government dominated by the BKP, which by 1947 had arrogated unto itself
complete power in the country. In the immediate postwar years policy and
direction concerning how the BKP should run the country was dictated
from Moscow, as was the case throughout most of the countries of Eastern
Europe. Between 1944 and 1948 eight countries had been taken over by
communist parties and had aligned themselves with the Soviet Union,
which exerted varying degrees of influence in the internal and
international affairs of all of them. Over the next twenty years
Yugoslavia and Albania broke out of the Soviet orbit completely; the
German Democratic Republic (East Germany), Poland, Hungary, and
Czechoslovakia experienced uprisings or civil disorders--in most cases
suppressed by Soviet force--and Romania asserted its right to national
self-determination on numerous occasions. Bulgaria alone remained
unwavering in its absolute allegiance to the Soviet Union.
Bulgaria chose not to follow the examples of other Eastern European
countries in seeking some degree of autonomy during the 1950s and 1960s
for many reasons. Not least among these were the historic traditions of
friendship between Bulgarians and Russians dating back to the
Russo-Turkish war that freed Bulgaria from Turkish rule in 1878.
Bulgarians are also close to the Russians in language, religion, and
cultural traditions. Additionally, having assumed power, the Bulgarian
Communists quite naturally looked toward Moscow--then the center of
world communism--for guidance and support. Many of the early postwar
leaders had spent several years as residents of the Soviet Union, where
they had been closely associated with the country's party.
Another reason for the close ties to the Soviet Union was pure
pragmatism on the part of the Bulgarian communist leaders. They were, in
effect, a minority leadership group faced with the task of imposing an
alien ideology on a reluctant majority at the same time that they were
trying to reorient the country's economy from an agricultural base to an
industrial base. The Bulgarian leaders needed the support of the Soviet
Union.
Beset by intraparty strife and lack of success in running the country
after the death of Georgi Dimitrov--the leading Bulgarian communist hero
and strong man of the early postwar years--the party leadership again
clung to Soviet support and totalitarian rigidity to perpetuate itself
in power. Even after the death of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin and the
later de-Stalinization program under Nikita Khrushchev, Bulgaria's
leaders retained Stalinism as a modus operandi until the early 1960s.
After Zhivkov became first secretary of the party in 1954, there was a
long power struggle, for a third time, and it was not until the early
1960s that Zhivkov managed to eliminate his major antagonists from the
party hierarchy and stabilize his regime. During all of those years and
on through the 1960s and into the 1970s, Zhivkov continued the policy of
absolute loyalty to the Soviet Union and to its leadership.
Consequently, Bulgarian foreign policy has been a mirror image of Soviet
policy.
Principles of Foreign Policy
Bulgaria's constitution, in describing how the state serves the people
in foreign affairs, mentions "developing and cementing friendship,
cooperation, and mutual assistance with the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics and the other socialist countries" and "pursuing a policy of
peace and understanding with all countries and peoples." Official
spokesmen proclaim that the country's international relations are
founded on the necessity for protecting national sovereignty and on the
creation of an overall attitude that would further the cause of all
nations in their development as modern states.
A quotation from the party program developed for the Tenth Party
Congress in 1971 indicates that, as far as Bulgaria's leaders are
concerned, the Soviet Union leads and Bulgaria follows. "For the
Bulgarian Communist Party and the Bulgarian people, Bulgarian-Soviet
friendship is like the sun and the air for every living creature, it is
a friendship of centuries and for centuries, one of the main driving
forces of our development, a condition and guarantee for the future
progress of our socialist fatherland and its tomorrow."
CONDUCT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
The Constitution of 1971 assigns the conduct of foreign relations to the
National Assembly, the State Council, and the Council of Ministers.
Formulation of foreign policy, however, remains a prerogative of the
BKP. The constitution states that the National Assembly implements
foreign policy but, because the assembly meets only three times each
year in short sessions, the implementation function is passed on to the
State Council during the long interim periods between assembly meetings.
Primary responsibilities of the State Council in foreign affairs (as
opposed to those limited to the periods between National Assembly
meetings) include representation of the country in its international
relations; the appointment, recall, or release from duty of diplomats
and consular officials; the ratification or denunciation of
international agreements; and the establishment of diplomatic and
consular ranks.
Although the ministries of foreign affairs and foreign trade are the
governmental operating agencies in the field of international
relations, in theory and in fact the State Council is the supervisory
body. The State Council exercises control over the activities of the
Council of Ministers and the ministries as stipulated in the
constitution. In essence, the State Council is the most powerful
government organ, not only in foreign affairs but in all governmental
activities. The interlocking of positions between the highest levels of
the party and the highest levels of the government assures that the BKP
program will be implemented.
According to the constitution, the Council of Ministers "organizes the
implementation of the home and foreign policy of the state." The council
is also charged with the concluding of international agreements and the
approval or denunciation of international agreements that are not
subject to ratification. In performing its constitutional duties in
foreign affairs, the Council of Ministers acts through the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Foreign Trade.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is the administrative arm of the
government in the execution of foreign policy directives, decrees, and
decisions of the BKP and in representing the country abroad in
embassies, legations, and consular offices. The ministry, in the
prosecution of its duties and functions, employs a minister, two first
deputy ministers, four deputy ministers, and a secretary general, who
are assisted by the heads of eight geographic departments. In 1973 these
departments were designated to handle affairs with the Soviet Union,
other socialist states, the Balkans, Western Europe, Asia, the Arab-bloc
countries, sub-Saharan Africa, and the Americas.
The functional departments include: administrative, consular, political,
research and planning, cultural, documentation and archives, economic,
finance and accounting, international organization, inspectors,
personnel, press and cultural affairs, protocol, and legal. A committee
for church affairs and a diplomatic service bureau, although not
classified as regular departments, function as such. Also included is
the position of disarmament negotiator.
The Ministry of Foreign Trade functions under the direction and
supervision of a minister, a first deputy minister, and six deputy
ministers, who are almost always high-ranking members of the BKP. The
ministry itself is organized into thirteen geographic offices and seven
departments. The different geographic offices handle trade agreements
with the Soviet Union, other socialist countries, developed capitalist
countries, Asia and Latin America, and the Arab and African countries.
Other offices include foreign exchange planning and accounting,
coordination, leadership and control of foreign trade organizations,
currency and finance, economic planning, market conditions, planning,
and personnel. There are departments for statistics, secretariat and
protocol, legal and departmental arbitration, accounting and auditing,
administration, labor and wages, and control inspectorate.
Additionally, there are offices and sections not falling under any
specific category but existing independently. They are: an office for a
trade fair director general, trade representatives, a foreign trade
research institute, and a state inspection on the quality of goods for
export.
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Relations with Communist Countries
Bulgaria's foreign policy and foreign trade are circumscribed to a great
extent within the alliances formed by the Soviet Union and the communist
countries of Eastern Europe. In the early 1970s this tightly knit,
although polycentric, group continued to expect and did receive
Bulgaria's participation in preserving the status quo in Eastern Europe.
As is the case with other Eastern European countries, Bulgaria wants
Western technology and also would like to attract more Western tourists
to increase its hard currency intake. Bulgaria's motive for attracting
the West is economic rather than ideological. It is accepted within the
socialist alliances that the principle of proletarian internationalism
does not preclude diversity of trading partners of the individual member
countries.
Soviet Union
Bulgarian relations with the Soviet Union have been described as
subservient, and Zhivkov once acknowledged that he was "known for being
bound to the Soviet Union in life and death." In 1948 Bulgaria entered
into the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Aid with the
Soviet Union, which was renewed for another twenty years on May 12,
1967, and over the years the close alignment between the two countries
has taken on greater importance. Ideologically, it is well known that
Bulgaria is a loyal partner within the Soviet-dominated socialist group.
Its leaders have been schooled in Marxism-Leninism and usually look to
the Soviet Union for leadership.
Economically, Bulgaria still looks to the Soviet Union for foreign aid
and preferential trade treatment. The rapid pace with which Bulgaria has
moved toward industrialization is primarily owing to Soviet assistance.
Raw materials critical to Bulgaria's economy are supplied by the Soviet
Union and, with Soviet aid, the country has been able to construct many
large industrial enterprises. Estimates in 1967 put the number of Soviet
specialists in Bulgaria at 5,000, and the number has probably increased.
The renewal of a five-year agreement for 1971 through 1975 would serve
to increase further the Soviet share of trade in Bulgaria.
Relations with Other Communist States
Bulgaria's relations with Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, Poland,
and Romania are largely governed by a series of bilateral and
multilateral treaties of friendship and cultural cooperation and by
military and economic alliances. The alliances are the Warsaw Pact and
COMECON. Relations with the other two communist states of Eastern
Europe, Albania and Yugoslavia, have usually followed Soviet initiatives
toward those countries.
Quite naturally, Bulgaria's major concerns in foreign affairs have dealt
with relations among the states of the Balkan Peninsula and particularly
with adjacent states. Romania, its northern neighbor, is a member of
COMECON and the Warsaw Pact but has often appeared to be a reluctant
member and since the early 1960s has stressed nationalism rather than
Marxist internationalism, causing Bulgaria, with its strong Soviet
orientation, to tread lightly in bilateral relations for fear of
offending the Soviets. Nevertheless, the Bulgarians and Romanians have
drawn closer together, probably because both countries see benefits that
might accrue from Balkan cooperation and believe that such cooperation
should in no way disturb the Soviet Union. In the early 1970s relations
appeared to be particularly good: there were frequent meetings between
leaders and government ministers, and a plan to cooperate in the
building of a huge hydroelectric project on the Danube River between the
two countries was announced.
Relations with Yugoslavia have more often than not been troubled to the
point of enmity. The problems existing between these two countries have
deep historical roots that hinge primarily on the Bulgarian contention
that Macedonia (since 1946 a federated republic of Yugoslavia) should be
Bulgarian rather than Yugoslavian. After World War II, when both
countries became communist, the Macedonian question was purposely
deemphasized but, when the Soviet-Yugoslav split occurred in 1948,
ideological differences paved the way for a renewal of the polemics on
the Bulgarian irredentist claims. In the early 1970s the polemics were
reduced to a minor level, and constructive talks leading to a
rapprochement began to occur. The changed atmosphere was attributed to
the state of relations between the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia but, for
whatever reason, the climate of relations between Bulgaria and its
western neighbor was considerably improved, and Bulgarian irredentism
was submerged.
Relations with Noncommunist States
The European Conference for Security and Cooperation held in Helsinki in
the spring of 1973 discussed the possibility of a freer exchange of
people and ideas as well as a freer flow of information between Western
European and Eastern European societies. The intensity of ideological
polemics had diminished with increasing contacts between East and West,
and the gap between the two social systems seemed narrower, especially
in regard to economic planning and development. Bulgaria, however,
publicly expressed doubts about importing anti-communist theories that
might accompany the freer exchanges of people, ideas, and information.
