Vănšnata politika na Bălgarija prez Vtorata svetovna vojna v bălgarskata istoričeska literatura: 1938 - 1944 g.
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Buch |
| Sprache: | Bulgarian |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Varna
Izdat. "Liternet"
2006
|
| Ausgabe: | 1. izd. |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract |
| Beschreibung: | In kyrill. Schr., bulg. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Bulgaria's foreign policy during the Second World War as reflected in Bulgarian historic literature |
| Beschreibung: | 259 S. |
| ISBN: | 9543042667 9789543042661 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 c 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV022401068 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20070503 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 070425s2006 |||| 00||| bul d | ||
| 020 | |a 9543042667 |9 954-304-266-7 | ||
| 020 | |a 9789543042661 |9 978-954-304-266-1 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)162455794 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV022401068 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a bul | |
| 049 | |a DE-12 | ||
| 084 | |a 7,41 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Janev, Ivan D. |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Vănšnata politika na Bălgarija prez Vtorata svetovna vojna v bălgarskata istoričeska literatura |b 1938 - 1944 g. |c Ivan Janev |
| 250 | |a 1. izd. | ||
| 264 | 1 | |a Varna |b Izdat. "Liternet" |c 2006 | |
| 300 | |a 259 S. | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a In kyrill. Schr., bulg. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Bulgaria's foreign policy during the Second World War as reflected in Bulgarian historic literature | ||
| 648 | 7 | |a Geschichte 1938-1944 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Außenpolitik |0 (DE-588)4003846-4 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Zweiter Weltkrieg |0 (DE-588)4079167-1 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Geschichtsschreibung |0 (DE-588)4020531-9 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 651 | 7 | |a Bulgarien |0 (DE-588)4008866-2 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Bulgarien |0 (DE-588)4008866-2 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Außenpolitik |0 (DE-588)4003846-4 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 2 | |a Geschichte 1938-1944 |A z |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 689 | 1 | 0 | |a Bulgarien |0 (DE-588)4008866-2 |D g |
| 689 | 1 | 1 | |a Geschichtsschreibung |0 (DE-588)4020531-9 |D s |
| 689 | 1 | 2 | |a Außenpolitik |0 (DE-588)4003846-4 |D s |
| 689 | 1 | 3 | |a Zweiter Weltkrieg |0 (DE-588)4079167-1 |D s |
| 689 | 1 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015609718&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015609718&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Abstract |
| 940 | 1 | |n oe | |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 909 |e 22/bsb |f 09043 |g 499 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 909 |e 22/bsb |f 09044 |g 499 |
| 943 | 1 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-015609718 | |
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1806960608243875840 |
|---|---|
| adam_text |
СЪДЪРЖАНИЕ
УВОД
ГЛАВА ПЪРВА
БЪЛГАРИЯ В НАВЕЧЕРИЕТО НА ВОЙНАТА
ГЛАВА ВТОРА
ВЪНШНАТА ПОЛИТИКА НА БЪЛГАРИЯ
СЛЕД НАЧАЛОТО НА ВОЙНАТА
ГЛАВА ТРЕТА
В ПАКТА
ГЛАВА ЧЕТВЪРТА
ВЪНШНАТА ПОЛИТИКА НА БЪЛГАРИЯ
СЛЕД СМЪРТТА НА ЦАР БОРИС
ЗАКЛЮЧЕНИЕ
БИБЛИОГРАФИЯ
РЕЗЮМЕ НА АНГЛИЙСКИ ЕЗИК
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.
FIRST
BULGARIA ON THE EVE OF THE WAR
SECOND CHAPTER
BULGARIA'S FOREIGN POLICY AFTER
THE BEGINNING OF THE WAR
THIRD CHAPTER
INTHEPACT.
FOURTH CHAPTER
BULGARIA'S FOREIGN POLICY AFTER
THE DEATH OF TSAR BORIS III
CONCLUSION.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
SUMMARY IN ENGLISH
BULGARIA'S FOREIGN POLICY
DURING THE SECOND WORLD WAR
AS REFLECTED IN BULGARIAN HISTORIC LITERATURE
1938 -1944
DR. Ivan Yanev
Summary
This research encompasses a large volume of historic
literature. The goal I set myself is to cover if not the whole, at least
a more significant part of the historic literature related to Bulgaria's
foreign policy on the eve of and during the Second World War.
Research, diaries and memoirs of politicians from the time of the
war have also been examined in this treatise. I remained true to the
theory that every rule has its exception, and for this reason I have
included some materials from the Gold Fund of the Bulgarian
National Radio
Those materials are kept in audio versions in the Gold Fund of the
BNR,
the form of an audio annex to the book, I was given a flat refusal. I
hope that the time will come when such historic evidence will not
only be looked on for commercial purposes but will be given to
researchers for the enrichment of the study of history. I have also
included in this research collections of documents which have
already been published and are part of Bulgaria's historic literature.
The discussion of Bulgarian foreign policy during the war years
in foreign language historic literature presents a different approach
and a separate research and for that reason this presentation is
baed solely on Bulgarian historic literature.
This work covers historic literature which was created over
the course of several decades. As is often the case, the shorter the
distance in time from the described events, the more emotional their
235
interpretation is. After the war, when Bulgaria was in the Soviet
orbit, the prevailing interpretation of facts in historiography was
one that created a favorable impression of the role of communism
and of the USSR. The first attempts at a more general treatment of
events in the first years of the war are two articles written by Mirin
Mihov,
Balkans at the Beginning of the Second World War" and "The
Struggle of the USSR to Prevent Nazi Aggression in the Balkans
during the Second World War", published in
respectively. They are full of inaccurate interpretations of events,
but at the same time they are the first attempt to make clear the
Bulgarian status quo.
tone and overstates the positive role of the USSR, but this is
understandable given the time the articles were published. The case
is also similar in volume
in
historic perspective. In volume
published
changed is the evaluation of Stalin's role in the years during the
war. He is already pointed to as the one to blame for the quick and
easy entry of the Wermacht deep into the territory of the USSR.
This position was dictated by the process of de-Stalinization
undertaken by
the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), rather than by
a professional historic approach to the facts.
The two studies written by Nikolay Genchev at the end of
the 1960's, "The Foreign Political Orientation of Bulgaria on the
Eve of the Second World War-September
and "Bulgaria's Foreign Policy in the Initial Period of the Second
World War
historiography with respect to the Second World War. Genchev
makes an attempt to leave the narrow Party line and keep to the
historic approach. In the
236
in Bulgarian historic writing concerning the Second World War.
At that time, a number of studies appeared in which a more factual,
historic tone prevails, and the number of pro-Party
decreases, although not totally eliminated. The following
monographs appeared: "Bulgaria and the Third Reich
by
1922-1943"
1941"
In the
Bulgarian foreign policy during the war continued to produce
good results. The following books were published: "England and
Bulgaria
Bulgaria and Germany
Policy towards Bulgaria in the Balkans
Toshkova; and "Diplomatic Relations between Bulgaria and the
Soviet Union
After
some historic works it was replaced by its equally unprofessional
opposite
place in
late 1930's to the middle of the 1940's were published. One of the
most important sources on Bulgarian foreign policy is
Filov's diary which was published surprisingly even before
Important works published in the
Parvan Draganov, Evdokia
Dimitrov
published, among which Stoicho Moshanov's and
Muraviev's standout.
The goal of the present research is to show Bulgaria's foreign
policy as reflected in Bulgarian historic literature. It is an attempt to
show the way the different historic works treat historic events
depending on the time they were written. In comparing contradictory
historic works, priority is given to the historic truth. The presentation
237
Starts
outbreak of the Second World War. The basic idea is to follow
events to the end of the war when Bulgaria enters the conflict.
The initial date chosen is July
the
after the hardships imposed on it by the
treaty cost Bulgaria dearly by the loss of its age-old lands and
demands for stiff reparations. This treaty resulted in negative
feelings on the part of the Bulgarian population toward the
victorious countries of the First World War. This research covers
the period to October
and the anti-Nazi coalition was signed in Moscow. It was after
dramatic internal political change that took place on September
1944,
and to participate in the defeat of Nazi Germany. Bulgaria's
position was officially acknowledged by the victorious countries
with the signing of the Moscow armistice.
The structure of this book consists of four chapters defined
on a thematic and on a chronological principle. The first chapter
encompasses the period from July
war. The second chapter is dedicated to the period from the beginning
of the war until Bulgaria joined the Tripartite Pact. The third chapter
examines the events from March
when the course of the war began to turn. The last chapter is on
Bulgarian foreign policy in the year when the country was governed
by a council of regents and by governments that had difficulty
finding their way in the tumultuous international situation. I leave
it to the readers of this book to make an assessment as to whether
the stated goals have been achieved and whether I have managed to
delineate impartially the foreign policy of Bulgaria during the Second
World War presented on the pages of Bulgarian historic literature.
Great Britain should undoubtedly be rendered its due for
the
238
on the Balkans to which Bulgaria would also be a part. But there
were territorial arguments between Bulgaria and its neighbours
which were difficult to solve. The revision of the nightmarish
Versailles system began, and the basic catalyst for the changes
was a new Germany governed by a new ideology
leader,
and turned it into a province of the Third Reich. In the end of
September
Czechoslovakia and annexed it to its territory with the consent of
the victorious countries of the First World War- France, England
and Italy. The British and the French hoped strongly that the new
dictator had been satisfied, but they were soon to find out that Hitler
would not be moderated by constant concessions made at the
expense of small countries. In the middle of March
managed to take the upper hand over Czechoslovakia as well. When
Bonito
unhappily since he considered himself the architect of
1938
the dissolution of Czechoslovakia. Mussolini restored the balance
between Rome and Berlin after Italy occupied the territory of Albania
at the beginning of April
can say that it was a reality. Yet, to make war one needs countries
at war, and at that time there were no such countries since the British
and French allies were constantly giving way to the German dictator.
Bulgaria fondly watched the German actions because it was also
looking for a solution to it revanchist aspirations
Government defined the foreign political goals of the country. Its
primary objective was to take back South Dobrudzha, the border in
Thrace from
districts. Sofia watched hopefully at the failure of the Versailles
Treaty but did not dare to undertake any real actions towards solving
its territorial problems. It understood that its neighbors would not
hesitate to punish it severely
239
foreign policy had to be neutral, or at least it had to be suggested in
international circles that Bulgaria was leading a policy of non-
engagement. There is no doubt that the strings of Sofia's foreign
policy were pulled by Tsar Boris III, but Prime Minister
Kyoseivanov, who was experienced in diplomacy, should also be
given credit for the neutral policy. By the summer of
showed that at that moment it had no intention of getting involved
with any of the Great Powers. Sofia secretly fully supported the
German moves because it hoped for a revision of its own borders,
and it is clear that it could get support from Berlin. Prime Minister
Kyoseivanov made a visit to Germany at the beginning of July.
