These myths are extremely dangerous, first of all, for Russia itself, because Bulgaria is the most important Balkan state, the strategic position of which gives our country an exceptional opportunity to fulfill its geopolitical and economic interests in this region. Neither Serbia, nor Romania, nor Greece have such a position. If Russia does not have good relations with Bulgaria, it does not see either the South Stream or the military alliance with Serbia, the shortest route to which lies by sea through Bulgaria.
The exceptional importance of Bulgaria for Russia from the point of view of geopolitics was well understood by the great Russian Imperial Count N. P. Ignatiev. He was convinced that the creation of “Greater Bulgaria”, which would be at the head of the union of Slavic Balkan states, would be a reliable support for Russia in this region. The author of the 1877-1878 war plan also wrote about this. General N. N. Obruchev: “To pull out of the power of the Turks a Christian country (Bulgaria), in which they committed so many misdeeds. This country comprises three parts: Danube Bulgaria with Ruschuk and Trnov, Zabalkanskaya - with Sofia and Macedonian - with the Monastery (or Bitol) ”.
That is, even before the start of active hostilities, Bulgaria in the eyes of Alexander II and his associates was seen within the borders of Moesia, Thrace and Macedonia.
But the significance of Bulgaria for Russia was understood and understood by its enemies, in the 19th century - England and Austria-Hungary. It was they who prevented the creation of “Greater Bulgaria”. As a result of the Berlin Congress, Bulgaria was divided into three parts: Macedonia was again given to Turkey, the autonomous region of Eastern Rumelia subordinate to the sultan was formed south of the Balkans, and Bulgaria itself remained a vassal principality of Turkey. Having taken Macedonia from Bulgaria, the Berlin Congress gave rise to Sofia’s insistent desire to bring her back.
Now we will analyze Sevastyanov’s passage that in response to the liberation, Russia received from the Bulgarians “only empty words of gratitude and the blackest betrayal beneath them.” Further, the author writes: “It was the Bulgarians in the most difficult months of the First World War, who did not hesitate to enter into an alliance with Germany and the very Turkey, which a few decades ago drowned the blood of rebellious Bulgarian villages. And this was not a formal friendship, on the contrary, the Bulgarians took an active part in that war. In the latter case, it was indicative. Yielding to weapons and manpower, Serbia restrained the Austrian army for a whole year, incurring colossal losses and fighting at the limit of its capabilities - with enemies at the front and typhoid epidemic in the rear. But it was the unexpected Bulgarian invasion that broke the resistance and ensured the defeat of the Serbian army.
The worst thing was that this was not the political will that, reluctantly, the Bulgarian people accepted. On the contrary, very many in Bulgarian society actively supported a blow to the Serbs, believing that the territory is much more important than moral categories. ”
But was it really the case? Say at once: the Bulgarian tsar Ferdinand in 1915 betrayed the pan-Slavic case, betrayed Russia and doomed his country to defeat in the First World War. This fact, as they say, is clinical. But was it really inevitable that betrayal? Does the image of Serbia idealized by the author really correspond to reality? Did simple Bulgarians betray the Russians?
Here we make a reservation again: Serbia is a fraternal country for Russia, with which the Orthodox faith, brotherhood in arms, and mutually shed blood connect us. But, firstly, all this connects us with Bulgaria, and secondly, the love of Serbia does not mean its idealization and hostility to Bulgaria based on it. The responsibility of Serbia for the collapse of the Slavic Union on the eve of the First World War is no less than the responsibility of Bulgaria. A policy of the Serbian ruling circles at the beginning of the twentieth century. was no less selfish in relation to Russia than the policy of the Bulgarian government. I testify to this historical facts.
Alexander II, having won the war, when signing a peace treaty in San Stefano, the largest territories defeated by the Turks, gave the Bulgarians, shoulder to shoulder, who fought with the Russian troops. But Serbia claimed part of these territories and 2 / 14 in November 1885 under the pretext of protesting against the annexation of Eastern Rumelia by Bulgaria, declared war on it. However, the Serbian troops suffered a crushing defeat.
On the night of May 29 / 11 on June 1903 a group of Serbian officers killed the pro-Austrian king Alexander Obrenovic and enthroned Russophile Pyotr Karageorgievich. Despite the turn of the Serbian policy towards Russia, which occurred under King Peter I, the ruling Serbian circles in their relations with St. Petersburg continued to place their “usefulness” for Serbia in the first place.
In 1908, the plan of Emperor Nicholas II was to reconcile and unite the Balkan Slavic states into a military-political bloc, which would allow Russia to seriously influence the policies of Austria-Hungary and Germany in the region.