In a plenum of the Central Committee of the Bulgarian Communist Party
in July 1973, the party leaders touched on issues of international
relations. The leaders pledged to continue a new policy of building
goodwill and enhancing relations with noncommunist European states as
well as with other developed capitalist states in all aspects of
political, economic, cultural, and other relations. Bulgaria also sought
to continue cultivating and developing friendly relations with
nonaligned friendly countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
Consistent with this policy, it pledged to render assistance to these
countries, especially where there were national liberation movements
involved in active resistance to the established regimes.
Greece and Turkey
Greece is geographically contiguous to Bulgaria, and relations between
the two countries have been alternately hot and cold depending on the
political climate of the times. In 1964 both countries signed an accord
relative to war reparations, which opened up some channels of
communication, cultural exchanges, and relaxed travel restrictions. The
move toward better relations was interrupted by the 1967 coup d'etat in
Greece, but improvement began again in the early 1970s when officials of
the two governments exchanged visits. By 1972 a newly created
Bulgarian-Greek economic cooperation commission had met in Sofia.
Difficulties between Bulgaria and Turkey have deep roots in history and
also involve the 750,000 ethnic Turks still residing in Bulgaria (see
ch. 2; ch. 4). An atmosphere of cordiality, however, had been developing
slowly as the officials of both countries cautiously negotiated to
reduce tensions between the two countries. Exchanges of high-level
visits and the signing of various economic agreements had stabilized
Bulgarian-Turkish relations by the early 1970s. The hijacking of two
Turkish planes to Sofia in 1972 disturbed the detente temporarily, but
the Bulgarian foreign minister went quickly to Turkey to make amends. In
1973 the two countries again enjoyed improved relations.
The United States
The tensions that marked Bulgarian-United States foreign relations in
the 1950s eased somewhat in the 1960s. The legations of both countries
were raised to embassy status in November 1966. This action was believed
to be an offshoot of United States efforts, particularly that of
President Lyndon B. Johnson, to "build bridges" to Eastern Europe. This
resumption of diplomatic goodwill was not pursued vigorously and, at the
time, reception to the idea in Bulgaria was generally cool. A noted
communist theoretician regarded the United States overtures as a
divisive force in the fraternal world of the communist movement,
designed ultimately to bring in a capitalist system inimical to the
ideological interest of any socialist country.
In 1973 the relations between the two countries were, however, cordial.
Observers noted an increase in trade, although it was still
quantitatively small and accounted for only between US$6 million and
US$7 million annually. Bulgaria hoped to increase this volume to US$30
million, especially by exporting high-quality tobacco to the United
States market.
Bulgaria has been seeking a consular agreement that would grant it
most-favored-nation tariff treatment in order to keep Bulgarian exports
on a competitive level with others in the United States market. Toward
this end, a Bulgarian trade delegation visited the United States in
mid-July 1973 to exchange views on expanded trade and economic relations
between the two countries. While in Washington the delegation met with
top officials from the Department of State, the Department of Commerce,
the Department of the Treasury, and the Export-Import Bank and with some
members of Congress.
West Germany
The two world wars saw Bulgaria fighting on Germany's side. Thereafter
Bulgarian policy differed from the Soviet line only once in a case that
involved relations between Bulgaria and the Federal Republic of Germany
(West Germany). When Chancellor Ludwig Erhard sounded out several
Eastern European governments with peace notes in 1966, Bulgaria along
with Romania did not publish official replies. Later that year West
German officials met with the Bulgarian foreign minister, and it
appeared that normalization of relations was in the offing. The
negotiations did not come to fruition, however, and Bulgaria fell back
in line with the Soviet Union, which at the time was hostile to West
Germany. The mere fact that Bulgaria participated in such independent
talks appeared remarkable to some observers.
During 1972 relations between Bulgaria and West Germany improved. Some
of the reasons attributed to this changing tack included the
ratification of treaties negotiated between West Germany, Poland, and
the Soviet Union; the opening of diplomatic channels between Poland and
West Germany; and the meetings of ambassadors of European countries in
Helsinki. Most important, however, was the signing of a basic treaty
that established and regulated relations between West and East Germany,
a condition set by Bulgaria before diplomatic relations could be resumed
with West Germany. The open advocacy of the Soviet Union for improved
relations with West Germany also encouraged Bulgaria to expedite the
resumption of diplomatic communications.
Other Western Countries
The mid-1960s saw party chief Zhivkov "building bridges" himself with
other Western countries. In light of Bulgaria's interest in expansion of
trade, relations with France were improved with reciprocal visits in
1966 between Zhivkov and Foreign Minister Maurice Couve de Murville.
Also in the same year, partly as a result of these negotiations, the
French car manufacturer, Renault, established an assembly plant in
Bulgaria. Simultaneous with this move was the establishment of a
diplomatic mission in Canada. Agreements were negotiated with Belgium
and Italy on cultural, technical, and economic matters. Australia also
had a share of Bulgaria's trade attention; both countries signed a
long-term trade agreement in 1972, and an agreement was reached to
establish diplomatic relations at the embassy level.
Relations with Other States
Bulgarian interest in trade with the developing countries has increased
considerably. In 1971 and 1972 the volume of trade with third world
countries exceeded 316 million leva (for value of the lev--see Glossary)
as opposed to 113.3 million leva in 1965. The Arab countries rank first
in the amount of business conducted with Bulgaria. A considerable number
of Bulgarian experts are also engaged in the construction of industrial
enterprises in various developing countries.
MEMBERSHIP IN REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
Regional Cooperation
Military cooperation on a regional basis was secured for Bulgaria and
its allies (the Soviet Union, East Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania,
and Czechoslovakia) in a multilateral alliance known as the Warsaw Pact.
Albania, an original member, withdrew in 1968 (see ch. 16). Signed on
May 14, 1955, in Warsaw, Poland, the pact was and remains Eastern
Europe's answer to the challenges and security arrangements of the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). In one sense it seemed to provide
legal grounds for the Soviet Union to keep its troops in east-central
Europe as well as to secure the balance of military power in Europe,
especially after West Germany joined NATO. In another sense it confirmed
the Soviet Union's political and military hegemony in all of Eastern
Europe.
The organization has two main bodies--the Political Consultative
Committee, which recommends general questions of foreign policy for
member countries, and the High Command of United Armed Forces, which
prepares military plans in time of war and decides troop deployments.
Both bodies are located in Moscow, and all its senior ranking officials
are Russians.
Bulgaria has bilateral treaties of mutual aid with each other member of
the Warsaw Pact. A multilateral agreement binds all the members to one
another in general and to the Soviet Union in particular. Within
Bulgaria Soviet officers serve as advisers at the division level and
formerly served down to the regiment level. Others serve as instructors.
Bulgaria was a charter member of COMECON in 1949. An economic alliance
among Eastern European countries, COMECON is the counterpart to Western
Europe's European Economic Community (commonly called the Common
Market). Other members are the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, Hungary,
Poland, Romania, and East Germany. Mongolia and Cuba, non-European
countries, joined in June 1962 and July 1972, respectively. Albania
joined in 1949 but withdrew in 1961.
Founded as an outlet for agricultural and industrial products and as a
capital-and-labor market, COMECON, like the Warsaw Pact, binds its
members to each other and all of them to the Soviet Union. Long-term
trade agreements of five years are usually renewable at the end of each
term. It is estimated that 60 to 65 percent of the total foreign trade
of each signatory is carried on with other member countries. One of the
obvious disadvantages of the organization, however, is the absence of a
common market. Trade and commerce between the member countries are
carried out on the basis of preference and within the framework of
bilateral agreements.
Because the loose structure of COMECON does not make for effective
regional planning, member countries such as Bulgaria continue to renew
bilateral trade agreements within COMECON. The Soviet Union remains
Bulgaria's largest foreign market, accounting for more than 50 percent
of Bulgarian trade. Bulgaria also agreed to send Bulgarian workers to
the Soviet Union for heavy industrial projects.
Participation of Bulgaria on a regional level has been confined to a few
projects. Among these are a COMECON electric power grid, which serves
the western Ukraine, especially the city of Kiev; a Romanian-Bulgarian
project to construct a power dam and navigation system for sixty miles
along the Danube River; a system of high-speed expressways to connect
the capital cities of member countries; a project to modernize steel
industries and to reduce production and delivery time; and membership in
the International Bank for Economic Cooperation, headed by a former
deputy chairman of the Soviet State Bank.
United Nations Membership and Participation
Bulgaria became a member of the UN on December 14, 1955. Its delegates
are active in committee work of the UN organs and subsidiary bodies as
well as in deliberations on the floor of the General Assembly. One of
its most important committee assignments is to the so-called First
Committee, which was established as one of the original six committees
under the General Assembly's rules of procedure in 1946. It deals with
political and security matters and was headed by Milko Tarabanov, one of
five Bulgarian delegates to the UN in the session held from September
through December 1972.
Available records of General Assembly activities in 1970 showed active
participation of Bulgaria's delegates in committee work touching on such
matters as the review of administrative tribunal judgments; the question
of defining aggression; the peaceful uses of outer space; the peaceful
uses of the seabed under international waters; and the implementation of
the declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries
and peoples. Bulgaria was particularly interested in the Caribbean
territories.
As a member of the Committee on Disarmament, Bulgaria, along with
twenty-four other participating states, met in Geneva in 1970. The
committee met to consider the question of cessation of the nuclear arms
race and associated matters, such as the prohibition of emplacing
nuclear arms or other destructive weapons on the seabed. A refinement of
the comprehensive test ban treaty of 1963 extended the prohibition on
arms control to underground testing. Bulgaria, along with other Eastern
European countries, also supported draft proposals of the committee not
to undertake the "development, production, and stockpiling of chemical
and bacteriological weapons" and the consequent "destruction of such
weapons" as well as the prohibition of "biological methods of warfare."
Bulgaria, as a member of the General Assembly's First Committee, also
cosponsored a resolution to secure guarantees that the seabed would be
used only for peaceful means.
In regard to the question of nuclear and thermonuclear testing, Bulgaria
sought the early passage of an agreement to prohibit all nuclear weapons
testing while the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) were going on
between the United States and the Soviet Union. Bulgaria also
participated actively in the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer
Space. As a member of a subcommittee's working group, proposals and
working papers were submitted on the question of liability for damage
caused by objects that were launched into outer space. For its part,
Bulgaria sought to clarify the "question of applicable law" and the
"settlement of disputes."
The country was also represented in bodies dealing with economic
questions; questions of development; and social questions involving
housing, building, and planning as well as the promotion of children's
welfare. Additionally, the United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development had Bulgarian delegates in five of its working groups,
dealing with trade and development, commodities, domestic shipping,
international shipping legislation, and the transfer of technology.