Even before Kyoseivanov returned to Bulgaria, the Chairman of
the National Assembly, Stoicho Moshanov, departed for France and
England. Thus Bulgaria looked neutral to the Great Powers although
it is not difficult to predict what its choice would be at the decisive
moment. Kyoseivanov was naturally very angry with what
Moshanov has done because in Berlin they would have understood
right away that after the visit of the Prime Minister to Germany, the
Chairman of the Parliament was making insurance visits to Paris
and London. At the beginning of August, a Bulgarian parliamentarian
delegation visited the USSR. In this way, accidentally or not,
Bulgarian politicians visited Berlin, Paris, London and Moscow in
the summer of
held between the USSR on the one hand and England and France
on the other for the conclusion of an alliance which was to act as a
deterrent to the steady advance of the Nazis. In the middle of August
though, these talks failed, and a pact was concluded between the
USSR and Germany on August 23rd. In this way, the totalitarian
systems overtook the western democracies. Bulgaria may also have
contributed to the failure of the pact between Berlin and Moscow
through its ambassador in Berlin, Parvan Draganov. On September
1st, the Wermacht invaded Poland. Two days later, being unable to
convince Hitler to withdraw his troops, Great Britain and France
240
declared" war
the Polish territory, and the USSR and Germany signed an agreement
for a new boundary between them. In the middle of September,
Bulgaria declared its neutrality with respect to the military conflict.
This delay is most probably because the Government wanted to
understand the situation and make a correct assessment as to
whether this was a local conflict or a large-scale war. There were
not many options for Bulgaria at that moment. Its moves were closely
observed by its neighbors who were well aware of the Bulgarian
revanchist desires and who could end up in Bulgaria within hours
should it not act peacefully. Thus, on September
declared its neutrality to the war that had broken out. The first
months of the war were uneventful, and there were no military
actions at that time. Because of this, it has been called "the strange
war",
invaded on a large scale. The Wermacht occupied Denmark,
Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxemburg and France. This
eliminated the competition for Germany on the continent. England
was pushed back to its islands, and the question about Moscow
was there to be solved. Italy also decided to intervene in the war
and declared war on France on July 10th. In
the issue of South Dobrudzha was ripe for a solution. On June 26th,
Moscow delivered an ultimatum to Bucharest: the regions of
Bessarabia and North
first the Romanians were inclined to resist, but after they understood
that Berlin and Rome would not support them, they acquiesced,
and on June
On July 27th, Prime Minister
1940
Ivan Popov met Hitler and Joachim
Äad
them to settle their argument with Bulgaria. After Berlin, the
Romanians also visited Rome where they were given similar advice.
241
In this way, Sofia received the support of Germany for the settlement
of the South Dobrudzha issue. Yet Hitler refused to be an arbitrator
between the two countries. The Romanians were forced to begin
bilateral negotiations with Bulgaria. After considerable delay on
the part of Romania, the Krayov Agreement was finally signed on
September 7th, and South Dobrudzha was restored as a territory of
Bulgaria. On September 21st, the Bulgarian army entered the restored
Dobrudzha territory. A pact was signed only
of the Krayov Agreement which was to play an important role in
subsequent years. Japan also joined the two aggressive European
forces. The signing of the trilateral pact shows that Germany had
no intention of being satisfied with what it had achieved up to that
moment. By the middle of October, Bulgaria's situation had
become quite delicate. Without consulting his ally in Berlin, the
Italian dictator decided to manage things with Greece. Mussolini
sent a letter to Tsar Boris III informing him of the actions which
were under way against Bulgaria's southern neighbor. The tone of
the letter was informative, but Mussolini was hoping that the
Bulgarian monarch would agree to joint actions so that Bulgaria
could take its claimed territories. Unfortunately for Mussolini, the
Bulgarian
After its initial offensive, the Italian army, which invaded Greece
at the end of October, was forced by the Greek army to retreat, and
Bulgaria actually helped Greece with its neutrality. In addition, in
the middle of October
Trilateral Pact. At that time, the Tsar also received a letter from the
British King expressing his satisfaction with Bulgaria's policy,
saying that this policy should continue because otherwise there
was a danger of the Bulgarian territory becoming a scene for military
action. The Tsar managed to get the country out of this complicated
situation. Bulgaria was not misled by the Italian suggestion and
remained calm with respect to its southern neighbor. The Tsar wrote
a personal letter to Hitler assuring him that it was not useful for
242
Bulgaria
the German plans. The Tsar wrote that Hitler should think well
whether it was imperative for Bulgaria to join the Pact in that
moment since Bulgaria's recent policy had kept the Bulgarian and
German enemies at bay. Tsar Boris and Minister Popov make a visit
to Hitler and
about Bulgaria eventually joining the Pact. Hitler behaved well
with the Bulgarian monarch, which was not true of
who treats/ the Bulgarian Foreign Minister quite unceremoniously.
Von
the Pact, but Popov stood up for his position heroically. According
to Genchev's thesis, Bulgaria refused to join the Pact not on
principle but only postponed joining until a later date. According
to him, the fact that the German army had yet to reach the Danube
combined with the threat coming from Turkey, the unpredictable
conduct of Yugoslavia and the British threats were the reasons that
the Bulgarian leaders rejected signing the contract.
that German military specialists had been installed in Bulgaria as
early as mid-October. He also thought that the suggestion for a
pact on the part of the USSR and Arkady Sobolev's visit to Sofia
prevented "the attachment of Bulgaria to the chariot of Nazi
Germany".
suspected that Bulgaria would enter into the Pact, especially
judging from King George's letter to Tsar Boris. As a whole, his
thesis is that talks were being held to unify all possible forces against
the USSR. According to
joining the Pact on principle, but instead had asked for a delay
and had also declared that he would like Yugoslavia to follow the
same path. According to Hitler, Turkey would not dare invade
Bulgaria if the latter joined the Pact. The Tsar went to the meeting
with Hitler accompanied by Popov instead of Filov in order to evade
making decisions in Bergtesgarden
road to
243
passed through the
According to Stefan Gruev, "The
said "not now". According to the same author, five days later
Ambassador
Government which agreed in principle to enter the pact but at a
later stage. In my opinion, the
Trilateral Pact but managed to get the delay he was seeking, namely
at the time the German troops reacherf the border of his country.
This would give Bulgaria the security it was striving for because, if
there were Wermacht troops on Bulgarian territory, none of
Bulgaria's neighbors would think of contradicting its decision to
join the Pact. The
either had to choose the German alternative or simply expose the
country to a quite unclear future. Vyacheslav
to Hitler on November 12th. During the visit, the Soviet diplomat
expressed the wish of the USSR to give Bulgaria guarantees similar
to those Germany gave Romania where Nazi troops were installed
at the beginning of October. Hitler asked if the Bulgarian Tsar had
requested such guarantees as the Romanian leaders had. After the
meeting between Boris and Hitler on November 19th in
Bergtesgarden, the Soviet Government delivered to Ivan Stamenov,
the Bulgarian Ambassador in Moscow, an offer to sign a pact of
mutual assistance. A year earlier,
simultaneously the Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs
of Bulgaria, rejected a similar offer declaring that the time had not
come for the signing of such a pact. According to Dekanozov,
Molotov's deputy, now was the right time for the signing of a pact.
Such pacts were also signed with the Baltic states in the summer of
1940,
nature of the Government in Moscow which did not tolerate any
monarchical form of government, as well as
would become 'Balticized', the Tsar and the strong four members
of the cabinet, namely Prime Minister
244
Minister
Minister of Interior
On November 23rd, Popov sent an answer to Stamenov,
saying that Bulgaria did not feel threatened and that no guarantees
were necessary. It also said that Bulgaria Am/been invited to enter
the Trilateral Pact and was studying this offer. The Soviet diplomat
Arkadi
his visit was to deliver the draft agreement between Moscow and
Sofia. The next day the Communists made public the text of the
Pact and a movement was started in its defense. Moscow had no
objections to military guarantees being omitted with Moscow being
the only one giving such guarantees to Sofia. The USSR had nothing
against Bulgaria joining the Trilateral Pact. Possibly the USSR
itself might enter the Pact at a later stage. The USSR acknowledged
Bulgaria's territorial aspirations. After a conversation with the Soviet
leaders Yosif Stalin and Vyacheslav
telegram to the Bulgarian Communists instructing them to start a
large scale propaganda campaign for the acceptance of the Soviet
offer of a pact. The Bulgarian Communists undertook large-scale
activities to popularize the Soviet offer. Some members of the
Bulgarian Workers' Party (BWP) were not well briefed on the
general situation, and in their opinion England was still the instigator
of the war. The BWPproclaimedthat signing a pact with the USSR
would not lead to balticization or bolshevization of the country. In
spite of all maneuvers by the jfsar, Bulgaria was forced to define
its position at the beginning of
and Hitler to discuss Bulgaria's inclusion in the Trilateral Pact.
Germany promised the White Sea region as a territorial acquisition
for Bulgaria. A Bulgarian-Turkish declaration on non-aggression
was declared "publicly" in Ankara and in Sofia on February 17th.
This declaration was signed with the knowledge of Berlin, and with
this step, the Bulgarian Government secured Turkey's neutrality
concerning Bulgaria's inclusion in the Pact, which was under way.
245
The members of the delegation who were to leave for the signing of
the contract, were changed because of Popov's supposed illness.
On principle, he was skeptical about Bulgaria joining the Pact,
however he did not resign and decided instead to feign illness so
that he would not have to go to Vienna. Bulgarian Prime Minister
Filov, the head of the Bulgarian delegation in Vienna, signed a
protocol joining Bulgaria to the Trilateral Pact on March 1st at
o'clock. On the part of the Axis, the protocol was signed by
Ribbentrop, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Germany, Count
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Italy and Japanese Ambassador
Oshima. On the next day, Bulgaria's inclusion in the Trilateral Pact
was ratified by the Governmental majority with a "loud ovation".