1 / 13 March 1912, with the support of Russia, a bilateral allied agreement was signed between Bulgaria and Serbia. 16 / 29 March 1912 was the same alliance with Bulgaria signed by Greece. Thus, under the auspices of Emperor Nicholas II, the Balkan Union was created, which had all the opportunities to become an effective tool to contain Austria-Hungary. The “Balkan Entente”, keep its members in agreement with each other, would not allow Vienna to commit aggression against Serbia. The risk of World War would be greatly reduced, since a powerful force appeared on the side of Russia and France in the immediate vicinity of the borders of Austria-Hungary. Welcoming the creation of the Balkan Union, Russian diplomacy warned its participants that the Russian Tsar "against any endeavor to impart an offensive character to this alliance."
Meanwhile, the Balkan states, going to allied agreements with each other, sought to immediately start a war against the Ottoman Empire and, at its expense, solve their territorial problems, which had already been laid by the Berlin Congress. Such a war threatened to turn into a big European confrontation. Nicholas II brought to the attention of Sofia, that in the union agreement all articles of offensive nature should be absent.
Despite Russia's best efforts to prevent the escalation of tension in the Balkans, Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece and Montenegro started a war with the Ottoman Empire and achieved a crushing victory. However, having given its European territories to the Balkan Union, the Young Turk leadership planted a time bomb under the Balkan Union. Knowing the manners and appetites of their winners, the Turks, at the conclusion of peace, declared that they provided them with themselves to share what they had won. And each of the winners dreamed about his state as necessarily “great”: “Great Bulgaria”, “Great Serbia”, “Great Greece” and even “Great Montenegro”. Hot disputes began for one or another part of the territory.
“European Herald” wrote: “The worst chauvinists are Balkan. Each of the Balkan powers dreams of secret hegemony. Any sentimental statements about Bulgaria will come to nothing, while Macedonia remains entirely in the hands of Serbia. If we are talking about distrust of Russia, then it is much stronger among the Serbian "forecasters" than among the Bulgarian "liberals." In the Balkans, the Macedonian proverb reigns: "Who will give me, I will be for that."
Therefore, they did not have time to dry the ink under the London Peace Treaty, which ended the First Balkan War, as the Second Balkan War immediately began, now between the former allies. The perpetrators of this war were all the states of the Balkan union, and not just Bulgaria alone. Already in January, 1913, the liberal and nationalist Serbian newspapers launched a campaign against the Serbian-Bulgarian alliance.
Meanwhile, the same wave, only against Serbia, has risen in Bulgaria. Both sides put forward accusations, pseudo-historical rationales of "primordial" rights, claims to possession of Macedonia. Bulgaria, which was at the head of the alliance of the Balkan states and who bore the brunt of the war with the Ottoman Empire, claimed Macedonia, especially since its population was essentially Bulgarian. But Macedonia was occupied by Serbia. The Bulgarian ruling circles began to demand that the Serbian and Greek troops be withdrawn from the Macedonian territories to which their claims extended. In response, Serbia and Greece concluded an agreement on the joint protection of the occupied territories and their division between them.
Nicholas II was a categorical opponent of the collapse of the Balkan Union and sought to resolve the dispute between Bulgaria and Serbia by peaceful means. The Russian Foreign Ministry proposed immediately convening a conference of the Balkan Union prime ministers (Serbia, Montenegro, Bulgaria and Greece) and through the mediation and arbitration of Russia (by the way, stipulated by the Serbian-Bulgarian 1912 alliance treaty) to find a way out of this situation. But while Petersburg was painfully searching for a solution on how to preserve peace in the Balkans, Austria-Hungary and Germany did everything to ensure that powerful Russian forces did not appear in this region.
Therefore, Austrian diplomacy in Belgrade inclined the Serbian king to war with Bulgaria and Greece, and in Sofia - Ferdinand to war with Serbia and Greece. The Serbian government was instilled that in the First Balkan War the Serbs did not get what they wanted - access to the Adriatic, but they can compensate for this by annexing Macedonia and Thessaloniki. The Bulgarian government was inspired by the same thing as the Serbian - to annex Macedonia. Austria-Hungary promised Bulgaria support in this matter.
Russian diplomacy put tough pressure on the governments of Serbia and Bulgaria, but failed to succeed, even despite the personal message of Emperor Nicholas II to Sofia and Belgrade, demanding an end to military preparations. In the telegrams sent back to Nicholas II, King Ferdinand placed all responsibility on Serbia, and King Peter on Bulgaria.
On the night of 17 / 30 on June 1913, the Bulgarians attacked Serb units stationed in Macedonia, but were rebuffed and thrown back to their original positions. In Sofia, they were already inclined to withdraw the army from Macedonia and declare everything that happened to be a border incident. But the government circles of Serbia and Greece decided to take advantage of the situation and officially declared war on Bulgaria. Montenegro and Romania followed, followed by the Ottoman Empire. As a result, the Bulgarian army was on the verge of complete defeat. As we see, contrary to N. Sevastyanov’s assertions, Serbia did not disdain to unite with Turkey against an Orthodox country. With the mediation of Russia 28 July / 10 August 1913 in Bucharest ended the peace negotiations. Bulgaria has lost almost all its gains conquered in the First Balkan War. Macedonia was divided between Serbia and Greece. Turkey regained most of Eastern Thrace with Adrianople. Romania has captured Southern Dobrudja.