Bulgaria is also a member of the Economic Commission for Europe.
CHAPTER 11
MASS COMMUNICATIONS
Since the Communists took over the government in 1944, the mass
communications systems have been perceived as instruments of propaganda
and vehicles for party control. Because of this perception of the
significance of the media, the new government immediately claimed all
mass media as state property.
There is little if any tolerance of the free expression of ideas
throughout the entire mass communications system. Because Bulgaria is
more closely tied to the Soviet Union than most of the other Eastern
European countries, the dictates of Moscow are virtually followed to the
letter in the media. Themes that are initiated in Moscow are reiterated
almost verbatim in Sofia. The major theme of the mass media is respect
for and emulation of the Soviet Union, although recently some social
themes--such as the problems of youth and alcoholism--have been
incorporated as well.
The only sources of information and entertainment permitted to the
people are the domestically controlled mass media. Most Bulgarians
distrust information available to them from these sources but, having no
alternative, continue to use them.
Historically, of all the mass communications systems, the press has
always reached the largest number of people and has traditionally been
viewed by the government as the most effective means of informing the
general public. Although the circulation of the press dropped
drastically in the mid-1940s, it has since the 1960s once again become
the chief instrument of the mass communications system. Radio has
greatly expanded in variety and scope since the 1940s. Television,
although slow to develop and still limited in its audience relative to
other European countries, has been growing rapidly since the early 1960s
and was beginning to experiment with color in the early 1970s.
There has been little change in the Bulgarian publishing industry since
1944. Owing to the government's fear of contamination by the West or
other capitalist societies, there is very little importation of foreign
books into the country. Although books have increased greatly in terms
of sheer numbers of editions, the quantity of book titles has remained
very much the same since World War II.
Libraries range from those under the control of state ministries and
committees to local reading rooms and enterprise libraries. The latter
are generally more widely used by the people.
Since the end of World War II the film industry has grown to a great
extent. Like other instruments of the media, films are chosen for their
propagandistic value; however, since the advent of television, fewer
people have attended films.
BACKGROUND
The press--composed of newspapers and periodicals--was the most
developed of the Bulgarian media in the first half of the twentieth
century. Radio, which was introduced in the 1920s, was under the aegis
of what was then the Ministry of Post, Telegraph, and Telephone. The
production, importation, and sale of radios were unrestricted. The least
developed communications system of the day was the film industry, which
was privately owned and operated. Television was not initiated in the
country until the mid-1950s.
In the years immediately after the takeover, a strong pro-Soviet policy
was established for the media, which was still in effect in 1973. While
the new government restricted individual freedom and initiative within
the media, it demanded total support by the media of all policies of the
Soviet Union. Despite the fact that Bulgaria has never deviated from the
policy of complete commitment to the Soviet Union, after the invasion of
Czechoslovakia various media conferences were held in which calls for
stricter adherence to the Soviet line were sounded.
OBJECTIVES OF MASS COMMUNICATIONS
The government has certain distinct perceptions as to how the media must
serve the state. Propaganda permeates every aspect of life from formal
education to membership in unions and clubs to the publication of books
and pamphlets. The Bulgarian Communist Party (BKP--see Glossary) is the
main political force. It both creates the appropriate condition for the
expression of public opinion and forms public opinion itself.
At a recent conference on the mass communications system, a leading
member of the Central Committee of the Bulgarian Communist Party
delineated the principal tasks of the media. The major task of the media
was "to work for the broadest possible propagation of the congress
decisions and for the mobilization of the people's physical and mental
powers to make their decisions materialize...." The second vital task of
the media was to "help form a socialist outlook on life among the
peoples and educate the new man--active fighter for the developed
socialist society, ideologically convinced, morally durable, physically
tempered, with profound awareness of duty and responsibility." The third
task was to promote the economic awareness of the people and to train
managers, specialists, workers, and farmers for the greater economic
good of the country. The fourth main task was to continue in the active
struggle against "bourgeois ideology ... and the ideological subversion
of imperialism."
A basic tenet of the Bulgarian system, however, is the belief that mass
communications must be actively supplemented by human contact on the
individual level. Iliya Georgiev, secretary of the Varna Okrug Bulgarian
Communist Party Committee, in an article on the political knowledge of
working people in 1972, stated categorically that the interest
stimulated in the people by the mass communications system must be
maintained and extended by informal means of communications, such as
district (_okrug_) seminars, meetings in enterprises and farms,
activities in the trade unions, and the Dimitrov Communist Youth Union
(Dimitrovski Komunisticheski Mladezhki Suyuz--commonly referred to as
the Komsomol).
The government has spent considerable time in assessing the extent to
which these media objectives have been achieved. In the years
immediately following the takeover, the government was consistently
distressed by continued Bulgarian feelings of friendship with the West
and the continual influence of the West upon the country. Although the
propaganda efforts of the communist government were tireless, radio
broadcasts and printed materials from the West continued to pour into
Bulgaria.
As the government's control over both the formal communications media
and the informal means of communications widened, the external threat
was perceived to be less, and governmental attention turned to the
assessment of the relative popularity of the various branches of the
media. In a recent study 3,294 people were questioned as to their
favorite source of domestic and international information. The vast
majority--64.8 percent--of those polled stated that their preferred
source was daily newspapers; 24.6 percent preferred television; and only
2.7 percent preferred radio. Although the newspapers were the favorite
source of information, they were frequently criticized by the people,
who expressed a basic lack of confidence in the press. In a second study
dealing with people's attitudes toward the press alone, 48.1 percent of
the 900 people polled said they disliked the press, and 52.1 percent
complained of the primitive quality of Bulgarian newspapers.
Young people, especially students, appeared to be even less stimulated
by the mass media than their elders. A study performed in the 1969/70
academic year indicated that students were indifferent to both domestic
political events and international developments. The pollsters concluded
that generally Bulgarian students take little advantage of the mass
media as a source of information. Unlike the broad public, whose primary
source of information was the press, students tended to see television
as their preferred source and the press and radio as secondary sources.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
The 1947 Constitution, known as the Dimitrov Constitution, established
the stated rights of citizens as well as the nationalization of all
private property, including the mass communications network. Regarding
the so-called freedom of citizens, Article 88 of the 1947 Constitution
claimed: "The citizens of the People's Republic are guaranteed freedom
of the press, of speech, of assembly, of meetings and demonstrations."
At the same time, Article 10 and Article 17 prohibited the unrestricted
freedom of private property and provided for its nationalization under
the authority of the National Assembly. More specifically, Article 80 of
the constitution dealt directly with the system of mass communications:
"The state cares for the development of science and art by establishing
... publishing houses, libraries, theatres, museums, public reading
clubs, ... film studios, [and] cinemas...."
In 1956 the premier of the communist regime, Vulko Chervenkov,
emphasized the ultimate control of the party over all institutions of
the country. He stated: "No institution, organization, or person can be
above the Politburo and the Central Committee ... those guilty of
deviation from the Bolshevik rule must be held responsible and
punished." Under his successor, Todor Zhivkov, a slight liberalization
regarding freedom of the media ensued (see ch. 9). For a brief period
writers and scholars were given greater latitude of expression. When
some writers dared to openly criticize the government, however, Zhivkov
was unable to tolerate this criticism and reimposed restrictions on the
media. The ultimate authority of the party was again made manifest. In
an article in 1969, Georgi Bokov, chief editor of _Rabotnichesko Delo_
and chairman of the Union of Bulgarian Journalists, flatly rejected the
notions of freedom and independence for the mass communications system.
The stated goals of the Union of Bulgarian Journalists in the late 1960s
were "to promote the development of mass information and propaganda
media as first-rate ideological weapons in the struggle for the victory
of socialism and Communism ... the Union must constantly work to turn
the press, radio, and television into effective ideological instruments
for the Party."
In 1971, a new constitution was promulgated, but the basic clauses of
the 1947 document, regarding so-called individual freedoms and state
ownership, remained essentially intact. It was restated in Article 54
that "citizens enjoy freedom of speech, press, meetings, associations
and demonstrations." Article 46 again provided for state development of,
and control over, the mass communications system.
The results of the policy regarding the media are witnessed by numerous
examples of party control and the repression of dissidents. All
newspapers must provide space for the official news of the government,
and all Central Committee directives must be printed without alteration.
No dispatches sent out by the Bulgarian Telegraph Agency (Bulgarska
Telegrafna Agentsiya--BTA)--the official news agency of the
country--are allowed to be revised. No criticism of government policies
is tolerated. Dissident individuals and groups are singled out for
criticism by the Politburo. In 1972 a Politburo member, Todor Pavlov,
accused certain writers of rejecting Socialist Realism in favor of more
bourgeois literature and art. Other writers were criticized for their
so-called subjectivistic interpretation of Bulgarian literature and were
branded as pseudoscientists.
ADMINISTRATION OF THE MASS COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
Administrative Units
As the system has evolved, the broad outlines of propaganda have been
dictated from the Politburo, the party's chief policymaking unit. From
there policy is transmitted to the Agitation and Propaganda Department
(Agitprop), which is a major operational unit of the Central Committee.
Agitprop, in turn, is responsible for the transmission of guidelines
down to the lowest levels of party organization. Simultaneously, the
same dictates are transmitted throughout all cultural institutions by
the Ministry of Information and Communications. Under this ministry's
jurisdiction are the arts, the film industry, radiobroadcasting,
television, book and pamphlet publishing, printing, all cultural or
educational institutions, and all so-called independent artists. Still a
third channel for the transmission of the original propaganda are the
mass organizations that function in the propaganda field under direction
of either Agitprop or the Ministry of Information and Communications
(see ch. 9).
The administrative center for all media is Sofia, the capital. Eight
daily newspapers are published in Sofia and distributed throughout the
country; there are also seventeen major publishing houses in Sofia. The
National Film Board, which oversees all aspects of film production, is
in Sofia, as is Radio Sofia, which is the radio station for the entire
country. The Cyril and Methodius Library--also known as the Bulgarian
National Library--is within the confines of the city, as are the Union
of Bulgarian Writers; the Union of Bulgarian Artists; and the Union of
Composers, Musicologists, and Performing Musicians (see ch. 7).
The exportation of propaganda is under the auspices of the Sofia Press
Agency. This agency was founded in 1967 with the express purpose of
disseminating Bulgarian propaganda to other countries. Its three major
tasks are to publicize Bulgaria's achievements and successes actively to
the world; to attempt to counter anti-Bulgarian propaganda; and to
provide the various communist parties of the world with rationale in
their struggles against capitalism.
In 1972 the Sofia Press Agency was in the process of negotiating
agreements with the BTA and the Committee for Television and Radio.