The members of Parliament in the opposition were not given an
opportunity to express their protest. The entry of the German army
into Bulgaria began on March 1st. After Bulgaria joined the
Trilateral Pact, Moscow expressed its disapproval, and England
broke off diplomatic relations with Sofia on March 5th. Genchev
described three possible options for action which Bulgaria had on
the eve of the signing of the pact Option one was for Bulgaria to
render military resistance to the Wermacht. This option would have
been disastrous for Bulgaria since as it became clear only a month
later, far better equipped armies capitulated to Germany within
days. Option number two was for Bulgaria not to joint the pact and
not to render resistance to the advancing Wermacht troops. The
risk in this case was to create chaos in the country when the
governing faction might be replaced by extreme supporters of the
Reich. Option three was the one chosen by Bulgaria
Pact. This option was the most suitable at that moment. England
promised to help Bulgaria
were not well-grounded because England itself was suffering great
difficulties and could not exit its islands. According to Sirkov there
was also another possibility for Bulgaria besides those described by
Genchev. This was the possibility of signing a pact with the USSR
246
which in the opinion of the author would have made it difficult for
Germany to have pursued its aggressive actions. The author rejects
the possibility that Germany moved to the Balkans mainly because
of the war between Italy and Greece. In his opinion, even if there
were no such war, Germany would have advanced towards the
peninsula. The parameters of an eventual pact between Sofia and
Moscow were also of importance. It was some hours before the
Wermacht invaded Yugoslavia that a pact was signed between the
USSR and Yugoslavia which did not influence in any way
Germany's aggression. It is written in volume two
of Bulgaria" published in
into an agreement with Germany
as the autumn of
Government at that time did not have many alternatives. Genchev
defines three options while Sirkov adds a fourth one. Maybe the
most correct decision is the one made by the Bulgarian leaders,
namely for Bulgaria to join the aggressor's pact but to evade
participation in military operations. Of course, the option involving
armed resistance to the Wermacht is only theoretical since the
Bulgarian army was too weak and poorly armed in comparison to
the German army. In the second place, why would Bulgaria oppose
Germany? Germany was the primary advocate for changes in the
demands of the Versailles Treaty when at the same time Bulgaria
was trying to revise the Neuilly Treaty. Therefore it appears there
was no Well-grounded reason for Bulgaria to render military
resistance to Germany. The above said, one should not ignore the
Germanophile
that time and especially that of Prime Minister Filov. The next option
which can also be defined as purely theoretical was for Bulgaria not
to join the Trilateral Pact and not render resistance to Germany for
allowing the Wermacht to pass through the territory of the country.
This was also impossible because the governing faction would have
been threatened by an eventual change, and rulers who were
247
extremist supporters of Berlin couldreplace it. Besides, if this option
were to be used, Bulgaria could not expect any solution to its
territorial claims. The next theoretical option would have been
for Bulgaria to have signed an agreement with Moscow and in this
way evade the German advancement through its territory. Yet where
is the guarantee that Germany would stop had such a pact been
signed? Even if this were the case, there were still no favorable
grounds for narrow cooperation between Bulgaria and the USSR.
The
monarchy. So, if the rulers wanted to maintain their positions, there
were no options to reach an agreement between the two countries.
Also, the example of the Baltic states was too recent for the rulers
in Sofia to consider a more serious rapprochement with Moscow.
Considering the options above, perhaps the most advantageous
for Bulgaria and the rulers in Sofia was the option which was finally
chosen
camp of the revisionist countries which had already acquired the
appearance of aggressors.
On March 25th, Cvetkovich's Government annexed
Yugoslavia into the Trilateral Pact which is what Bulgaria had
wanted to happen. Two days later, General Simovich carried out a
coup d'etat in Belgrade. Hitler undertook immediate action. As
early as the evening of March 27th, he signed Directive
dissolution of Yugoslavia. Bulgaria and Hungary were to be drawn
into the military action by means of territorial concessions.
Ambassador Draganov in Berlin was summoned on the same day
to a meeting with Hitler and
the new situation brought forward the issue of Macedonia. On
April 6th, the Wermacht advanced on Yugoslavia and Greece and
eliminated their armies in a matter of days. The armies of Bulgaria's
two neighbors had not had any military limitations imposed upon
them after the First World War and, in spite of this, they were crashed
quickly and uncompromisingly by the German military machine.
248
What would have happened to Bulgaria had the rulers in Sofia
eventually decided to render military resistance to the German army?
On April 19th, Germany gave a green light to
army entered the newly liberated territories. The White Sea region
was given to Bulgaria as compensation for its entry into the Trilateral
Pact. The issue of
because of Serbia's relationship with Germany. Had Yugoslavia
remained loyal to Germany, this painful issue for Bulgaria would
not have been solved in such a way. Germany had no intention of
satisfying Bulgaria at the expense of Yugoslavia, but after the latter
betrayed the Trilateral Pact, Berlin decided to punish severely
Bulgaria's western neighbor. Continuous friction with the Italians
started in Macedonia. Italy wanted more of the territory of
Macedonia to annex to the territory of Albania. On June 22nd Hitler
made a gross blunder when he attacked the USSR without having
dealt with England. In "The History of Bulgaria", volume three,
published in
all important state and military issues, is blamed for the advance of
the Wermacht and the lack of readiness on the part of the Red Army.
Germany believed that the war against the USSR would end quickly.
Yet, German plans proved wrong. The blitzkrieg failed and at the
beginning of December, the invincible Wermacht was defeated near
Moscow. In the early morning
air force attacked the American military base at Pearl Harbor. On
December
that. On December
its neutrality, and in this way war was declared. Berlin was supported
by Rome. With the Japanese declaration of war on the USA,
Germany demanded that the member countries of the Trilateral Pact
enter the war on the side of Japan. On December
Government made the disastrous decision to declare war on the
USA and England. According to Bulgaria's rulers, this was a
"symbolic war". The next day, the majority in the National Assembly
249
approved the decision of the Government. At the end of
Germany wanted Bulgaria to send three military divisions to occupy
Moravia The Government agreed to that, thinking that in this way
it could evade larger obligations. Berlin did not want to resolve
Bulgaria's territorial issues since it was more convenient for them
to keep Bulgaria at bay in order to submit more easily to German
demands. The political map of "The Danube Area" was published
in Germany, which referred to April
territories of Macedonia and Thrace, annexed to Bulgaria, were given
only for the Bulgarian Government to administer; the borders
were marked as temporary. In April
the Government. The indecisive Foreign Minister Popov was
removed from the Government and the other essential change was
to replace the Minister of Defense General
General Nikola
over by Filov who also kept his post as Prime Minister. These
changes were made after the Tsar visited Hitler. It is not certain
whether Hitler suggested the changes in the Government. It is
possible that the
under German influence. Bulgaria managed to save its Jewish
population, but only, it should be noted, those Jews living within
the old boundaries of the country. The Jewish population from the
newly annexed territories were subjected to extermination. Perhaps
the most important role in the salvation of the Jews within the old
boundaries of the country was played in March
Chairman of Parliament, Dimitar Peshev, who wrote a letter of
protest. This letter was signed by more than
Parliament. Peshev hardly ever acted without the knowledge of
the palace. However, despite the Government's censure of the letter
and the refusal of some parliamentarians to sign the letter, this
was successful in saving the lives of more than
Jews, unlike their fellow-Jews from the newly annexed territories
who were taken by Bulgarian trains to the Danube River where
250
they were handed over to the Germans. The colossal Battle for
Stalingrad ended between the end of January and the beginning of
February
November
German troops. The success of the Red Army led to the capture of
more than
fact the turning point of the war. From this point on, the Wermacht
started slowly but surely losing its positions and retreating. Bulgarian
Prime Minister
defeat, not attaching to it any special military importance. By the
end of
of making a separate peace with the Allies. They suggested that
Italy take part in this action as well, but Mussolini refused to do it
Chano,
of Foreign Minister together with the remaining "defeatist" ministers.
The landing of British and American troops on the island of Sicily
began on July
Mussolini with
Italy was signed in September. Hitler decided to help his ally.
Mussolini was freed by the Germans, and on September 23rd, he
took his place at the head of the newly created Italian Social Republic
situated in northern and
On September
acknowledge the newly-created republic. The Bulgarian
Government acknowledged the republic, but at the same time it did
not break its relations with the royal government. On the morning
of August 14th, Tsar Boris flew to Germany and returned on the
afternoon of August 15th. This was the third time the Tsar had
visited Hitler in that year. The same evening, Filov had an audience
with the
days after his return from his meeting with Hitler, the Tsarfettill.
Specialists were called from Berlin and Vienna, but the Tsar's health
deteriorated, and he died on the afternoon of August 28th. At first
251
the Tsar's illness was kept secret, and only on August
official
of the Tsar and especially the fact that it followed a meeting with
Hitler has given rise to different opinions among historians and
others. Yet, there is no proof 'for any of the speculation. Some claim
that prior to falling into a coma, the Tsar said that he had fought
with Hitler to protect Bulgaria. Others speculate that the Tsar was
poisoned
Germans, others by the English and yet others by the Russian. Where
there are no clear facts, thefantasies of some writers are unleashed
and they manage to arrange the puzzle in ways that are logical to
them. Yet, it is a fact that the death of the
attitude of Bulgaria toward Germany. Could the
eliminated by the Germans for wanting to break away from the
German ship which was sinking slowly but surely? This is hardly
possible because Germany was still too strong and the Tsar too
careful to risk subjecting the country to German occupation. At
that moment in the USSR, they would have hardly thought of
eliminating the Bulgarian
the situation in any way. The same can be said about England as
well. It was necessary to reconstruct the leadership of the country
after the death of the
country alone, and according to the Constitution, a Regency Council
had to be elected. Filov, who became the most powerful man in the
country after the death of the Tsar, Prince Kiril and General
were elected to be regents. Constituted in this way, the regency
violated two points of the Constitution. First, the regents should
have been elected by a Great National Assembly and not by an
ordinary National Assembly as was the case. Second, Prince Kiril
did not have the right to be a regent because he was a member of the
royal family and had not held any of the posts named in the
Constitution which were a requisite to being named a regent. The
Minister of Finance at that time,
252
Minister.
foreign policy of the country, but it should be mentioned that there
were no extreme
have brought the country even closer to Germany which was losing
the war slowly but surely. A new danger threatened Bulgaria in the
autumn of
terrorized the country because peaceful communities and civilian
sites were being targeted. The most massive bombardment was the
one that took place on January
notes were delivered to the Bulgarian Government by Moscow in
April and May
and sea ports were being used by the German army. These allegations
were rejected by the Government After that the USSR asked for
the restoration of the Soviet Consulate in Varna and for the opening
of Consular offices in Burgas and Ruse, but the Government set a
pre-condition of developing economic relations between the USSR
and Bulgaria. In actual fact, the Soviet diplomatic notes in April
and May
cabinet was headed by Ivan Bagryanov, who thought he could
communicate equally well with Moscow and Berlin. On June
the situation for Germany became even more unstable. England
and the USA finally opened a second front against the Wermacht in
France. At the end of July, the new Government agreed to restore
the Soviet Consulate in Varna, whose consular district included
Varna, Ruse and Burgas. If this Government had the goal of
preparing for a change in Bulgarian foreign policy and extricating
itself from a pact with the losing camp, its actions were too
indecisive. On the other hand, the possibilities for this were slight
since there were still German troops in Bulgaria. Yet the
Government made a decision and in August sent to Turkey the former
Chairman of the 24th National Assembly, Stoycho Moshanov, who
was to contact the Allies and learn under what conditions Bulgaria
could exit the war. The development of subsequent events went
253
lightening fast. Romania capitulated on August 23rd and the Red
Army landed on the Danube. On August 26th, the Government
declared neutrality in the war between Germany and the USSR and
announced that it was in contact with the countries with which
Bulgaria was in a state of war. The regents prepare themselves to
form a new Government which was to be formed from among the
opposition. The leader of the Agrarian Union,
became Prime Minister and had to form a cabinet of a national
coalition, i.e. all opposition entities had to enter the Government.