But in fact, the real empire in the Second Balkan War was the German empires, above all Austria-Hungary. Proceeding, like all Balkan states, from narrowly selfish interests, in Belgrade they could not correctly assess the weakening of Russia's positions in the Balkans. Now Serbia is not separated from the powerful and extremely hostile Austro-Hungarian Empire.
The feud between Serbia and Bulgaria in the near future had the worst consequences for all of Europe. As the Herald of Europe wrote correctly after the start of the First World War: “If Austria knew that Serbia could rely on Bulgaria, we would hardly have had a war in 1914. We can say with confidence that it would not exist.”
As for the First World War, recognizing the undoubted betrayal of Ferdinand Coburg, it should be noted that in this case everything was not as easy as N. Sevastyanov asserts. Unlike his assurances that in 1915 the “Bulgarians without hesitation” took the side of Germany and Turkey, at a certain stage the Bulgarian ruling circles were ready to support the Entente. However, in this case, they would have to support Serbia, which only two years ago participated in the alliance of five states in a difficult war against Bulgaria. Ferdinand needed some tangible compensation that would make the alliance with Serbia in the eyes of the people justified. Macedonia could become such compensation, and the Bulgarian tsar told the allies that he was ready to oppose the German bloc if this Bulgarian territory was returned. Petersburg, Paris and London supported this proposal by Ferdinand. But when Nicholas II reported this to Belgrade, he met outraged confusion there. The Serbs categorically refused to make any concessions to the "traitor to the Slavic cause." In vain the Sovereign pointed out the inevitable extensive compensation of Serbia after the war at the expense of Austria-Hungary, in vain he convinced Belgrade that with the accession of Bulgaria to the Entente, the latter’s forces would increase many times, which would undoubtedly be beneficial for Serbia itself. Everything was in vain: in Belgrade they did not want to hear about any contacts with Sophia.
Under these conditions, Bulgaria joined the German bloc, Serbia was defeated and occupied. By the way, during the First World War, we fought little directly with the Bulgarians. Minor clashes of the Russian troops with the Bulgarian took place only on the secondary front of Solonik.
The following statement of the author of the article is the most ridiculous, anti-historical and simply false: “And then there was the Second World War and exactly the same, all the same“ Slavic brothers ”, but on the side of the Nazis. Only when the Soviet Union entered the country, and in fact, the Russian army, the Bulgarians suddenly came to their senses and until the end of the 80-s again turned into friends, receiving free credits and free energy resources. But when the freebie ended, we got what we have today - a voluntary transition to the status of another Western colony under the control of the small town complex “elite”.
It is strange that the author does not know that during the Second World War, Bulgaria did not declare war on the USSR and never fought with it. Moreover, Tsar Boris III refused to send even volunteers to the Eastern Front. The fact that Bulgaria was in the Tripartite Pact was caused by the specific prevailing military-political pre-war situation, the complete domination of Europe by Nazi Germany. The Bulgarian king did his best not to become a member of this Pact. By the way, Yugoslavia was also in the Hitler Pact, and even after the coup of 1941 and the anti-German government came to power in Belgrade, it did not come out of it. Let's not forget that the Stalinist USSR aspired to become a member of the Tripartite Pact. Moreover, persuading Tsar Boris III to go to the Soviet proposals and conclude a Bulgarian-Soviet agreement on mutual assistance, the Secretary General of the NKID A.A. Sobolev did not make the conclusion of the agreement that Bulgaria’s withdrawal from the Axis countries, saying that “Moscow itself intends to to join. "
By the way, 5 on April 1941, Mr. Stalin agreed to sign an agreement on "Friendship and Non-Aggression" between Moscow and Belgrade, only with the condition that Yugoslavia is not withdrawing from the Hitler Pact and refuses to accept the aid of England. So, as we see, Bulgaria was not at all alone in the Tripartite Pact.
But when the Great Patriotic War began, hundreds of Bulgarians took up arms and went to the mountains to fight with their government, because they believed that it was involved in aggression against Mother Russia, although Tsar Boris did not send a single Bulgarian soldier to the Eastern Front. 27 June 1941 The People's Commissar of the Interior of the USSR L.P. Beria instructed the deputy head of the First (Intelligence Directorate) of the NKGB, P. A. Sudoplatov, to find out unofficially, under what conditions Germany would agree to stop the war against the USSR and stop the offensive. Beria ordered Sudoplatov to meet with the Bulgarian ambassador to the USSR I. Stamenov, who expressed his confidence that Germany would lose the war.