Agreements had already been established with book publishers,
photographic artists, and the film industry. In early 1972 over 500
people--the majority of whom were editors and translators--were working
for the Sofia Press Agency, and contracts had been signed with
approximately 120 foreign countries. Nine magazines, translated into
eleven languages, had been published each year in 2.5 million copies. A
dual language newspaper has been published each year in 500,000 copies,
and 400 books had appeared in approximately 4 million copies. Some
15,000 articles had been written, 30,000 photographs taken, and dozens
of television motion pictures and documentaries had been filmed.
News Agency
The BTA was founded originally in 1898 in Sofia. It is the official news
agency of the country and the sole source of both foreign and domestic
news. It receives most of its foreign items from the Soviet Union news
agency but also maintains exchange agreements with Reuters, Associated
Press, and the Associated Foreign Press as well as a host of lesser
known foreign news agencies, although it tends to be more discriminating
in terms of the items selected from these sources.
In the 1960s the BTA had twenty-three correspondents posted throughout
the nation, as well as foreign correspondents in Moscow, Peking, East
Berlin, Prague, Budapest, Tirana, Belgrade, Ankara, Paris, Bonn, New
York, Vienna, Cairo, and New Delhi. Correspondents are sent on special
assignments to investigate news that is considered to be of interest to
Bulgaria. Domestic news is reproduced in Russian, English, French,
German, and Spanish, and international news is reproduced in Russian,
English, French, German, Spanish, and Italian. In an average day the BTA
receives approximately 800 foreign newspapers, magazines, and bulletins
and itself produces over 125,000 words.
THEMES OF THE MEDIA
The predominant theme of the media remains the expression of friendship
with the Soviet Union. In 1971 a leading member of the party's Central
Committee informed members of the media that one of their primary
functions was to champion the feelings of "fraternal love, trust, and
gratitude" of the Bulgarian people for the "heroic Soviet people," at
the same time demonstrating "clearly and convincingly the unbreakable
ties linking our present and future with the present and future of the
Soviet Union."
A second common theme of the current media deals with the continuing
struggle between so-called bourgeois capitalism and socialism. The
people are, on the one hand, warned of the invidiousness of capitalistic
methods--"The veiled methods of ideological struggle applied on an even
broader scale by contemporary imperialism requires greater vigilance
from us...." On the other hand they are assured that socialism will
ultimately prevail--"their [socialist] ideas make their way with
insuperable force into the minds and hearts of working people all over
the world, gain more and more new adherents, and become a powerful
factor of social progress."
Another dichotomy that the media pose as a continuing theme is that of
religion versus socialism. Bulgarian writers triumphantly proclaim that
"religion as a component of the sociological structure of society for
thousands of years gradually withers away at an even faster pace
throughout the transition from capitalism to communism." Since one of
the major aims of the government is to eliminate religious sentiment
among the people, the public is from time to time assured
that--according to the latest survey--only 35.5 percent of the
population is considered religious or that the "Bulgarian people is one
of the least religious in the world."
Another divisive force that is frequently posed by the media is national
patriotism versus proletarian internationalism. Although
internationalism is viewed as predominant, citizens are warned against
feelings of bourgeois nationalism, since the "unity between
internationalism and patriotism is of a relative character, and there is
always the real possibility of dissension between them; they may even be
placed into a position of mutual opposition." Somehow the conflict,
according to the journal _Filosofska Misal_, is perceived as being
resolved through a higher form of patriotism that is inextricably linked
with love of the Soviet Union. Socialist patriotism is seen as a
"qualitatively new, higher form of patriotism" as expressed in "love and
gratitude toward the Soviet Union and the Communist Party of the Soviet
Union organically linked with love for Bulgaria."
In accordance with the media's constant expression of admiration for,
and solidarity with, the Soviet Union, any issue that raises the
question of conflicting loyalties between the People's Republic of China
(PRC) and the Soviet Union is summarily dismissed with the reiteration
of support for the Soviet Union. One journal warned the people of the
dangers from the left in the form of the people of the PRC as well as
from the right in the form of capitalist societies: "Contrary to all
healthy logic, for years on end, the Chinese leadership has been waging
hostile propaganda campaigns against the Soviet Union ... which are in
no way inferior to the most malicious fabrications of bourgeois
anti-Sovietism."
When the troops of the Soviet Union invaded Czechoslovakia in August
1968, Bulgaria once again rose to the Soviet Union's defense in complete
justification of the invasion. The BTA cited a long list of workers,
peasants, and intellectuals who were allegedly in favor of the action.
Major newspapers such as _Rabotnichesko Delo_ interpreted the event as
symbolic of proletarian internationalism, and _Zemedelsko Zname_ stated
that "it is our supreme duty to resist the common enemy and not to allow
anyone ever to tear away even one link from the chain of the socialist
community." The Czechoslovak uprising itself, as reported by the
Bulgarian press some months later, was interpreted as nationalistic and
counterrevolutionary.
Bulgaria's relationship with the West, as expressed by the media, has
evolved over time from overt hostility to some degree of tolerance. In
1968 the Bulgarian media openly denounced the concept of peaceful
coexistence with the West. By the early 1970s, however, although
citizens were still urged by the media to struggle against bourgeois
capitalism as epitomized by the West, a slight thaw in the cool
relations that had prevailed since the mid-1940s was detected. On the
one hand, all instruments of the media were urged to direct the people
away from foreign influences and to struggle against "bourgeois
ideology, anticommunism, and the ideological subversion of imperialism."
On the other hand, however, Western correspondents in 1973 declared that
Bulgaria was entering a period of greater flexibility with the West.
The last polemical theme of the Bulgarian mass media is known as the
Bulgarian miracle. Although success for the alleged achievement of
Bulgaria's national goals is attributed to correct socialism, the
application of Leninist principles, and the unity of party and people,
the media take every opportunity to stress the achievements of the
Bulgarian state since the advent of communism. One journal stated that
"our country strengthened and matured as a state with a modern socialist
industry, intensive mechanized agriculture, and flourishing national
culture, a state enjoying an indisputable international prestige,
respected as an economic partner and as a factor for the safeguard of
peace."
On the nonpolemical side, the Bulgarian media discuss both Bulgaria's
immediate social problems and issues that affect the world. The issue of
alcoholism is discussed relatively openly and is viewed as an issue of
national concern. Alcoholism is perceived to be related to both the
rising number of divorces and the frequency of crimes (see ch. 5; ch.
15).
Bulgarians also have become involved in the international issue of
pollution of the environment, and the press has given the topic a fair
amount of coverage. The issue has been dealt with on a completely
nonpolemical basis; in fact the brotherhood of all forms of societies is
stressed as the means of combating the problem.
THE PRESS
Newspapers
In 1944, three months after the new government took control, all
newspaper plants were made the property of the state. In the ensuing
year, the government took over the distribution of newsprint, and many
noncommunist editors and Communists were either jailed or executed. By
1945 only eight daily and weekly newspapers were permitted to publish.
Five of them were published under the aegis of a governmental or party
agency. _Rabotnichesko Delo_--which was patterned on the Soviet
_Pravda_--became the organ of the Central Committee, and _Otechestven
Front_--patterned on the Soviet _Isvestia_--became the official organ of
the government. _Izgrev_ was an organ of the Fatherland Front _Zvenos_;
_Narod_ was an instrument of the Fatherland Front (Otechestven Front)
Socialists; and _Narodna Voiska_ was an army organ. _Politika_ was not
directly affiliated with the party but was decidedly pro-Communist (see
ch. 9).
The other two newspapers, both expressing a degree of opposition, were
tolerated only through 1946. These were _Narodno Zemedelsko Zname_, an
organ of the Bulgarian Agrarian Union (Bulgarski Zemedelski Suyuz--BZS)
and _Svoboden Narod_, an organ of the Social Democratic Party. In early
1947, however, they were closed down.
The Fifth Party Congress in 1948, endeavoring to more fully exploit the
potential of the press for propaganda purposes, called upon it to serve
as the "first assistant of the Bulgarian Communist Party, of the
Fatherland Front, and of the government." The primary function of the
printed news media, as stated by that congress, was to mobilize the
working people in terms of their identification with the so-called great
socialist buildup. In the same year the Central Home of Bulgarian
Journalists was established in order to train writers in the correct
propaganda line established by the party. This institution was replaced
in 1955 by the Union of Bulgarian Journalists.
After World War II the national newspapers were generally four pages
long and consisted of news concerning Bulgaria, the Soviet Union, and
other socialist countries; progress reports regarding national economic
plans; foreign news presented with a decided anti-Western bias; and
information regarding cultural events and sports. Cartoons, which
appeared occasionally in the daily and weekly newspapers, were generally
propagandistic and dealt with so-called foreign agents, the bourgeoise,
and other so-called enemies of the people. There was little humor in the
newspapers, as their overall purpose was to portray and defend the
communist system.
The national newspapers were modeled after those of the Soviet Union, in
both style and content. During the 1940s they established ties with the
Soviet news agency, the Chinese Communist news agency, and the news
agencies in other communist countries. All international events--those
dealing with the communist-bloc countries and those dealing with the
West--were integrated through these sources.
While Stalin lived, all of his dictates were followed to the letter,
including the duplication of the Soviet example in the strong verbal
campaign against Yugoslavia. When Nikita Khrushchev succeeded him and
subsequently made some semblance of peace with Yugoslavia, the Bulgarian
press followed suit. Similarly, when the Soviets quickly quelled the
Polish and Hungarian revolts, the Bulgarian press endorsed the Soviet
versions of these events. Strict control over the press was retained in
the early 1970s, and most news still emanated from the Soviet news
agency. Censorship was seldom required, however, since all editors were
by this time acutely aware of their responsibilities to the party.
In contrast to the natural press, the provincial press concentrated on
local matters. It included, in addition to a few regularly published
newspapers, a variety of new types of publications, such as
multicirculators--which were wall posters--and the so-called bumblebees,
which were letters of accusation pointing out alleged failures of
particular individuals to maintain acceptable social standards or to
attain programmed economic goals. In broad terms, all these publications
were designed to indoctrinate specific groups of people, generally in
their places of work. The multicirculators called on workers to support
the economic goals of the government and promised them rewards if they
fulfilled the required objectives (see table 10).
_Table 10. Bulgaria, Newspaper Circulation by Frequency of Issue, 1971_
---------------------------+--------+----------------
Frequency | | Annual
of | | Circulation
Issue | Number | (in thousands)
---------------------------+--------+----------------
Daily | 13 | 611,900
Two to four times per week | 31 | 108,181
Weekly | 58 | 100,880
Less than once per week | 604 | 16,533
| --- | -------
TOTAL | 706 | 837,494
---------------------------+--------+----------------
In the early 1970s the style of Bulgarian newspapers remained
essentially the same as in the mid-1940s. National daily newspapers
ordinarily had four pages, but sometimes had from six to eight pages
when there was vital news to cover. Headlines were often printed in red,
but stories and articles were in black print. Since the late 1960s or
early 1970s advertising increased, and newspapers began to resemble
their Western counterparts to a greater extent.