But the Communists refused to enter Muraviev's Government. On
September 2nd, Muraviev presented the new Government to the
regents. The USSR declared war on Bulgaria on September 5th. With
this act, Moscow found a way for the Red Army to invade Bulgaria.
The same day, the Government broke its relations with Germany
and decided to seek
decided to declare war on Germany, but for military reasons the
decision did not take effect until September
took place on September 6th, 7th and 8th. Jails were broken into and
political prisoners were set free. Workers went on strike. A miners'
strike in Pernik began on September 7th and escalated. The Bulgarian
Communists overthrew Muraviev's Government on the night of
September 9th and replaced it with a Government of the Fatherland
Front.
can find different explanations in the Bulgarian historic literature
as to how the Fatherland Front came to power. In the so-called
Marxist historiography, these events were defined as a people's
uprising and a revolution, while in the historiography after
we encounter the word 'coup' as well. No matter how one calls the
event on September
pronunciamento,
change that determined the history of Bulgaria for four and a half
decades. On September 9th,
was replaced by a radically different one. This change became
254
possible
but because the Great Powers had agreed that Bulgaria would be
within the Soviet sphere of influence. The new Government was
composed in violation of the Constitution and the new regency
appointed by the Government of the Fatherland Front was also in
violation of the Constitution although hardly anyone was interested
at that time. The Bulgarian army was incorporated into the structure
of the Third Ukrainian Front, and an agreement was signed between
Yugoslavia and Bulgaria on October 5th in Krayova which declared
that the Bulgarian troops operating inside Yugoslavia were there
to help expel the Germans and were not considered invaders. After
the USSR declared war on Bulgaria, the issue of signing an armistice
acquired a new aspect. Moshanov, who had been in Cairo since the
end of August for talks with the British and the Americans, returned
to Bulgaria because his mission had ended and Moscow was
designated as the new location for holding talks. The armistice
between Bulgaria and the Allies was signed in Moscow on October
28, 1944.
region, and Bulgaria entered the war against Germany. This is how
the participation of Bulgaria in the so-called Patriotic War began
during which many Bulgarians were killed. Yet these victims
certainly contributed to a more favorable situation for the country
after the end of the war with Germany. Bulgarian foreign policy on
the eve of and during the Second World War is an issue of continuing
interest to historians. This is undoubtedly one of the most interesting
periods in Bulgaria's new history. The Bulgarian historiography
during the first two decades after the war does not make a real
evaluation of the situation of the country and the conduct of its
rulers. It is later that historical works appear, making a more
objective evaluation of Bulgarian foreign policy in the years of the
Second World War. Diaries and memoirs
events were published after the political change that took place in
1989.
255
pretend to be objective but which were dominated by anti-
communist rhetoric. The authors of those works may have thought
that in this way they would more quickly find their place in the sun
of history. Yet, one is a true historian when one strives to present
events objectively to a maximum degree.
In the 1950's and
role of the USSR and of Bulgarian Communists in a most
favorable light while the merits of the rulers of the country and of
the allies of the USSR were criticized and their mistakes exaggerated.
Research was published later in which a professional historic
approach prevailed over the Party approach, although not
completely eliminated. Bulgaria could not afford to follow its own
foreign political line during the Second World War because its status
quo was defined
Treaty by force of which age-old Bulgarian territories were taken
from Bulgaria. The Treaty also imposed harsh reparations on
Bulgaria. What brought about these demands is another question,
but the victorious countries severely punished the countries that
lost the First World War which laid the basis for the next devastating
military conflict. In the period between the two world wars, the
victorious countries made no effort to draw Bulgaria to their side.
They supported Bulgaria's neighbors which were ready at any
moment to deal with their weak neighbor should it show any signs
of revanchism. It is hardly strange under these circumstances that
the Bulgarian rulers saw the only beam of hope in the face of
Germany which also lost the First World War and was punished
by England and France. Yet, Germany was a great power, while
Bulgaria was not. For this reason Bulgaria had to assess carefully
each move it made. Bulgaria's foreign policy, which became more
and more oriented toward Germany, seems quite reasonable. If
England and France did not wish to win over Bulgaria to their side
and the rulers in Sofia
then the only way out was to ally with Germany. It is namely through
256
Germany that Bulgaria sought a resolution of its claims. The
Bulgarian rulers headed by Tsar Boris III were exceptionally careful
not to make a wrong step and draw the country into the war.
Coincidentally or not, Bulgarian politicians visited Berlin, Moscow,
Paris and London in the summer of
got back South Dobrudzha by peaceful means. Bulgaria received
this territory from Germany, not from the USSR or England, which
also acknowledged Bulgaria's just demands. This is perhaps the
most telling evidence that Bulgaria wanted to follow Germany
and not any other Great Power. But even if Bulgaria's wish were
different, it would have been impossible to realize because England
could hardly breathe from the German attacks and the
want to hear anything about the USSR. He knew quite well what
had happened to his godfather, the last Russian Tsar after the
October /revolution.
The Bulgarian rulers managed during the war to prevent
Bulgaria from becoming a battleground, and if it were not for the
misguided decision of the rulers to declare war on England and the
USA, Bulgaria could have avoided the devastating bombardments
in
For its role as a German satellite, Bulgaria received the
territories it had justly claimed. Yet, Germany did not want to solve
Bulgaria's territorial issues. Itpreferred to keep the Bulgarian rulers
at bay by giving Bulgaria the new territories to administer only with
the intention of redrawing the borders after the end of the war. One
can only guess if Bulgaria would have been satisfied then with respect
to all its claims. Keeping in mind that it was not playing its role of a
satellite exactly as they would have liked in Berlin, I doubt that the
Germans would have agreed to all Bulgarian territorial claims.
The turning point of the war in
of the Bulgarian pro-German politicians, and the death of
confused them still more since it happened after a visit to Hitler,
giving grounds for rumors of a forced death. On their part, the
257
Germans also spread versions about the death of the
Consequently, there are doubts about his death even today. Known
historic materials give grounds to draw the conclusion that the death
of Tsar Boris was most probably natural and the result of a still
more complicated situation. The
policy of maneuvering and waiting, understood that Germany was
gradually but surely losing the war. Bulgaria was inevitably to follow
it, making the road to salvation seem more and more impossible to
travel. It is most probably this conclusion and the great tension that
led to the death of the
have been had he lived to the time of the radical change that took
place on September
The Bulgarian Communists who made the political, social
and economic changes on September 9th can take no practical credit
for this change. Bulgaria turned out to be a pawn of the Great Powers
which
by deciding that Bulgaria would be within the Soviet sphere of
influence. This period is subject to strenuous research on the part of
historians and is evaluated in contradictory ways. Future historians
will give the most correct evaluation of the regime after
Bulgarian army conttibuted to the defeat of Nazism, and the tens of
thousands of killed and wounded Bulgarian warriors allowed
favorable treatment of the country after the end of the war. Bulgaria
even retained South Dobradzha
its entry into the Trilateral Pact. This territory was conceded by
Romania which at the end of the war was also a defeated German
satellite. What would have been the situation concerning this piece
of land had Romania been on the side of the Allies?
In my
a reasonable foreig policy considering there were not many
alternatives. Natural]
pro-German
not have avoided Bulgaria's inclusion in the Trilateral Pact, but it
258
was not necessary to make the big mistake of declaring war on
Great Britain and the USA. It is quite questionable whether Bulgaria
could have left the German orbit earlier. If it had made a more
decisive attempt to do this in the spring and summer of
could have cost the country dearly. The Germans would have hardly
hesitated to replace the members of the Government by extreme
supporters of the Third Reich.
During the years of the Second World War, Bulgaria
attempted to develop a reasonable foreign policy, but we should not
underestimate the fact that it is a small country and that it is among
the countries which lost the First World War. Had it not been for the
blunder of the rulers in December
avoided the destructive bombardments by the Allies.
259 |
| adam_txt |
СЪДЪРЖАНИЕ
УВОД
ГЛАВА ПЪРВА
БЪЛГАРИЯ В НАВЕЧЕРИЕТО НА ВОЙНАТА
ГЛАВА ВТОРА
ВЪНШНАТА ПОЛИТИКА НА БЪЛГАРИЯ
СЛЕД НАЧАЛОТО НА ВОЙНАТА
ГЛАВА ТРЕТА
В ПАКТА
ГЛАВА ЧЕТВЪРТА
ВЪНШНАТА ПОЛИТИКА НА БЪЛГАРИЯ
СЛЕД СМЪРТТА НА ЦАР БОРИС
ЗАКЛЮЧЕНИЕ
БИБЛИОГРАФИЯ
РЕЗЮМЕ НА АНГЛИЙСКИ ЕЗИК
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.
FIRST
BULGARIA ON THE EVE OF THE WAR
SECOND CHAPTER
BULGARIA'S FOREIGN POLICY AFTER
THE BEGINNING OF THE WAR
THIRD CHAPTER
INTHEPACT.
FOURTH CHAPTER
BULGARIA'S FOREIGN POLICY AFTER
THE DEATH OF TSAR BORIS III
CONCLUSION.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
SUMMARY IN ENGLISH
BULGARIA'S FOREIGN POLICY
DURING THE SECOND WORLD WAR
AS REFLECTED IN BULGARIAN HISTORIC LITERATURE
1938 -1944
DR. Ivan Yanev
Summary
This research encompasses a large volume of historic
literature. The goal I set myself is to cover if not the whole, at least
a more significant part of the historic literature related to Bulgaria's
foreign policy on the eve of and during the Second World War.
