortunately, everything that has been happening recently shows us that there is instability. From then on, I remember how Prime Minister Denkov, unfortunately, missed many chances and did not play his cards properly. They boasted in advance about how we were entering Schengen, and that cost us the land-based Schengen. Yes, it is nice to claim the laurels for a battle that has been fought for more than 12 years, 13 perhaps, since we fulfilled the criteria for joining Schengen, and this battle has been fought by many Bulgarian governments and by us here in the European Parliament, I would say without exception, by all colleagues. So it is very important who will be at the head of the state, of the government and what kind of policy he will pursue with his Austrian colleagues because I remember how in the Council, which was held last December and where the Bulgarian interior minister was supposed to participate and the fate of Bulgaria and Romania was to be decided, two weeks before that Prime Minister Denkov asked for the resignation of the interior minister. Imagine with what authority this man appeared, perhaps at the most important council for Bulgaria, the Council on Home Affairs. So these short-sighted actions must not be repeated. Again, I said, we have the support of the European Parliament, of the European Commission. Bulgarian diplomacy must also succeed in winning the support of the Council. 

Is this idea of creating a 'mini-Schengen' between Bulgaria, Romania and Greece becoming relevant again? I am asking you because a decision was recently taken in Washington to create a military Schengen between these three countries. 

Unfortunately, when we talk about creating a mini-Schengen, it may be between Bulgaria and Romania, but Greece cannot break the current Schengen legislation and open its borders overland through Bulgaria and Romania. Secondly, we have also undertaken to increase checks between Bulgaria and Romania, so if we are fighting for the big goal of full Schengen membership, right now might not be the time to be thinking about exactly that. 

There is such an idea, and if it was to happen, it should have happened much earlier between Bulgaria and Romania. Now, both countries are doing everything they can for full membership. It may be a solution in connection with the tourist flow in the summer for Greece, but it is not a solution for our carriers, who go from here all over Europe to reach, for example, the Netherlands, the UK and so on. We need absolutely full membership, and that is the big goal that we have and that we must achieve. 

Since the issue of carriers has also been touched on, Romania, like Bulgaria, is suffering huge losses. Have you planned here in the new European Parliament to seek cooperation and to take any joint action with your Romanian colleagues? And if so, what are they? 

We work very well with our Romanian colleagues and we always coordinate our actions because our problems are similar. And not only with Schengen. With carriers, with tourism and with European connectivity. So we work well with our Romanian colleagues. It is also good to coordinate policies at government level, because yes, we do the events, yes, we advocate the causes together here, but again I say, most of our problems are in the Council. 

Are we to expect sharp turns in the coming months at global level, at European Union level, for example in green policies, the Green Deal?

I would not say just in the coming months, but throughout this mandate. Because, lo and behold, the EPP has made it clear that we cannot continue on this course of the Green Deal. It was a mistake, for example, to ban internal combustion engines at the end of this decade. We see that we are not prepared to do that. We see that we have put a lot of restrictions. When I say 'we put', the European Commission put and the colleagues here in the European Parliament voted. We were against the Green Deal in many ways. I personally voted against the internal combustion engine ban, and we have seen over time that we have been right. We cannot keep putting restrictions on farmers, too. We cannot think only of green energy, such as photovoltaics, because we can see that the energy system of the whole of Europe is failing. Thank goodness we have nuclear energy counted as clean energy. We see that we cannot close the coal plants because there is no one to balance the system. So many aspects of the Green Deal will be revisited. We need to take the burden off the business, which has been very unduly imposed. And we see that Europe's economy is starting to stumble. And while we are imposing restrictions, countries like China continue to churn out cheap produce and conquer markets, including Europe's. 

But we have heard the calls of Viktor Orbán, who has proposed a plan for Ukraine to the European Union and this plan envisages warming relations with China and Russia. What do you think of this 'appeasement mission', let us call it, of Orbán? 

Viktor Orbán is known for his eccentric actions. Unfortunately, these actions have not been coordinated with anyone in the European Union or with our NATO partners. We can see that there are very strong reactions against these plans, because, yes, we should seek a peaceful solution to the problem, but not by allowing the aggressor to keep all its conquests and not having any compensation for what happened in Ukraine. So Europe increasingly appreciates the external threat, the military threat. Europe is increasingly preparing to react in a purely defensive case to such aggression. We see that European industry is beginning to coordinate and to be prepared to produce much more ammunition, to replenish the European Union's reserve, because this war has shown many gaps in our preparedness to defend ourselves. 

Yes, henceforth the creation of a joint European rapid reaction force is on the agenda. We see that we are taking action to move NATO troops quickly in the event of aggression on NATO's borders. So this is sobering. This war, as bad as it has been, it has also shown our weaknesses at one point. Just as the COVID crisis showed how backward we are and how we have outsourced all our key production to China and to third countries, and at a time when European citizens most needed medicines, needed masks, needed sanitary supplies, it turned out that we had to wait for them to come from China. All these crises are rethinking many of the European Union's policies, and they are also bringing back production within the Member States, strategic production, production of medicines, at the moment with the defence industry. And we have to get involved, and Bulgaria as a country, not to miss these important moments, because at the moment the European funds will give a lot of money for the development of the defence industry. Bulgaria has a highly developed one, but we must also get involved and modernize our industries and expand our production so that we can keep up with the new challenges.