In 1972 thirteen daily newspapers were published, eight of which were
printed in Sofia. _Rabotnichesko Delo_ was a descendant of the first
workers' newspaper, which was begun in 1897. It led both in importance
and circulation, was the primary organ of the BKP, and set the tone for
all other newspapers in the country. In 1950 it had a daily circulation
of 364,500 copies, and by 1960 its circulation had risen to 567,360. In
1972 this newspaper had a total circulation of approximately 650,000
copies. The second most important daily newspaper published in Sofia
was the _Otechestven Front_, the organ of the government. This
publication was initiated as an underground newspaper in 1942. As of
1972 it claimed a daily circulation of 247,000.
The other Sofia dailies and their circulations were: _Zemedelsko Zname_,
168,000; _Narodna Mladez_, the newspaper for youth, 225,000; _Trud_, the
organ of the trade unions, 200,000; _Narodna Armiya_, an organ of the
Ministry of National Defense, 50,000; _Vecherni Novini_, founded in
1951, an evening newspaper, 40,000; and _Kooperativno Selo_, the organ
of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Industry, 230,000. The major
provincial dailies were _Otechestven Glas_ (in Plovdiv), _Narodno Delo_
(in Varna), _Chernomorski Front_ (in Burgas), _Dunavska Pravda_ (in
Ruse), and _Pirinsklo Delo_ (in Blagoevgrad) (see table 11).
_Table 11. Bulgaria, Circulation of Newspapers and Periodicals, Selected
Years, 1939-71_
-----------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------
| 1939 | 1948 | 1960 | 1971
-----------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------
_Newspapers_: | | | |
Annual circulation* | 130,297 | 345,905 | 602,813 | 837,494
Annual circulation | | | |
per capita | 20.7 | 48.5 | 76.6 | 98.1
_Periodicals_: | | | |
Number | 393 | 246 | 151 | 963
Annual circulation* | 11,208 | 10,421 | 20,923 | 48,605
Average annual | | | |
issues per capita | 1.8 | 1.5 | 2.7 | 5.7
-----------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------
* In thousands.
Periodicals
By 1971 there were 963 periodicals with an annual circulation of 48.6
million, roughly tripling the pre-World War II figures. Periodicals were
an extremely popular form of reading material.
Among the leading periodicals of Bulgaria are: _Novo Vreme_, a monthly
journal of the Central Committee; _Ikonomicheska Misal_, the organ of
the Institute of Economics of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences; _Puls_,
a publication of the Central Committee of the Komsomol; _Slavyani_, the
monthly journal of the Slav Committee in Bulgaria; _Bulgarski Voin_, the
monthly journal of the chief political department of the Bulgarian
People's Army (Bulgarska Narodna Armiya); _Resorts_, a bimonthly journal
printed in Russian, French, English, and German; and _Lov i Ribolov_.
RADIO
In 1939 there were three radio stations and over 60,000 subscribers (see
table 12). Approximately one out of every 100 Bulgarian citizens owned a
radio set.
_Table 12. Bulgaria, Number of Radio Stations and Subscribers, Selected
Years, 1939-71_
----------------------------+--------+---------+-----------+-----------
| 1939 | 1948 | 1960 | 1971
----------------------------+--------+---------+-----------+-----------
Radio stations: | | | |
Mediumwave | n.a. | n.a. | 5 | 12
Shortwave | n.a. | n.a. | 2 | 4
Ultra-shortwave | n.a. | n.a. | 0 | 11
Number of radio stations | 3 | 5 | 7 | 27
Number of relay stations | n.a. | 41 | 1,347 | 1,835
Number of radio subscribers | 62,677 | 210,366 | 1,430,653 | 2,304,567
Number of radio receivers | 62,677 | 201,866 | 868,950 | 1,546,163
Subscribers* | 10 | 30 | 182 | 269
----------------------------+--------+---------+-----------+-----------
n.a.--not available.
* Per 1,000 population.
As of March 26, 1948, the state controlled not only the management of
radio stations and the content of radio programs but also the
manufacture, distribution, and sale of radio equipment. The ownership
and operation of radios were subject to the chief directorate of radio
information according to the Law on Radio. Article 15 of this law stated
that private homes could only receive programs of Bulgarian radio
stations. Article 17 of the same law stated that all people wishing to
purchase radios had to receive prior authorization and pay a radio tax.
The ideological purposes of radio broadcasts are presented by the
government in quasi-cold war terms. One radio commentator, Lyuben Popov,
has described the radio as a weapon for waging war on the air. He
explained that "the struggle on the air is becoming sharper and sharper
and more and more uncompromising.... Our propaganda work is part of the
ideological struggle for victory of communist ideas." Radio is perceived
as serving two principal ends. On the domestic level it serves to
provide information as well as propaganda to the public; on the
international level it functions in a purely ideological capacity.
There are twelve mediumwave radio transmitters: two are located in
Pleven; two in Kurdzhali; two in Sofia; and one each in Plovdiv,
Blagoevgrad, Varna, Shumen, Stara Zagora, and Stolnik. There are eleven
ultra-shortwave stations: three are located in Sofia, two in Botev, two
in Slunchev Bryag, two in Kyustendil, one in Snezhinka, and one in
Plovdiv. There are four shortwave radio stations in Bulgaria. Of the
total number of twenty-seven radio stations in the country, six
broadcast in both amplitude modulation (AM) and frequency modulation
(FM); twenty broadcast in AM only; and one located at Botev Peak
broadcasts only in FM.
Bulgarian radio stations are on the air approximately 500 hours per
week. Foreign broadcasts are transmitted approximately twenty-six hours
a day Monday through Saturday and twenty-nine hours on Sunday. These
programs are broadcast in Bulgarian, Turkish, Greek, Serbo-Croat,
French, Italian, German, English, Spanish, and Arabic and are
transmitted to Europe, the Middle East, Africa, North America, and South
America. The number of domestic listeners has approximately doubled over
the 1960-71 period. In mid-1973 over a quarter of the population owned
radio sets.
The leading radio programs are transmitted by Radio Sofia. Radio
Plovdiv, Radio Varna, and Radio Stara Zagora also transmit popular
programs. Radio Rodina is the main station transmitting to Bulgarians
residing abroad. Generally, radio programs consist of news bulletins
dealing with both local and international events; programs for rural
listeners and industrial workers, which deal with industrial,
agricultural, and cultural matters; programs for children, which
complement the formal educational curriculum; literary and cultural
programs; and scientific programs.
In January 1971 Radio Sofia took steps to refurbish its old programming.
Some critics felt that the old programming was lacking in variety,
causing listeners to turn to foreign broadcasts for more enjoyable
entertainment. Others within the medium wanted to have more freedom and
creativity in programming. As a result, in mid-1973 the three main
programs of Radio Sofia had a singular and distinctive character.
"Horizont" provided both general information and popular music. "Christo
Botev" had a more cultural and propagandistic nature, presenting
ideological, literary, and educational programs. "Orfei" was the program
for classical music, which was occasionally supplemented by theatrical
and literary features. The results of these changes have been mixed.
Although some critics felt that the new programs were more lively than
their predecessors, others continued to criticize them for a "dearth of
original thought, a laconic style, and a pompous tone."
Other recent developments in radio have been the establishment of radio
relay ties with nearby countries. These relay ties are expected to
increase Bulgaria's communications with the West while providing her new
partners with access to the East. In July 1972 the construction of radio
lines between Bulgaria and Turkey was completed. In December 1972 plans
for a radio relay line between Sofia and Athens were announced; the line
was to be completed by 1974. This particular line was expected to
provide Greece with access to Eastern Europe and Bulgaria with access to
the Middle East and North Africa.
TELEVISION
Television, like radio, became a state monopoly under the control of the
Ministry of Culture on March 26, 1948, but the first strictly
experimental broadcasts were not undertaken until 1954. It was 1959
before the first regular programming--consisting of two programs per
week--was being broadcast. By 1962 programs had been increased to only
four per week.
The number of television subscribers rose from a mere 2,573 in 1960 to
185,246 in 1965 and to 1.2 million in 1971. These figures meant the
number of sets per 1,000 people were; less than one, in 1960; about
twenty-three, in 1965; and 138, in 1971. During the same period an
increasing number of transmitting stations was making reception possible
in nearly all parts of the country. By 1972 there were twenty-seven
transmitters; the major ones were located at Sofia, Slunchev Bryag,
Botev, Varna, and Kyustendil. In spite of the expansion of the network
and the increasing numbers of sets available, in comparison to other
European countries there were still relatively few television
subscribers per 1,000 of the population.
Three-quarters of the television sets are located in the cities.
Although there is only one major television program, Program I, plans
are underway for the transmission of a second program, Program II. This,
when added to the coverage of Program I, is expected to reach 95 percent
of the population by 1975.
Television is transmitted on a daily basis. The weekly programs run
between 68 and 72 hours. Television time has been apportioned more or
less according to popular taste. Of the total hours, 22 percent of
television time was devoted to documentaries, 15 percent to music, 12
percent to news, 11 percent to programs for children, 10 percent to
language and literature programs, and 8 percent to sports. There were
also special broadcasts to villages and question-and-answer programs in
industrial enterprises and cooperative farms. Unlike the rest of Eastern
Europe, Bulgaria imported very few television films from the United
States.
One of the most recent innovations in television programming was the
transmission of a special program for tourists in 1973. Bulgarian Radio
and Television decided to cooperate with the Committee for Tourism to
promote a 1-1/2-hour program for foreign tourists on the Black Sea
coast. The program, as envisioned in 1973, would consist of local news,
presented on three different channels in Russian, English, and German
respectively; local events; international news; tourist information; and
advertisements.
Future plans for Bulgarian television were outlined in the Sixth Five
Year Plan (1971-75). Although color television programs in the 1970s
were transmitted to Bulgaria from Moscow, Bulgaria's own color
television was to be transmitted in late 1973. Along these lines,
Bulgaria planned to collaborate with Intervision--the Eastern European
television network--in the promotion of color television. In 1972 plans
were also being formulated for the construction of between 250 and 300
relay stations and additional television transmitters.
PUBLISHING
In 1939 there were 2,169 books and pamphlets published in 6.5 million
copies, and in 1948 there were 2,322 books and pamphlets published in
19.9 million copies. By 1960 the number of book and pamphlet titles had
risen to 3,369 in 30.2 million copies, and by 1971 the number of book
and pamphlet titles reached 4,188 in 46.8 million copies.