Research, diaries and memoirs of politicians from the time of the
war have also been examined in this treatise. I remained true to the
theory that every rule has its exception, and for this reason I have
included some materials from the Gold Fund of the Bulgarian
National Radio
Those materials are kept in audio versions in the Gold Fund of the
BNR,
the form of an audio annex to the book, I was given a flat refusal. I
hope that the time will come when such historic evidence will not
only be looked on for commercial purposes but will be given to
researchers for the enrichment of the study of history. I have also
included in this research collections of documents which have
already been published and are part of Bulgaria's historic literature.
The discussion of Bulgarian foreign policy during the war years
in foreign language historic literature presents a different approach
and a separate research and for that reason this presentation is
baed solely on Bulgarian historic literature.
This work covers historic literature which was created over
the course of several decades. As is often the case, the shorter the
distance in time from the described events, the more emotional their
235
interpretation is. After the war, when Bulgaria was in the Soviet
orbit, the prevailing interpretation of facts in historiography was
one that created a favorable impression of the role of communism
and of the USSR. The first attempts at a more general treatment of
events in the first years of the war are two articles written by Mirin
Mihov,
Balkans at the Beginning of the Second World War" and "The
Struggle of the USSR to Prevent Nazi Aggression in the Balkans
during the Second World War", published in
respectively. They are full of inaccurate interpretations of events,
but at the same time they are the first attempt to make clear the
Bulgarian status quo.
tone and overstates the positive role of the USSR, but this is
understandable given the time the articles were published. The case
is also similar in volume
in
historic perspective. In volume
published
changed is the evaluation of Stalin's role in the years during the
war. He is already pointed to as the one to blame for the quick and
easy entry of the Wermacht deep into the territory of the USSR.
This position was dictated by the process of de-Stalinization
undertaken by
the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), rather than by
a professional historic approach to the facts.
The two studies written by Nikolay Genchev at the end of
the 1960's, "The Foreign Political Orientation of Bulgaria on the
Eve of the Second World War-September
and "Bulgaria's Foreign Policy in the Initial Period of the Second
World War
historiography with respect to the Second World War. Genchev
makes an attempt to leave the narrow Party line and keep to the
historic approach. In the
236
in Bulgarian historic writing concerning the Second World War.
At that time, a number of studies appeared in which a more factual,
historic tone prevails, and the number of pro-Party
decreases, although not totally eliminated. The following
monographs appeared: "Bulgaria and the Third Reich
by
1922-1943"
1941"
In the
Bulgarian foreign policy during the war continued to produce
good results. The following books were published: "England and
Bulgaria
Bulgaria and Germany
Policy towards Bulgaria in the Balkans
Toshkova; and "Diplomatic Relations between Bulgaria and the
Soviet Union
After
some historic works it was replaced by its equally unprofessional
opposite
place in
late 1930's to the middle of the 1940's were published. One of the
most important sources on Bulgarian foreign policy is
Filov's diary which was published surprisingly even before
Important works published in the
Parvan Draganov, Evdokia
Dimitrov
published, among which Stoicho Moshanov's and
Muraviev's standout.
The goal of the present research is to show Bulgaria's foreign
policy as reflected in Bulgarian historic literature. It is an attempt to
show the way the different historic works treat historic events
depending on the time they were written. In comparing contradictory
historic works, priority is given to the historic truth. The presentation
237
Starts
outbreak of the Second World War. The basic idea is to follow
events to the end of the war when Bulgaria enters the conflict.
The initial date chosen is July
the
after the hardships imposed on it by the
treaty cost Bulgaria dearly by the loss of its age-old lands and
demands for stiff reparations. This treaty resulted in negative
feelings on the part of the Bulgarian population toward the
victorious countries of the First World War. This research covers
the period to October
and the anti-Nazi coalition was signed in Moscow. It was after
dramatic internal political change that took place on September
1944,
and to participate in the defeat of Nazi Germany. Bulgaria's
position was officially acknowledged by the victorious countries
with the signing of the Moscow armistice.
The structure of this book consists of four chapters defined
on a thematic and on a chronological principle. The first chapter
encompasses the period from July
war. The second chapter is dedicated to the period from the beginning
of the war until Bulgaria joined the Tripartite Pact. The third chapter
examines the events from March
when the course of the war began to turn. The last chapter is on
Bulgarian foreign policy in the year when the country was governed
by a council of regents and by governments that had difficulty
finding their way in the tumultuous international situation. I leave
it to the readers of this book to make an assessment as to whether
the stated goals have been achieved and whether I have managed to
delineate impartially the foreign policy of Bulgaria during the Second
World War presented on the pages of Bulgarian historic literature.
Great Britain should undoubtedly be rendered its due for
the
238
on the Balkans to which Bulgaria would also be a part. But there
were territorial arguments between Bulgaria and its neighbours
which were difficult to solve. The revision of the nightmarish
Versailles system began, and the basic catalyst for the changes
was a new Germany governed by a new ideology
leader,
and turned it into a province of the Third Reich. In the end of
September
Czechoslovakia and annexed it to its territory with the consent of
the victorious countries of the First World War- France, England
and Italy. The British and the French hoped strongly that the new
dictator had been satisfied, but they were soon to find out that Hitler
would not be moderated by constant concessions made at the
expense of small countries. In the middle of March
managed to take the upper hand over Czechoslovakia as well. When
Bonito
unhappily since he considered himself the architect of
1938
the dissolution of Czechoslovakia. Mussolini restored the balance
between Rome and Berlin after Italy occupied the territory of Albania
at the beginning of April
can say that it was a reality. Yet, to make war one needs countries
at war, and at that time there were no such countries since the British
and French allies were constantly giving way to the German dictator.
Bulgaria fondly watched the German actions because it was also
looking for a solution to it revanchist aspirations
Government defined the foreign political goals of the country. Its
primary objective was to take back South Dobrudzha, the border in
Thrace from
districts. Sofia watched hopefully at the failure of the Versailles
Treaty but did not dare to undertake any real actions towards solving
its territorial problems. It understood that its neighbors would not
hesitate to punish it severely
239
foreign policy had to be neutral, or at least it had to be suggested in
international circles that Bulgaria was leading a policy of non-
engagement. There is no doubt that the strings of Sofia's foreign
policy were pulled by Tsar Boris III, but Prime Minister
Kyoseivanov, who was experienced in diplomacy, should also be
given credit for the neutral policy. By the summer of
showed that at that moment it had no intention of getting involved
with any of the Great Powers. Sofia secretly fully supported the
German moves because it hoped for a revision of its own borders,
and it is clear that it could get support from Berlin. Prime Minister
Kyoseivanov made a visit to Germany at the beginning of July.
Even before Kyoseivanov returned to Bulgaria, the Chairman of
the National Assembly, Stoicho Moshanov, departed for France and
England. Thus Bulgaria looked neutral to the Great Powers although
it is not difficult to predict what its choice would be at the decisive
moment. Kyoseivanov was naturally very angry with what
Moshanov has done because in Berlin they would have understood
right away that after the visit of the Prime Minister to Germany, the
Chairman of the Parliament was making insurance visits to Paris
and London. At the beginning of August, a Bulgarian parliamentarian
delegation visited the USSR. In this way, accidentally or not,
Bulgarian politicians visited Berlin, Paris, London and Moscow in
the summer of
held between the USSR on the one hand and England and France
on the other for the conclusion of an alliance which was to act as a
deterrent to the steady advance of the Nazis. In the middle of August
though, these talks failed, and a pact was concluded between the
USSR and Germany on August 23rd. In this way, the totalitarian
systems overtook the western democracies. Bulgaria may also have
contributed to the failure of the pact between Berlin and Moscow
through its ambassador in Berlin, Parvan Draganov. On September
1st, the Wermacht invaded Poland. Two days later, being unable to
convince Hitler to withdraw his troops, Great Britain and France
240
declared" war
the Polish territory, and the USSR and Germany signed an agreement
for a new boundary between them. In the middle of September,
Bulgaria declared its neutrality with respect to the military conflict.
This delay is most probably because the Government wanted to
understand the situation and make a correct assessment as to
whether this was a local conflict or a large-scale war. There were
not many options for Bulgaria at that moment. Its moves were closely
observed by its neighbors who were well aware of the Bulgarian
revanchist desires and who could end up in Bulgaria within hours
should it not act peacefully. Thus, on September
declared its neutrality to the war that had broken out. The first
months of the war were uneventful, and there were no military
actions at that time. Because of this, it has been called "the strange
war",
invaded on a large scale. The Wermacht occupied Denmark,
Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxemburg and France. This
eliminated the competition for Germany on the continent. England
was pushed back to its islands, and the question about Moscow
was there to be solved. Italy also decided to intervene in the war
and declared war on France on July 10th. In
the issue of South Dobrudzha was ripe for a solution. On June 26th,
Moscow delivered an ultimatum to Bucharest: the regions of
Bessarabia and North
first the Romanians were inclined to resist, but after they understood
that Berlin and Rome would not support them, they acquiesced,
and on June
On July 27th, Prime Minister
1940
Ivan Popov met Hitler and Joachim
Äad
them to settle their argument with Bulgaria. After Berlin, the
Romanians also visited Rome where they were given similar advice.
241
In this way, Sofia received the support of Germany for the settlement
of the South Dobrudzha issue. Yet Hitler refused to be an arbitrator
between the two countries. The Romanians were forced to begin
bilateral negotiations with Bulgaria. After considerable delay on
the part of Romania, the Krayov Agreement was finally signed on
September 7th, and South Dobrudzha was restored as a territory of
Bulgaria. On September 21st, the Bulgarian army entered the restored
Dobrudzha territory. A pact was signed only
of the Krayov Agreement which was to play an important role in
subsequent years. Japan also joined the two aggressive European
forces. The signing of the trilateral pact shows that Germany had
no intention of being satisfied with what it had achieved up to that
moment. By the middle of October, Bulgaria's situation had
become quite delicate. Without consulting his ally in Berlin, the
Italian dictator decided to manage things with Greece. Mussolini
sent a letter to Tsar Boris III informing him of the actions which
were under way against Bulgaria's southern neighbor. The tone of
the letter was informative, but Mussolini was hoping that the
Bulgarian monarch would agree to joint actions so that Bulgaria
could take its claimed territories. Unfortunately for Mussolini, the
Bulgarian
After its initial offensive, the Italian army, which invaded Greece
at the end of October, was forced by the Greek army to retreat, and
Bulgaria actually helped Greece with its neutrality. In addition, in
the middle of October
Trilateral Pact. At that time, the Tsar also received a letter from the
British King expressing his satisfaction with Bulgaria's policy,
saying that this policy should continue because otherwise there
was a danger of the Bulgarian territory becoming a scene for military
action. The Tsar managed to get the country out of this complicated
situation. Bulgaria was not misled by the Italian suggestion and
remained calm with respect to its southern neighbor. The Tsar wrote
a personal letter to Hitler assuring him that it was not useful for
242
Bulgaria
the German plans. The Tsar wrote that Hitler should think well
whether it was imperative for Bulgaria to join the Pact in that
moment since Bulgaria's recent policy had kept the Bulgarian and
German enemies at bay. Tsar Boris and Minister Popov make a visit
to Hitler and
about Bulgaria eventually joining the Pact. Hitler behaved well
with the Bulgarian monarch, which was not true of
who treats/ the Bulgarian Foreign Minister quite unceremoniously.