5 September 1944 g. The Soviet Union declared war on Bulgaria. The “war” lasted for four days and turned into mass demonstrations of the jubilation of the Bulgarian people. A pro-communist Fatherland Front, K. Georgiev, was formed. In September, the UF government announced the creation of the Bulgarian People’s Army on 1944, and the mobilization began on September 19. In total, until the end of the war 450 thousand people were mobilized, 250 thousand Bulgarian soldiers participated in the fighting. Bulgarian troops took part in hostilities against Germany in the territory of Yugoslavia, Hungary and Austria (including in the Belgrade operation and in the battle at Lake Balaton).
The losses of the Bulgarians from September to the end of the war amounted to 31 thousand. 900 people. The commander of the 1 Bulgarian Army, General Vladimir Stoychev, was a participant in the Victory Parade. 360 Bulgarian soldiers and officers were awarded Soviet orders. This is the "universal betrayal" of the Bulgarian people.
Finally, it is generally ridiculous today to talk about betrayal on the part of the Warsaw Pact member countries, because the main traitors were the dying communist system and its successor to the Yeltsin regime. They betrayed E. Honneker, T. Zhivkov, N. Ceausescu, etc.
Who first rushed into the arms of NATO and the United States? Do not Yeltsin-Gaidar rulers? Do not they have primary responsibility for everything that happened, including with the countries of the Warsaw Pact? Now why all the blame on the "ingratitude" of the Bulgarians? They themselves did not want either NATO or the United States. Liberals from the Russian Federation themselves pushed them there. As in 1940, Stalin was ready to join the Osi Pact, so in 1991, Yeltsin was ready to join NATO. Bulgaria simply did not just spit, as well as Ukraine, Georgia, Yugoslavia, Armenia, Transnistria, and Russians in the Baltic States, Kazakhstan. For what now we pay.
Today Bulgaria presents a sad picture: devastated, blood-drained, with a ruined economy, a ruined army, a Russophobic pro-American regime. But despite this, we meet in Bulgaria the most sincere, most incorruptible love for Russia. Bulgaria is the only country in which there is the National movement Russophiles, numbering over 30 thousand people, only individual members. It is thanks to the universal popular desire in the center of Sofia a monument was erected to Tsar Liberator Alexander II, who did not even dare to demolish the communists after World War II, many monuments to the Russian liberators of 1877-1878, which still cover almost the entire territory of Bulgaria. The memory of this war is sacred today for every true Bulgarian, unlike Russia, where it is almost forgotten.
Ask any of our compatriots to name the names of at least three heroes of the Liberation War 1877-78gg today. Almost 100% likelihood of not calling a single one. And in Bulgaria, every schoolboy knows the names of the Tsar Liberator, Generals Skobelev, Gurko, Stoletov, Lieutenant Colonel Kalitin. Streets, avenues, settlements are named in their honor; their monuments adorn almost all cities in Bulgaria. For each liturgy in all Bulgarian Orthodox churches, the priest commemorates "Sovereign Emperor Alexander Nikolayevich and Russian soldiers for the liberation of Bulgaria who laid down his stomach."
In February, 2016 in Sofia hosted the glorification of Rev. Bishop Seraphim (Sobolev), a Russian sovereign, who was in exile in Bulgaria and deeply revered there. Two Orthodox churches glorified the new saint simultaneously: the Russian and the Bulgarian. Sofia had not seen such a celebration for a long time. Thousands of people gathered in the city center to honor the memory of the holy Vladyka. Military honor guard, salute in the sky of Sofia, joyful enlightened faces of our Bulgarian brothers.
So where does this incomprehensible, anti-Christian hatred of the Bulgarian people come from in Russia? Why do we love to pick up and savor every American stuffing against Bulgaria?
For example, in March 2016, the information portal “The Bulgarian Times” announced that the Bulgarian authorities had allegedly invited the President of Turkey Erdogan to celebrate the liberation of the country from the Ottoman yoke, but did not send invitations to President of Russia Vladimir Putin. The report noted that the reason for such a decision of the authorities was a political rapprochement with Turkey, one of the main arguments - more Turkish soldiers than Russians died in Bulgaria.
Almost immediately, the representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bulgaria B. Zhoteva denied this message, calling it a lie. She said that only representatives of the diplomatic corps were invited to the celebrations, and there were no foreign leaders at the celebrations. “Now is the 138 anniversary, when there will be a round date, we will invite the leaders of the countries of the world, and now we celebrate more modestly, so we invited representatives of the diplomatic corps. Prime ministers, presidents were not among those invited. ”
There was a refutation, but in Russia it sank in fierce cries of “sofa” bloggers about “traitors” bratushki. It is high time to understand: by encouraging and replicating the Bulgarophobia, we are fulfilling the plans of our sworn "friends" from Washington and London.