More recent studies of book and pamphlet publication conducted in 1969
and 1970 indicated that the overwhelming majority of books and pamphlets
were written by Bulgarians. Of the 3,799 books published in 1970, there
were 3,368 by Bulgarian authors. The foreign works during this year were
predominantly in Russian, 131; French, sixty-five; English, sixty-five;
and German, fifty-four. There were few books translated from Spanish and
a sprinkling of translations from other lesser known languages. Of the
translated works most were literary, followed by works dealing with the
social sciences, the applied sciences, the arts, geography and history,
the so-called hard sciences, philosophy, philology, and religion.
A 1971 study illustrates the fact that--in terms of titles alone--books
are more popular than pamphlets by a ratio of approximately three to one
(see table 13). The greatest number of book titles in 1971 were in the
areas of artistic and folkloric literature, technology and industry, and
scientific and educational texts. The smallest number of book titles
were in the areas of general handbooks, community affairs, and atheism
and religion. The greatest number of pamphlet titles, on the other hand,
were in juvenile literature, communist party literature, and science and
education. The fewest pamphlet titles dealt with atheism and religion,
Marxism-Leninism, languages, and labor and trade unions.
Because the Bulgarian publishing industry has emphasized the quantity of
books available in terms of copies rather than variety or number of
titles, there has been some serious criticism of policy, particularly
from the newspapers. In fact, among the Balkan countries, Bulgaria ranks
below Yugoslavia, Romania, and Turkey in the number of titles published
annually. One newspaper claimed that of the total number of books
published in 1972, only approximately one-third were so-called real
books, meaning that they were not simply textbooks or brochures. This
newspaper claimed that foreign literature was not well known in Bulgaria
and pointed out that the literature of Asia, Africa, and South America
had increased by only 470 titles since 1939.
The state not only is in charge of the publishing houses themselves but
also supervises the distribution of books throughout the country.
Editorial councils are the final authorities in determining the output
of individual publishing houses. The one exception to the general
administration of publishing houses is the publication of textbooks. In
this case the Committee on Art and Culture is responsible for the
printing of textbooks, and the Ministry of National Education is, in
turn, responsible for their distribution.
_Table 13. Bulgaria, Book and Pamphlet Publication, 1971_
-------------------------------------+--------------+--------+----------
| Total Number | Book | Pamphlet
Subject of Publication | of Titles | Titles | Titles
-------------------------------------+--------------+--------+----------
Marxism-Leninism | 26 | 23 | 3
Communist party | 270 | 158 | 112
Socialist and communist construction | 181 | 97 | 84
Foreign policy and economics | 94 | 74 | 20
Philosophy | 70 | 52 | 18
History | 147 | 121 | 26
Economics | 29 | 21 | 8
Production | 90 | 82 | 8
Finance | 15 | 11 | 4
Labor and trade unions | 55 | 39 | 16
Legal and constitutional system | 73 | 53 | 20
Military policy | 38 | 28 | 10
Natural science and mathematics | 261 | 225 | 36
Technology and industry | 490 | 415 | 75
Agriculture and cooperatives | 284 | 214 | 70
Trade and nutrition | 51 | 37 | 14
Transportation and communications | 75 | 64 | 11
Community affairs | 4 | 4 | ...
Health | 215 | 157 | 58
Physical education and sports | 72 | 53 | 19
Scientific and educational texts | 397 | 301 | 96
Literary criticism | 133 | 55 | 78
Art | 152 | 118 | 34
Languages | 70 | 66 | 4
Artistic and folkloric literature | 609 | 534 | 75
Juvenile literature | 277 | 146 | 131
Atheism and religion | 8 | 7 | 1
General handbooks | 2 | 2 | ...
| ----- | ----- | -----
TOTAL | 4,188 | 3,157 | 1,031
-------------------------------------+--------------+--------+--------
The party is the final arbiter regarding the acceptability of work for
publication. All party control, however, is theoretically unofficial;
censorship exists only in the sense that all power of decision regarding
publication is in the hands of party members. The official process for
publication is that the writer submits his work to the publishing house.
The publishing house then sends it, with a brief description of its
ideological content, to the Committee on Art and Culture. If the book is
approved at this stage, it is returned to the publishing house, where it
is again checked for its ideological content.
The major criterion for acceptance is the ideological soundness of the
work in question. According to a refugee playwright from Bulgaria, "The
journalist must praise the party, and government, and criticize the
West. The poet, the playwright, the novelist must uphold the communist
ideal." Since the works of leading Communists are almost always accepted
for publication, one writer has stated; "In Bulgaria dead communist
heroes are the safest bet."
The government is actively engaged in attempting to promote Bulgarian
books abroad. In the late 1960s and early 1970s books by native
authors--although in relatively small numbers--were published in such
diverse countries as Great Britain, Japan, France, Turkey, Italy, Iran,
Austria, Argentina, and Finland. According to the latest available
source on the promotion of Bulgarian books abroad, plans also have been
formulated for the publication of books in the United States, Belgium,
Brazil, and Syria.
One of the most serious problems in the publishing industry, other than
the broad issue of freedom of expression of the writers, is that of a
shortage of textbooks. In 1970 the Committee for State Control
discovered that courses in 1,013 subjects at the university level had no
textbooks whatsoever. In the University of Sofia alone, where
approximately 317 subjects were taught, textbooks existed for only 216
of these subjects; roughly half of the books for the 216 subjects that
used textbooks were out of print.
LIBRARIES
When the Communists took power in 1944, they began to allocate
relatively large sums of money to develop new libraries in both large
cities and small villages. By 1971 the country had over 10,000
libraries, whose collections numbered nearly 50 million volumes (see
table 14).
The Committee on Art and Culture maintained a number of libraries,
including the country's largest, the Bulgarian National Library. Founded
in 1878 in Sofia, it contained 814,000 works in 1971, including about
13,000 old and rare volumes, approximately 17,000 graphic works, and
some 20,000 photographs and portraits. The library published both a
yearbook and a monthly periodical.
The committee maintained two other libraries. One was the Ivan Vazov
State Library, situated in Plovdiv, whose collection included a wide
variety of periodicals, old and rare books, and archives. The other
library under the committee was the Elin Pelin Bulgarian Bibliographical
Institute, which maintained a record of all printed works in the country
and published a monthly bulletin listing all of its publications, an
annual yearbook, and a monthly list of all articles published in reviews
and journals.
In addition there were research-related libraries maintained by the
Academy of Sciences; public school libraries; university libraries;
libraries organized in state plants, factories, and cooperative farms;
regional libraries; and local libraries.
The major regional libraries were located in Burgas, Ruse, Stara Zagora,
Shumen, Varna, Velsko, and Turnovo. The best known local library was the
City Library of Sofia, which contained about 452,862 volumes.
_Table 14. Libraries in Bulgaria, 1971_
---------------------+---------------------------------------------
| Number
Kind of Library |-----------+--------+----------+-------------
| Libraries | Books* | Readers* | Books Lent*
---------------------+-----------+--------+----------+-------------
National | 1 | 814 | 25 | 189
Local | 27 | 5,287 | 259 | 4,807
Reading rooms | 4,108 | 20,387 | 1,359 | 20,744
Enterprises and | | | |
government offices | 2,110 | 6,532 | 537 | 4,984
Public schools | 3,860 | 9,336 | 772 | 6,653
Universities | 23 | 2,077 | 84 | 1,320
Specialized: | | | |
Science | 115 | 1,409 | 29 | 507
Government | 35 | 594 | 16 | 282
Party and public | | | |
organizations | 93 | 804 | 39 | 280
Technical | 212 | 864 | 54 | 398
Medical | 60 | 405 | 36 | 361
Theaters | | | |
(archives) | 133 | 443 | 6 | 34
Educational | 14 | 152 | 8 | 57
| ------ | ------ | ----- | ------
Total specialized | 662 | 4,671 | 188 | 1,919
| ------ | ------ | ----- | ------
TOTAL | 10,791 | 49,104 | 3,224 | 40,616
---------------------+-----------+--------+----------+-------------
* In thousands.
The so-called public reading room was another form of library. Founded
by educated Bulgarians during the Turkish occupation as centers of
culture and education, the reading rooms have become quite widespread,
particularly in the villages, and supply books to farmworkers and other
members of the rural population. In the early 1970s there were 4,108
reading rooms with over 20 million volumes.
FILMS
By 1947, after the new constitution had been enacted, the film industry
became a state monopoly. The next year the new Law on Motion Pictures
was passed, which essentially expanded on the theme of state control. It
officially abolished free enterprise in the film industry and prohibited
individual activities in the importation and exportation of films and
the private operation of movie theaters. The film industry fell under
the official control of the Bulgarian Cinematography Association, which
was under the Department of Motion Pictures of the Committee for
Science, Art, and Culture. By 1950 the entire film industry was under
the complete control of the Council of Ministers. The Department of
Motion Pictures became officially attached to the council.
One of the early laws regarding films stated that "the motion picture
must become a real fighting assistant of the party and the government
and be an ardent agitator and propagator of the government policy." The
focus of the industry was to be placed on the building of socialism
while increasing the country's bonds with the Soviet Union. Early
legislation stated that "Soviet films gave immense educational influence
and mobilized action and conscious participation in the building of
socialism for still greater friendship with the Soviet Union." This
emphasis on the relationship with the Soviet Union was not only
ideological. Soviet films also represented approximately 87 percent of
the films shown in Bulgaria from 1945 to 1956, and the Bulgarian film
industry was in large part assisted by its film counterpart in the
Soviet Union.
The film industry expanded quickly under the new government. There were
187 films produced in 1960 (see table 15). By 1965 there were
approximately 2,000 motion picture houses, roughly 83 percent of which
were in the villages.
_Table 15. Bulgaria, Films Produced and Translated, Selected Years,
1939-71_
-------------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------
| 1939 | 1948 | 1960 | 1971
-------------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------
Full length | 3 | ... | 11 | 18
Art | (3) | ... | (10) | (16)
Documentary | ... | ... | (1) | (2)
Television | 0 | 0 | 0 | 19
Short and medium length | ... | 19 | 110 | 252
Documentary | ... | (15) | (36) | (60)
Popular science | ... | (4) | (32) | (61)
Technical education | ... | ... | (16) | (21)
Animated | ... | ... | (8) | (16)
Propaganda | ... | ... | (18) | (94)
Previews | ... | 53 | 66 | 58
| --- | --- | --- | ---
TOTAL | 3 | 72 | 187 | 347
-------------------------+--------+--------+--------+-------
In mid-1973 information on the film industry indicated that the
production, distribution, importation, exportation, and exhibition of
films were still controlled by the Bulgarian Cinematography Association.
This agency was subdivided into three sections: the chief studio at the
Bulyana film center where feature films and cartoons were produced; a
second studio that produced documentary shorts and popular science films
for schools; and a third studio that specialized in newsreels.