Von
the Pact, but Popov stood up for his position heroically. According
to Genchev's thesis, Bulgaria refused to join the Pact not on
principle but only postponed joining until a later date. According
to him, the fact that the German army had yet to reach the Danube
combined with the threat coming from Turkey, the unpredictable
conduct of Yugoslavia and the British threats were the reasons that
the Bulgarian leaders rejected signing the contract.
that German military specialists had been installed in Bulgaria as
early as mid-October. He also thought that the suggestion for a
pact on the part of the USSR and Arkady Sobolev's visit to Sofia
prevented "the attachment of Bulgaria to the chariot of Nazi
Germany".
suspected that Bulgaria would enter into the Pact, especially
judging from King George's letter to Tsar Boris. As a whole, his
thesis is that talks were being held to unify all possible forces against
the USSR. According to
joining the Pact on principle, but instead had asked for a delay
and had also declared that he would like Yugoslavia to follow the
same path. According to Hitler, Turkey would not dare invade
Bulgaria if the latter joined the Pact. The Tsar went to the meeting
with Hitler accompanied by Popov instead of Filov in order to evade
making decisions in Bergtesgarden
road to
243
passed through the
According to Stefan Gruev, "The
said "not now". According to the same author, five days later
Ambassador
Government which agreed in principle to enter the pact but at a
later stage. In my opinion, the
Trilateral Pact but managed to get the delay he was seeking, namely
at the time the German troops reacherf the border of his country.
This would give Bulgaria the security it was striving for because, if
there were Wermacht troops on Bulgarian territory, none of
Bulgaria's neighbors would think of contradicting its decision to
join the Pact. The
either had to choose the German alternative or simply expose the
country to a quite unclear future. Vyacheslav
to Hitler on November 12th. During the visit, the Soviet diplomat
expressed the wish of the USSR to give Bulgaria guarantees similar
to those Germany gave Romania where Nazi troops were installed
at the beginning of October. Hitler asked if the Bulgarian Tsar had
requested such guarantees as the Romanian leaders had. After the
meeting between Boris and Hitler on November 19th in
Bergtesgarden, the Soviet Government delivered to Ivan Stamenov,
the Bulgarian Ambassador in Moscow, an offer to sign a pact of
mutual assistance. A year earlier,
simultaneously the Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs
of Bulgaria, rejected a similar offer declaring that the time had not
come for the signing of such a pact. According to Dekanozov,
Molotov's deputy, now was the right time for the signing of a pact.
Such pacts were also signed with the Baltic states in the summer of
1940,
nature of the Government in Moscow which did not tolerate any
monarchical form of government, as well as
would become 'Balticized', the Tsar and the strong four members
of the cabinet, namely Prime Minister
244
Minister
Minister of Interior
On November 23rd, Popov sent an answer to Stamenov,
saying that Bulgaria did not feel threatened and that no guarantees
were necessary. It also said that Bulgaria Am/been invited to enter
the Trilateral Pact and was studying this offer. The Soviet diplomat
Arkadi
his visit was to deliver the draft agreement between Moscow and
Sofia. The next day the Communists made public the text of the
Pact and a movement was started in its defense. Moscow had no
objections to military guarantees being omitted with Moscow being
the only one giving such guarantees to Sofia. The USSR had nothing
against Bulgaria joining the Trilateral Pact. Possibly the USSR
itself might enter the Pact at a later stage. The USSR acknowledged
Bulgaria's territorial aspirations. After a conversation with the Soviet
leaders Yosif Stalin and Vyacheslav
telegram to the Bulgarian Communists instructing them to start a
large scale propaganda campaign for the acceptance of the Soviet
offer of a pact. The Bulgarian Communists undertook large-scale
activities to popularize the Soviet offer. Some members of the
Bulgarian Workers' Party (BWP) were not well briefed on the
general situation, and in their opinion England was still the instigator
of the war. The BWPproclaimedthat signing a pact with the USSR
would not lead to balticization or bolshevization of the country. In
spite of all maneuvers by the jfsar, Bulgaria was forced to define
its position at the beginning of
and Hitler to discuss Bulgaria's inclusion in the Trilateral Pact.
Germany promised the White Sea region as a territorial acquisition
for Bulgaria. A Bulgarian-Turkish declaration on non-aggression
was declared "publicly" in Ankara and in Sofia on February 17th.
This declaration was signed with the knowledge of Berlin, and with
this step, the Bulgarian Government secured Turkey's neutrality
concerning Bulgaria's inclusion in the Pact, which was under way.
245
The members of the delegation who were to leave for the signing of
the contract, were changed because of Popov's supposed illness.
On principle, he was skeptical about Bulgaria joining the Pact,
however he did not resign and decided instead to feign illness so
that he would not have to go to Vienna. Bulgarian Prime Minister
Filov, the head of the Bulgarian delegation in Vienna, signed a
protocol joining Bulgaria to the Trilateral Pact on March 1st at
o'clock. On the part of the Axis, the protocol was signed by
Ribbentrop, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Germany, Count
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Italy and Japanese Ambassador
Oshima. On the next day, Bulgaria's inclusion in the Trilateral Pact
was ratified by the Governmental majority with a "loud ovation".
The members of Parliament in the opposition were not given an
opportunity to express their protest. The entry of the German army
into Bulgaria began on March 1st. After Bulgaria joined the
Trilateral Pact, Moscow expressed its disapproval, and England
broke off diplomatic relations with Sofia on March 5th. Genchev
described three possible options for action which Bulgaria had on
the eve of the signing of the pact Option one was for Bulgaria to
render military resistance to the Wermacht. This option would have
been disastrous for Bulgaria since as it became clear only a month
later, far better equipped armies capitulated to Germany within
days. Option number two was for Bulgaria not to joint the pact and
not to render resistance to the advancing Wermacht troops. The
risk in this case was to create chaos in the country when the
governing faction might be replaced by extreme supporters of the
Reich. Option three was the one chosen by Bulgaria
Pact. This option was the most suitable at that moment. England
promised to help Bulgaria
were not well-grounded because England itself was suffering great
difficulties and could not exit its islands. According to Sirkov there
was also another possibility for Bulgaria besides those described by
Genchev. This was the possibility of signing a pact with the USSR
246
which in the opinion of the author would have made it difficult for
Germany to have pursued its aggressive actions. The author rejects
the possibility that Germany moved to the Balkans mainly because
of the war between Italy and Greece. In his opinion, even if there
were no such war, Germany would have advanced towards the
peninsula. The parameters of an eventual pact between Sofia and
Moscow were also of importance. It was some hours before the
Wermacht invaded Yugoslavia that a pact was signed between the
USSR and Yugoslavia which did not influence in any way
Germany's aggression. It is written in volume two
of Bulgaria" published in
into an agreement with Germany
as the autumn of
Government at that time did not have many alternatives. Genchev
defines three options while Sirkov adds a fourth one. Maybe the
most correct decision is the one made by the Bulgarian leaders,
namely for Bulgaria to join the aggressor's pact but to evade
participation in military operations. Of course, the option involving
armed resistance to the Wermacht is only theoretical since the
Bulgarian army was too weak and poorly armed in comparison to
the German army. In the second place, why would Bulgaria oppose
Germany? Germany was the primary advocate for changes in the
demands of the Versailles Treaty when at the same time Bulgaria
was trying to revise the Neuilly Treaty. Therefore it appears there
was no Well-grounded reason for Bulgaria to render military
resistance to Germany. The above said, one should not ignore the
Germanophile
that time and especially that of Prime Minister Filov. The next option
which can also be defined as purely theoretical was for Bulgaria not
to join the Trilateral Pact and not render resistance to Germany for
allowing the Wermacht to pass through the territory of the country.
This was also impossible because the governing faction would have
been threatened by an eventual change, and rulers who were
247
extremist supporters of Berlin couldreplace it. Besides, if this option
were to be used, Bulgaria could not expect any solution to its
territorial claims. The next theoretical option would have been
for Bulgaria to have signed an agreement with Moscow and in this
way evade the German advancement through its territory. Yet where
is the guarantee that Germany would stop had such a pact been
signed? Even if this were the case, there were still no favorable
grounds for narrow cooperation between Bulgaria and the USSR.
The
monarchy. So, if the rulers wanted to maintain their positions, there
were no options to reach an agreement between the two countries.
Also, the example of the Baltic states was too recent for the rulers
in Sofia to consider a more serious rapprochement with Moscow.
Considering the options above, perhaps the most advantageous
for Bulgaria and the rulers in Sofia was the option which was finally
chosen
camp of the revisionist countries which had already acquired the
appearance of aggressors.
On March 25th, Cvetkovich's Government annexed
Yugoslavia into the Trilateral Pact which is what Bulgaria had
wanted to happen. Two days later, General Simovich carried out a
coup d'etat in Belgrade. Hitler undertook immediate action. As
early as the evening of March 27th, he signed Directive
dissolution of Yugoslavia. Bulgaria and Hungary were to be drawn
into the military action by means of territorial concessions.
Ambassador Draganov in Berlin was summoned on the same day
to a meeting with Hitler and
the new situation brought forward the issue of Macedonia. On
April 6th, the Wermacht advanced on Yugoslavia and Greece and
eliminated their armies in a matter of days. The armies of Bulgaria's
two neighbors had not had any military limitations imposed upon
them after the First World War and, in spite of this, they were crashed
quickly and uncompromisingly by the German military machine.
248
What would have happened to Bulgaria had the rulers in Sofia
eventually decided to render military resistance to the German army?