Relative to other European countries there was little importation or
exportation of films. In mid-1973 data suggested that between 100 and
150 feature films were imported per year. These films generally came
from the Soviet Union and other Eastern European countries, although a
few were imported from Italy, France, and Great Britain. The first
Bulgarian film to be exported was _The Chain_, which was shown in
Czechoslovakia in 1964. The same year another Bulgarian film, _The
Intransigents_, was shown in Ireland, and still another, _The Peach
Thief_, was shown in Great Britain. The precise number of Bulgarian
films exported was unknown, although one writer claimed that in 1973
Bulgarian films were viewed in about seventy countries.
In mid-1973 the subject matter of Bulgarian films was characteristically
contemporary, and there was little focus on historical events. Although
a few historical films had been produced, they were in the minority. A
few films had dealt with the subject of Bulgarian resistance to the
Nazis, but they too were relatively scarce. More films were devoted to
the so-called people's heroic struggles. Most films in Bulgaria,
however, dealt with contemporary life in the country and current events.
The overwhelming majority of these films treated the conflicts and
issues of Bulgarian youth.
SECTION III. ECONOMIC
CHAPTER 12
CHARACTER AND STRUCTURE OF THE ECONOMY
Under comprehensive control of the Bulgarian Communist Party (BKP--see
Glossary), the economy was severely strained in mid-1973 as the result
of the dual task imposed upon it by the BKP leadership to increase
productivity rapidly and substantially and to provide a growing volume
of consumer goods and services under a newly announced program for
raising the population's low standard of living. A first step in
improving the living standard took the form of an upward adjustment in
the lowest wage brackets and a broadening of social security provisions.
Further improvements, however, were made conditional upon attainment of
the productivity and production goals.
The development of the economy and of the consumer program faced severe
limitations because of the inadequacy of domestic resources, including
basic raw materials, fuels and power, skilled workers, and trained
professional personnel. Economic development was heavily dependent on
financial and technical aid from the Soviet Union, and dependence upon
that country was to be increased in the 1971-75 period. Efforts to
overcome persistent and growth-retarding difficulties in the economy led
to frequent organizational and procedural changes in the economic
mechanism, the structure of which in mid-1973 was still in flux as a
result of decisions taken by the BKP in 1965 and in 1968.
The main trend in reshaping the organization and management of the
economy was one of concentration and centralization--a trend that led to
the creation of huge trusts in industry and distribution and of vast
agroindustrial complexes in agriculture. In the process, divisions and
lines of authority were blurred, and violations of government directives
were frequent because of their complexity and the constraints they
placed on the day-to-day operation of economic enterprises.
In the search for a more efficient organization and management pattern,
heavy reliance was placed on the introduction of complex automation into
all economic processes with the aid of a nationwide computer network--a
system of automation that would extend from the highest levels of
national economic planning down to the individual factory shop and cow
barn. No ideas have been advanced, however, on how complex automation
would solve the basic problem of the economy--the widely acknowledged
and pervasive lack of incentives to work. The methods used to grapple
with this problem were limited to a tinkering with the wage and bonus
system, administrative sanctions, political indoctrination, and
exhortations.
ORGANIZATION
State ownership of the means of production predominates in the economy.
Collective ownership has prevailed in agriculture, but it may be
gradually eliminated in the course of the agricultural reorganization
initiated in 1970 (see ch. 13). Private ownership of productive
resources is limited to subsidiary farm or garden enterprises of
collective farmers, industrial and state farmworkers, and artisans; a
small number of individual farms on marginal lands; and noncollectivized
artisan shops. In 1971 private ownership encompassed about 10 percent of
the agricultural land but only 2.5 percent of the fixed assets used in
production. Private ownership of personal property and homes is allowed.
The proportions of national income (net material product) generated in
each of the ownership sectors in 1971 were: state, 70 percent;
collective, 21 percent; and private, 9 percent. The importance of
private enterprise in the production of food, however, is much greater
than its contribution to the national income may suggest. The private
sector has provided more than one-fifth of the crop output and one-third
of the livestock production (see ch. 13).
Whereas the leadership has promoted livestock production on private farm
plots, since 1968 it has placed increasingly severe restrictions on the
activities of private artisans, who had originally been encouraged to
expand their operations through liberal regulations issued in 1965.
Aside from providing essential services, private artisans played an
important role in supplying a variety of consumer goods for the
population. The restrictions on artisans' activities have been based on
the BKP tenet that private ownership of means of production and the use
of personal property to acquire unearned income are incompatible with
the socialist order and the country's new constitution.
Economic activities are centrally planned and directed along lines
prescribed by the BKP. The functions of planning and control are
exercised by the Council of Ministers with the aid of specialized
economic ministries, such as the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of
Chemical Industry and Power Generation, and the Ministry of Foreign
Trade, and of various governmental committees and commissions (see ch.
8). The state banking system and, more particularly, bank credit have
also served as tools for the control of enterprises and trusts.
The economic management structure has been subject to frequent changes.
In the spring of 1972 there were fourteen economic ministries, including
five ministries exclusively concerned with branches of industry and
construction. The Ministry of Agriculture and the Food Industry, as its
name implies, has functioned in two major economic sectors and has also
had substantial responsibilities in the field of distribution. Among the
committees and commissions the most important have been the State
Planning Committee, the Committee on Prices, and the Commission for
Economic and Scientific-Technical Cooperation. In December 1972 the
Commission on the Living Standard was created to coordinate and control
the fulfillment of the national living standard program decided upon by
the plenum of the Central Committee of the Bulgarian Communist Party.
Attached to the Council of Ministers and chaired by a deputy minister,
the commission is composed of ministers and deputy ministers,
representatives of public organizations, scientists, and other members.
Since the beginning of 1971 economic management has been more highly
centralized than before. A plan for partial decentralization of economic
decision making adopted in 1965 was abandoned by 1968. The economy is
organized into trusts (officially known as state economic associations)
that unite enterprises within branches of economic sectors along
functional lines, such as metallurgy, textiles, food processing,
railroads, freight forwarding, tourism, wholesale distribution,
publishing, and filmmaking. In agriculture, trusts are known as
agroindustrial complexes; each complex unites several previously
independent farms (see ch. 13). Trusts are subordinated to economic
ministries and are ultimately responsible to the Council of Ministers.
The extent of the ministries' authority over trusts is not clear. In
some important respects trusts receive instructions directly from the
Council of Ministers.
Agroindustrial trusts number 170. In the nonagricultural sector about
sixty-two trusts were originally created, with an average of thirty
branches but as many as 106 in one instance. The process of
concentration and centralization continued on a small scale at least
until the spring of 1973, in part through the consolidation of separate
trusts. Before the reorganization, trust branches had been legally and
financially independent enterprises, and trusts served only as
administrative links between enterprises and ministries. Whereas
individual enterprises were previously regarded as the basic economic
units in the country, it is the trusts that have been officially
considered as such under the new system of management.
Trusts have assumed various functions previously performed by the
enterprises themselves. They formulate economic and technological
development policies for the trust as a whole and for each branch;
establish relations with suppliers, distributors, and financial
institutions; and centralize research and development. Trusts have also
been charged with responsibility for providing operational guidance to
their branches and for organizing the export of products that they
manufacture. Branches remain responsible for the effective organization
of operations, efficient uses of resources, and the conscientious
fulfillment of tasks assigned to them by the annual plan.
Regulations governing the authority of trusts over their branches were
intended to permit the establishment of flexible internal management
organizations adapted to the particular needs of each trust. The trusts'
policies were expected to be based on the rule that whatever the trust
could do better than the branches should be centralized in it and,
conversely, whatever the branches could do better than the trust should
be left in their field of competence. Each trust was supposed to arrive
at an optimal combination of management centralization and
decentralization.
The transition to the new management system involved difficulties
because of delays in issuing pertinent regulations, misinterpretation of
the regulations by trust managers, and the reluctance of enterprise
managers to acquiesce in the loss of their independence. Most of the
organizational and personnel problems were reported to have been
resolved by the end of 1971, and in March 1973 party chief Todor Zhivkov
reported that further consolidation of the new management structure had
been achieved. In the long run, greater efficiency of economic
management is to be attained through pervasive automation of all
management functions with the aid of a synchronized national network of
electronic computers.
Under the new system of trusts, profits of individual branches are
pooled and redistributed by the parent organization. Highly productive
branches may thus find themselves in the position of having to share
their profits with unproductive branches. This feature, some observers
believe, may reduce incentives to raise the level of efficiency,
increase output, and improve the quality of products.
STRUCTURE AND GROWTH
National income (net national product, which excludes most services not
directly related to production) was officially reported to have been
10.41 billion leva (for value of the lev--see Glossary) in 1971,
compared to 10.53 billion leva in 1970. Nevertheless, the official index
of national income growth showed an increase of 7 percent from 1970 to
1971. This example illustrates the difficulty of using official
statistics to describe the structure and growth of the economy or
structural changes over a period of time.
According to the 1971 statistical yearbook for Bulgaria, the respective
shares of industry and agriculture in national income in 1970 were 49
and 22 percent. The yearbook issued in 1972, however, cited 1970 figures
of 55 and 17 percent instead. According to the earlier source, the
proportion of national income contributed by industry increased by 6.5
percent in the 1960-70 period, whereas the subsequent source shows a
growth of 17 percent for the same period. Similarly, the contribution of
agriculture to national income was reported to have declined by 36.4 and
by 33.3 percent. An upward trend in the contribution of trade to
national income was shown in the earlier source, but a declining trend
appeared in the latter.
The differences in statistical presentation resulted primarily from a
major revision of wholesale prices, introduced by the government in
January 1971. Price revisions made in earlier years, changes in the
composition of individual statistical categories and other
methodological modifications also contributed to the inconsistency of
statistical time series in value terms. Because of differences in
concept and coverage, Bulgarian national account data are not comparable
with those of the United Nations or the United States systems of
national accounts.
In the 1960-71 period national income at prices of 1957 was reported to
have increased 2.25 times, which is equivalent to an average annual 7.7
percent rate of growth. The growth of national income was more rapid in
the years 1966 through 1971 than it had been in the 1960-65 period. The
official national income index implies an average annual increase of 8.5
percent in the latter period, compared to 6.7 percent in the earlier
years. Reliable data on the growth of Bulgarian national income in
Western terms are not available. Relatively high rates of economic
growth are generally associated with early stages of industrial
development.
In 1971 industry still lagged behind agriculture in terms of employment,
although the proportion of the labor force employed in industry had been
steadily rising, while employment in agriculture had been declining. In
the 1960-71 period employment in industry rose from 21.9 to 31.2 percent
of the labor force, and employment in agriculture declined from 54.7 to
33.4 percent of the total. During the same period employment in the
services sector increased from 9.2 to 13.4 percent of the labor force,
and gains in employment were made in all other economic sectors except
forestry, including construction, transportation and communications, and
trade.