On April 19th, Germany gave a green light to
army entered the newly liberated territories. The White Sea region
was given to Bulgaria as compensation for its entry into the Trilateral
Pact. The issue of
because of Serbia's relationship with Germany. Had Yugoslavia
remained loyal to Germany, this painful issue for Bulgaria would
not have been solved in such a way. Germany had no intention of
satisfying Bulgaria at the expense of Yugoslavia, but after the latter
betrayed the Trilateral Pact, Berlin decided to punish severely
Bulgaria's western neighbor. Continuous friction with the Italians
started in Macedonia. Italy wanted more of the territory of
Macedonia to annex to the territory of Albania. On June 22nd Hitler
made a gross blunder when he attacked the USSR without having
dealt with England. In "The History of Bulgaria", volume three,
published in
all important state and military issues, is blamed for the advance of
the Wermacht and the lack of readiness on the part of the Red Army.
Germany believed that the war against the USSR would end quickly.
Yet, German plans proved wrong. The blitzkrieg failed and at the
beginning of December, the invincible Wermacht was defeated near
Moscow. In the early morning
air force attacked the American military base at Pearl Harbor. On
December
that. On December
its neutrality, and in this way war was declared. Berlin was supported
by Rome. With the Japanese declaration of war on the USA,
Germany demanded that the member countries of the Trilateral Pact
enter the war on the side of Japan. On December
Government made the disastrous decision to declare war on the
USA and England. According to Bulgaria's rulers, this was a
"symbolic war". The next day, the majority in the National Assembly
249
approved the decision of the Government. At the end of
Germany wanted Bulgaria to send three military divisions to occupy
Moravia The Government agreed to that, thinking that in this way
it could evade larger obligations. Berlin did not want to resolve
Bulgaria's territorial issues since it was more convenient for them
to keep Bulgaria at bay in order to submit more easily to German
demands. The political map of "The Danube Area" was published
in Germany, which referred to April
territories of Macedonia and Thrace, annexed to Bulgaria, were given
only for the Bulgarian Government to administer; the borders
were marked as temporary. In April
the Government. The indecisive Foreign Minister Popov was
removed from the Government and the other essential change was
to replace the Minister of Defense General
General Nikola
over by Filov who also kept his post as Prime Minister. These
changes were made after the Tsar visited Hitler. It is not certain
whether Hitler suggested the changes in the Government. It is
possible that the
under German influence. Bulgaria managed to save its Jewish
population, but only, it should be noted, those Jews living within
the old boundaries of the country. The Jewish population from the
newly annexed territories were subjected to extermination. Perhaps
the most important role in the salvation of the Jews within the old
boundaries of the country was played in March
Chairman of Parliament, Dimitar Peshev, who wrote a letter of
protest. This letter was signed by more than
Parliament. Peshev hardly ever acted without the knowledge of
the palace. However, despite the Government's censure of the letter
and the refusal of some parliamentarians to sign the letter, this
was successful in saving the lives of more than
Jews, unlike their fellow-Jews from the newly annexed territories
who were taken by Bulgarian trains to the Danube River where
250
they were handed over to the Germans. The colossal Battle for
Stalingrad ended between the end of January and the beginning of
February
November
German troops. The success of the Red Army led to the capture of
more than
fact the turning point of the war. From this point on, the Wermacht
started slowly but surely losing its positions and retreating. Bulgarian
Prime Minister
defeat, not attaching to it any special military importance. By the
end of
of making a separate peace with the Allies. They suggested that
Italy take part in this action as well, but Mussolini refused to do it
Chano,
of Foreign Minister together with the remaining "defeatist" ministers.
The landing of British and American troops on the island of Sicily
began on July
Mussolini with
Italy was signed in September. Hitler decided to help his ally.
Mussolini was freed by the Germans, and on September 23rd, he
took his place at the head of the newly created Italian Social Republic
situated in northern and
On September
acknowledge the newly-created republic. The Bulgarian
Government acknowledged the republic, but at the same time it did
not break its relations with the royal government. On the morning
of August 14th, Tsar Boris flew to Germany and returned on the
afternoon of August 15th. This was the third time the Tsar had
visited Hitler in that year. The same evening, Filov had an audience
with the
days after his return from his meeting with Hitler, the Tsarfettill.
Specialists were called from Berlin and Vienna, but the Tsar's health
deteriorated, and he died on the afternoon of August 28th. At first
251
the Tsar's illness was kept secret, and only on August
official
of the Tsar and especially the fact that it followed a meeting with
Hitler has given rise to different opinions among historians and
others. Yet, there is no proof 'for any of the speculation. Some claim
that prior to falling into a coma, the Tsar said that he had fought
with Hitler to protect Bulgaria. Others speculate that the Tsar was
poisoned
Germans, others by the English and yet others by the Russian. Where
there are no clear facts, thefantasies of some writers are unleashed
and they manage to arrange the puzzle in ways that are logical to
them. Yet, it is a fact that the death of the
attitude of Bulgaria toward Germany. Could the
eliminated by the Germans for wanting to break away from the
German ship which was sinking slowly but surely? This is hardly
possible because Germany was still too strong and the Tsar too
careful to risk subjecting the country to German occupation. At
that moment in the USSR, they would have hardly thought of
eliminating the Bulgarian
the situation in any way. The same can be said about England as
well. It was necessary to reconstruct the leadership of the country
after the death of the
country alone, and according to the Constitution, a Regency Council
had to be elected. Filov, who became the most powerful man in the
country after the death of the Tsar, Prince Kiril and General
were elected to be regents. Constituted in this way, the regency
violated two points of the Constitution. First, the regents should
have been elected by a Great National Assembly and not by an
ordinary National Assembly as was the case. Second, Prince Kiril
did not have the right to be a regent because he was a member of the
royal family and had not held any of the posts named in the
Constitution which were a requisite to being named a regent. The
Minister of Finance at that time,
252
Minister.
foreign policy of the country, but it should be mentioned that there
were no extreme
have brought the country even closer to Germany which was losing
the war slowly but surely. A new danger threatened Bulgaria in the
autumn of
terrorized the country because peaceful communities and civilian
sites were being targeted. The most massive bombardment was the
one that took place on January
notes were delivered to the Bulgarian Government by Moscow in
April and May
and sea ports were being used by the German army. These allegations
were rejected by the Government After that the USSR asked for
the restoration of the Soviet Consulate in Varna and for the opening
of Consular offices in Burgas and Ruse, but the Government set a
pre-condition of developing economic relations between the USSR
and Bulgaria. In actual fact, the Soviet diplomatic notes in April
and May
cabinet was headed by Ivan Bagryanov, who thought he could
communicate equally well with Moscow and Berlin. On June
the situation for Germany became even more unstable. England
and the USA finally opened a second front against the Wermacht in
France. At the end of July, the new Government agreed to restore
the Soviet Consulate in Varna, whose consular district included
Varna, Ruse and Burgas. If this Government had the goal of
preparing for a change in Bulgarian foreign policy and extricating
itself from a pact with the losing camp, its actions were too
indecisive. On the other hand, the possibilities for this were slight
since there were still German troops in Bulgaria. Yet the
Government made a decision and in August sent to Turkey the former
Chairman of the 24th National Assembly, Stoycho Moshanov, who
was to contact the Allies and learn under what conditions Bulgaria
could exit the war. The development of subsequent events went
253
lightening fast. Romania capitulated on August 23rd and the Red
Army landed on the Danube. On August 26th, the Government
declared neutrality in the war between Germany and the USSR and
announced that it was in contact with the countries with which
Bulgaria was in a state of war. The regents prepare themselves to
form a new Government which was to be formed from among the
opposition. The leader of the Agrarian Union,
became Prime Minister and had to form a cabinet of a national
coalition, i.e. all opposition entities had to enter the Government.
But the Communists refused to enter Muraviev's Government. On
September 2nd, Muraviev presented the new Government to the
regents. The USSR declared war on Bulgaria on September 5th. With
this act, Moscow found a way for the Red Army to invade Bulgaria.
The same day, the Government broke its relations with Germany
and decided to seek
decided to declare war on Germany, but for military reasons the
decision did not take effect until September
took place on September 6th, 7th and 8th. Jails were broken into and
political prisoners were set free. Workers went on strike. A miners'
strike in Pernik began on September 7th and escalated. The Bulgarian
Communists overthrew Muraviev's Government on the night of
September 9th and replaced it with a Government of the Fatherland
Front.
can find different explanations in the Bulgarian historic literature
as to how the Fatherland Front came to power. In the so-called
Marxist historiography, these events were defined as a people's
uprising and a revolution, while in the historiography after
we encounter the word 'coup' as well. No matter how one calls the
event on September
pronunciamento,
change that determined the history of Bulgaria for four and a half
decades. On September 9th,
was replaced by a radically different one. This change became
254
possible
but because the Great Powers had agreed that Bulgaria would be
within the Soviet sphere of influence. The new Government was
composed in violation of the Constitution and the new regency
appointed by the Government of the Fatherland Front was also in
violation of the Constitution although hardly anyone was interested
at that time. The Bulgarian army was incorporated into the structure
of the Third Ukrainian Front, and an agreement was signed between
Yugoslavia and Bulgaria on October 5th in Krayova which declared
that the Bulgarian troops operating inside Yugoslavia were there
to help expel the Germans and were not considered invaders. After
the USSR declared war on Bulgaria, the issue of signing an armistice
acquired a new aspect. Moshanov, who had been in Cairo since the
end of August for talks with the British and the Americans, returned
to Bulgaria because his mission had ended and Moscow was
designated as the new location for holding talks. The armistice
between Bulgaria and the Allies was signed in Moscow on October
28, 1944.
region, and Bulgaria entered the war against Germany. This is how
the participation of Bulgaria in the so-called Patriotic War began
during which many Bulgarians were killed. Yet these victims
certainly contributed to a more favorable situation for the country
after the end of the war with Germany. Bulgarian foreign policy on
the eve of and during the Second World War is an issue of continuing
interest to historians. This is undoubtedly one of the most interesting
periods in Bulgaria's new history. The Bulgarian historiography
during the first two decades after the war does not make a real
evaluation of the situation of the country and the conduct of its
rulers. It is later that historical works appear, making a more
objective evaluation of Bulgarian foreign policy in the years of the
Second World War. Diaries and memoirs
events were published after the political change that took place in
1989.
255
pretend to be objective but which were dominated by anti-
communist rhetoric. The authors of those works may have thought
that in this way they would more quickly find their place in the sun
of history. Yet, one is a true historian when one strives to present
events objectively to a maximum degree.
In the 1950's and
role of the USSR and of Bulgarian Communists in a most
favorable light while the merits of the rulers of the country and of
the allies of the USSR were criticized and their mistakes exaggerated.
Research was published later in which a professional historic
approach prevailed over the Party approach, although not
completely eliminated. Bulgaria could not afford to follow its own
foreign political line during the Second World War because its status
quo was defined
Treaty by force of which age-old Bulgarian territories were taken
from Bulgaria. The Treaty also imposed harsh reparations on
Bulgaria. What brought about these demands is another question,
but the victorious countries severely punished the countries that
lost the First World War which laid the basis for the next devastating
military conflict. In the period between the two world wars, the
victorious countries made no effort to draw Bulgaria to their side.
They supported Bulgaria's neighbors which were ready at any
moment to deal with their weak neighbor should it show any signs
of revanchism. It is hardly strange under these circumstances that
the Bulgarian rulers saw the only beam of hope in the face of
Germany which also lost the First World War and was punished
by England and France. Yet, Germany was a great power, while
Bulgaria was not. For this reason Bulgaria had to assess carefully
each move it made. Bulgaria's foreign policy, which became more
and more oriented toward Germany, seems quite reasonable. If
England and France did not wish to win over Bulgaria to their side
and the rulers in Sofia
then the only way out was to ally with Germany. It is namely through
256
Germany that Bulgaria sought a resolution of its claims. The
Bulgarian rulers headed by Tsar Boris III were exceptionally careful
not to make a wrong step and draw the country into the war.
Coincidentally or not, Bulgarian politicians visited Berlin, Moscow,
Paris and London in the summer of
got back South Dobrudzha by peaceful means. Bulgaria received
this territory from Germany, not from the USSR or England, which
also acknowledged Bulgaria's just demands. This is perhaps the
most telling evidence that Bulgaria wanted to follow Germany
and not any other Great Power. But even if Bulgaria's wish were
different, it would have been impossible to realize because England
could hardly breathe from the German attacks and the
want to hear anything about the USSR. He knew quite well what
had happened to his godfather, the last Russian Tsar after the
October /revolution.
The Bulgarian rulers managed during the war to prevent
Bulgaria from becoming a battleground, and if it were not for the
misguided decision of the rulers to declare war on England and the
USA, Bulgaria could have avoided the devastating bombardments
in
For its role as a German satellite, Bulgaria received the
territories it had justly claimed. Yet, Germany did not want to solve
Bulgaria's territorial issues. Itpreferred to keep the Bulgarian rulers
at bay by giving Bulgaria the new territories to administer only with
the intention of redrawing the borders after the end of the war. One
can only guess if Bulgaria would have been satisfied then with respect
to all its claims. Keeping in mind that it was not playing its role of a
satellite exactly as they would have liked in Berlin, I doubt that the
Germans would have agreed to all Bulgarian territorial claims.
The turning point of the war in
of the Bulgarian pro-German politicians, and the death of
confused them still more since it happened after a visit to Hitler,
giving grounds for rumors of a forced death. On their part, the
257
Germans also spread versions about the death of the
Consequently, there are doubts about his death even today. Known
historic materials give grounds to draw the conclusion that the death
of Tsar Boris was most probably natural and the result of a still
more complicated situation. The
policy of maneuvering and waiting, understood that Germany was
gradually but surely losing the war. Bulgaria was inevitably to follow
it, making the road to salvation seem more and more impossible to
travel. It is most probably this conclusion and the great tension that
led to the death of the
have been had he lived to the time of the radical change that took
place on September
The Bulgarian Communists who made the political, social
and economic changes on September 9th can take no practical credit
for this change. Bulgaria turned out to be a pawn of the Great Powers
which
by deciding that Bulgaria would be within the Soviet sphere of
influence. This period is subject to strenuous research on the part of
historians and is evaluated in contradictory ways. Future historians
will give the most correct evaluation of the regime after
Bulgarian army conttibuted to the defeat of Nazism, and the tens of
thousands of killed and wounded Bulgarian warriors allowed
favorable treatment of the country after the end of the war. Bulgaria
even retained South Dobradzha
its entry into the Trilateral Pact. This territory was conceded by
Romania which at the end of the war was also a defeated German
satellite. What would have been the situation concerning this piece
of land had Romania been on the side of the Allies?
In my
a reasonable foreig policy considering there were not many
alternatives. Natural]
pro-German
not have avoided Bulgaria's inclusion in the Trilateral Pact, but it
258
was not necessary to make the big mistake of declaring war on
Great Britain and the USA. It is quite questionable whether Bulgaria
could have left the German orbit earlier. If it had made a more
decisive attempt to do this in the spring and summer of
could have cost the country dearly. The Germans would have hardly
hesitated to replace the members of the Government by extreme
supporters of the Third Reich.
During the years of the Second World War, Bulgaria
attempted to develop a reasonable foreign policy, but we should not
underestimate the fact that it is a small country and that it is among
the countries which lost the First World War. Had it not been for the
blunder of the rulers in December
avoided the destructive bombardments by the Allies.
259 |
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| any_adam_object_boolean | 1 |
| author | Janev, Ivan D. |
| author_facet | Janev, Ivan D. |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Janev, Ivan D. |
| author_variant | i d j id idj |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV022401068 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)162455794 (DE-599)BVBBV022401068 |
| edition | 1. izd. |
| era | Geschichte 1938-1944 gnd |
| era_facet | Geschichte 1938-1944 |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>00000nam a2200000 c 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV022401068</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20070503</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">070425s2006 |||| 00||| bul d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9543042667</subfield><subfield code="9">954-304-266-7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9789543042661</subfield><subfield code="9">978-954-304-266-1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)162455794</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV022401068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">bul</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,41</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Janev, Ivan D.</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Vănšnata politika na Bălgarija prez Vtorata svetovna vojna v bălgarskata istoričeska literatura</subfield><subfield code="b">1938 - 1944 g.</subfield><subfield code="c">Ivan Janev</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="250" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">1. izd.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Varna</subfield><subfield code="b">Izdat. "Liternet"</subfield><subfield code="c">2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">259 S.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">In kyrill. Schr., bulg. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Bulgaria's foreign policy during the Second World War as reflected in Bulgarian historic literature</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1938-1944</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Außenpolitik</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4003846-4</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Zweiter Weltkrieg</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4079167-1</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichtsschreibung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4020531-9</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Bulgarien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4008866-2</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Bulgarien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4008866-2</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Außenpolitik</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4003846-4</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1938-1944</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Bulgarien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4008866-2</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Geschichtsschreibung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4020531-9</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Außenpolitik</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4003846-4</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Zweiter Weltkrieg</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4079167-1</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015609718&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015609718&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">909</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09043</subfield><subfield code="g">499</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">909</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09044</subfield><subfield code="g">499</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="943" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-015609718</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| geographic | Bulgarien (DE-588)4008866-2 gnd |
| geographic_facet | Bulgarien |
| id | DE-604.BV022401068 |
| illustrated | Not Illustrated |
| index_date | 2024-07-02T17:18:26Z |
| indexdate | 2024-08-10T01:05:22Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9543042667 9789543042661 |
| language | Bulgarian |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-015609718 |
| oclc_num | 162455794 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-12 |
| owner_facet | DE-12 |
| physical | 259 S. |
| publishDate | 2006 |
| publishDateSearch | 2006 |
| publishDateSort | 2006 |
| publisher | Izdat. "Liternet" |
| record_format | marc |
| spelling | Janev, Ivan D. Verfasser aut Vănšnata politika na Bălgarija prez Vtorata svetovna vojna v bălgarskata istoričeska literatura 1938 - 1944 g. Ivan Janev 1. izd. Varna Izdat. "Liternet" 2006 259 S. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier In kyrill. Schr., bulg. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Bulgaria's foreign policy during the Second World War as reflected in Bulgarian historic literature Geschichte 1938-1944 gnd rswk-swf Außenpolitik (DE-588)4003846-4 gnd rswk-swf Zweiter Weltkrieg (DE-588)4079167-1 gnd rswk-swf Geschichtsschreibung (DE-588)4020531-9 gnd rswk-swf Bulgarien (DE-588)4008866-2 gnd rswk-swf Bulgarien (DE-588)4008866-2 g Außenpolitik (DE-588)4003846-4 s Geschichte 1938-1944 z DE-604 Geschichtsschreibung (DE-588)4020531-9 s Zweiter Weltkrieg (DE-588)4079167-1 s Digitalisierung BSBMuenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015609718&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015609718&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Abstract |
| spellingShingle | Janev, Ivan D. Vănšnata politika na Bălgarija prez Vtorata svetovna vojna v bălgarskata istoričeska literatura 1938 - 1944 g. Außenpolitik (DE-588)4003846-4 gnd Zweiter Weltkrieg (DE-588)4079167-1 gnd Geschichtsschreibung (DE-588)4020531-9 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4003846-4 (DE-588)4079167-1 (DE-588)4020531-9 (DE-588)4008866-2 |
| title | Vănšnata politika na Bălgarija prez Vtorata svetovna vojna v bălgarskata istoričeska literatura 1938 - 1944 g. |
| title_auth | Vănšnata politika na Bălgarija prez Vtorata svetovna vojna v bălgarskata istoričeska literatura 1938 - 1944 g. |
| title_exact_search | Vănšnata politika na Bălgarija prez Vtorata svetovna vojna v bălgarskata istoričeska literatura 1938 - 1944 g. |
| title_exact_search_txtP | Vănšnata politika na Bălgarija prez Vtorata svetovna vojna v bălgarskata istoričeska literatura 1938 - 1944 g. |
| title_full | Vănšnata politika na Bălgarija prez Vtorata svetovna vojna v bălgarskata istoričeska literatura 1938 - 1944 g. Ivan Janev |
| title_fullStr | Vănšnata politika na Bălgarija prez Vtorata svetovna vojna v bălgarskata istoričeska literatura 1938 - 1944 g. Ivan Janev |
| title_full_unstemmed | Vănšnata politika na Bălgarija prez Vtorata svetovna vojna v bălgarskata istoričeska literatura 1938 - 1944 g. Ivan Janev |
| title_short | Vănšnata politika na Bălgarija prez Vtorata svetovna vojna v bălgarskata istoričeska literatura |
| title_sort | vansnata politika na balgarija prez vtorata svetovna vojna v balgarskata istoriceska literatura 1938 1944 g |
| title_sub | 1938 - 1944 g. |
| topic | Außenpolitik (DE-588)4003846-4 gnd Zweiter Weltkrieg (DE-588)4079167-1 gnd Geschichtsschreibung (DE-588)4020531-9 gnd |
| topic_facet | Außenpolitik Zweiter Weltkrieg Geschichtsschreibung Bulgarien |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015609718&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015609718&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT janevivand vansnatapolitikanabalgarijaprezvtoratasvetovnavojnavbalgarskataistoriceskaliteratura19381944g |