LABOR
Growth and productivity of the economy have been adversely affected by
shortages of skilled labor and of adequately trained and experienced
technical and executive personnel. In the words of the minister of labor
and social welfare, the level of worker's current training is
inconsistent with the country's industrial base; it lags behind the
requirements of the scientific and technical revolution. The lack of
required skills has contributed to frequent machinery breakdowns and to
the output of low-quality products. As a means of upgrading the skills
of workers and executives, a broad program for training and retraining
was launched in October 1972 with the cooperation of the Ministry of
National Education. About half the number of persons undergoing training
were below the age of thirty.
Other persistent shortcomings in the field of labor that have plagued
the economy and have been the target of frequent criticism and
administrative action by the leadership are inefficient organization of
labor and poor labor discipline. Inefficient labor organization has been
mainly an outgrowth of inferior management skills. Poor labor discipline
has been a consequence of inadequate work incentives. In 1972 the
minister of labor and social welfare estimated that more than 20 percent
of the working time was lost through idling and other violations of
labor discipline.
Adequate information on the structure of wages was not available in
mid-1973. The main faults of the wage system that prevailed in early
1973 after repeated revisions, however, were outlined by the BKP leader,
Zhivkov, and these faults were also discussed by labor ministry
officials from the point of view of their effect on labor productivity.
The basic wage constitutes the main incentive for work; bonuses,
premiums, and honors play a minor role. Because of the large investment
needs for industrial development and the corollary need to restrict
consumption, wages have been kept low, and the rise in wages has been
slower than the growth of productivity.
Basic wage pay has been based on the place of employment and not on the
work performed. Wage scales for identical work have differed
substantially between branches of the economy and industry. In industry,
wage scales have been lower in branches manufacturing consumer goods
than in branches producing capital goods; they have been lowest in
textile mills. Wages have been determined by job classifications within
economic and industrial branches, the workers' level of education, and
length of service. Normal increases in pay for workers remaining in the
same positions have therefore been infrequent.
Slow promotion and the disparity in wage scales contributed to excessive
labor turnover because, under the prevailing conditions of scarcity,
trained workers were able to improve their incomes through a change of
jobs. It also led to irregularities in job reclassification by employers
seeking to retain their workers through increases in pay. Wages have
been raised from time to time by the government through general upward
revisions of pay scales. This method, however, has no incentive value
because it is not directly linked to an improvement in the workers'
performance.
With a view to enhancing the stimulative effect of wages on
productivity, Zhivkov proposed a basic reform of the wage system that
would be carried out gradually in the 1973-80 period. In presenting his
proposal to the BKP Central Committee plenum, Zhivkov dwelt on some of
the major principles to be embodied in the new wage system. The minimum
wage must be higher, and the rise in wages must be more rapid than
before. Increases in basic wages must be closely linked to individual
performance and to overall labor productivity in general, pay would be
based on performance rather than on formal qualification or length of
service. To this end the sectoral approach to wage determination is to
be abandoned in favor of a functional approach that would establish a
uniform economy-wide wage scale for jobs in relation to their complexity
and hardship and to the specific conditions of work. Rigid pay scales
are to be replaced by flexible schedules providing a range of pay for
each job depending upon the ability and performance of the worker.
The reform would also gradually eliminate the egalitarian aspect of the
current wage system by providing appropriate differentials for workers
with higher qualifications. Under the current system, for example, the
salary of economists has been below that of engineers, and the salary of
engineers has been equivalent to the wages of skilled workers. This
problem has been repeatedly considered in the past, but its solution was
delayed for lack of funds.
Zhivkov also cited shortcomings of the prevailing piecework system and
suggested some long-range remedies for the ills. About 60 percent of all
workers have been employed on the piecework system. Production norms
under the system have been low because of technological advances and the
infrequency of adjustment of norms. Under these conditions workers have
been able to exceed the basic norms to such an extent that payment for
work above the norm has become a large, and in some cases the
predominant, portion of the workers' earnings. Striving to increase
their wages, workers under the piecework system have often resorted to
shortcuts that have lowered the quality of output.
Zhivkov's proposal for improvement included the introduction of more
realistic and more flexible quantitative and qualitative production
norms and a gradual transition to hourly rates of pay with bonus
payments for superior work whenever the quantity and quality of output
is not directly dependent on individual workers. Under these conditions
bonus payments would be linked to the performance of the entire working
personnel, and the importance of the bonus in wage payments would be
enhanced.
The wage reform has been discussed in the context of a broad program,
announced by the BKP Central Committee plenum in December 1972, for a
general rise in incomes and an improvement in the population's level of
living. In the process the difference between urban and lagging rural
incomes is to be eliminated. Implementation of the program has been made
contingent upon the attainment of greater productivity and output
through workers' efforts to surpass production and efficiency targets
set by the government. These more difficult targets must be embodied in
what have been officially labeled workers' counterplans. The BKP and
the government have launched a new form of so-called socialist
competition among workers and economic units, the aim of which is to
exceed in performance the requirements of the counterplans.
Implementation of the standard of living program began with the
introduction of wage increases, effective March 1, 1973, for workers
employed under difficult or hazardous conditions, schoolteachers and
university faculties, physicians and medical personnel, and employees of
artistic and cultural institutions. Effective June 1 the minimum wage
for all types of work was raised from 65 to 80 leva per month, and a
level of 88 leva per month was decreed for all workers earning between
80 and 87 leva. The resultant distortion of the wage structure is to be
eliminated over a period of several years.
Another important measure affecting labor was announced in March 1973--a
gradual transition from a six-day, forty-six-hour workweek to a five-day
week of forty-two and a half hours. Under the BKP directive the
transition must be accomplished without loss in production; the loss in
worktime must be compensated by a corresponding rise in productivity.
The shorter workweek had been in effect on an experimental basis for
about 17 percent of the industrial workers since 1968. In 1973 and 1974
it was to be introduced in enterprises of the material production
sector, excluding agriculture, provided that the required rise in
productivity has been assured. In 1975 the reduced workweek will be
introduced in transport, for management of state economic enterprises,
and for persons employed in the field of services other than health
services and educational institutions. Preparations for experiments with
a shortened workweek in these two areas and in agriculture are to be
undertaken in 1974 and 1975. The decree on working hours gave formal
approval to an established practice that requires workers to make up by
work on Saturdays or Sundays for worktime lost whenever official
holidays fall on weekdays.
INVESTMENT
The proportion of national income devoted annually to capital formation
(net investment) rose steadily from 22.6 percent in 1961 to 35.4 percent
in 1966 and 1967 and declined thereafter progressively to 26.8 percent
in 1971. In absolute terms annual capital formation increased from 1.06
billion leva in 1961 to 3.06 billion leva in 1970, then declined to 2.74
billion leva in 1971. More than half the net addition to capital (from
46 to 67 percent annually) consisted of fixed assets; the balance
represented equipment and inventories.
Gross investment at current prices increased from 1.4 billion leva in
1961 to 3.6 billion leva in 1971; investment was officially estimated at
3.9 billion leva in 1972 and was scheduled to reach 4.3 billion leva in
1973. The bulk of investment has been channeled into the material
production sector (including trade). The annual investment share of
this sector increased from about 74 percent in 1960 to 79 percent in
1969 and declined to 76 percent in 1971. The proportion of investment
devoted to housing and services declined correspondingly in the 1960-69
period from 26 to 21 percent and rose in the subsequent two years to 24
percent. The shift in the investment trend foreshadowed the formal
directive issued by the Tenth Party Congress in April 1971 for the
development of a program to raise the population's standard of living.
Industry has been the main beneficiary of investment funds; its share
rose to almost 50 percent in 1969 but declined slightly thereafter.
Agriculture received only about 15 percent of investment in the years
1969 through 1971, compared to 28 percent in 1960 and 19 percent in
1965. Residential investment declined from 14 percent in 1960 to an
average of not quite 10 percent in the 1969-71 period.
Building construction and installation work absorbed the largest, though
declining, share of investment--60 percent in 1960 and 46.4 percent in
1971. The share of investment spent on machinery and equipment rose by
50 percent in the 1960-69 period from 26 to 39 percent, but declined to
34 percent in 1970 and 37 percent in 1971. Imported machinery, mostly
from the Soviet Union, constituted a major though declining proportion
of investment in machinery--from two-thirds to one-half of the total in
the 1965-71 period. Other investment expenses, including geological
surveys, absorbed from 12 to 17 percent of annual investment.
New investment has been increasingly concentrated in state enterprises.
In the 1960-71 period the proportion of investment absorbed by state
enterprises increased from 68 to 83 percent, while the share of
investment devoted to collective farms declined from 18 to 8.5 percent.
Annual investment in artisans' collectives rose from 1.2 percent of
total investment in 1960 to 2.7 percent in 1968 and declined to 1.1
percent in 1971. This trend paralleled the government's policy of
initial encouragement and subsequent restriction of private artisan
activities; it suggests that the government's restrictive policy may not
have been limited to private artisans alone (see Organization, this
ch.).
Private investment in residential construction declined from 12.7
percent of annual investment in 1960 to 6.5 percent in 1970 but rose to
7.2 percent in 1971. In absolute terms private investment increased from
about 174 million leva to 262 million leva. By 1973, however, new
restrictions were being introduced on housing construction by private
individuals. As much as 90 percent of the residential construction in
1960 and 70 percent in 1971 was privately financed. In the 1968-70
period about half the private investment in housing was supported by
bank loans or by loans from special funds of employing organizations.
The rise in the volume of capital per worker in the 1960-70 period as a
result of the investment activity did not produce a corresponding
increase in labor productivity; that is, the efficiency of investment
declined. Whereas the amount of fixed capital per worker in the sphere
of material production increased at an average annual rate of 10.4
percent, and the volume of machinery and inventories rose by 12.5
percent per year, output per worker increased at an annual rate of only
7.7 percent. In an effort to increase the efficiency of investment, the
Tenth Party Congress, convened in the spring of 1971, directed that 35
percent of new investment in the sphere of material production during
the 1971-75 period should be used for the reconstruction and
modernization of existing facilities. In 1972, however, the proportion
of investment used for this purpose was only 18 percent.
In the context of the eventually abandoned program for economic
decentralization, provision was made for reducing the role of the
central government budget in financing investments and for increasing
participation by investors with their own funds and bank credits. In the
sphere of material production, excluding trade, budgetary allocations in
1965 accounted for 55 percent of investment, and bank credits made up 7
percent; in 1969 investment funds from these sources constituted 21 and
32 percent, respectively. The contribution from the budget, however,
rose again after 1969 to 28 percent in 1971, whereas bank credits
declined to less than 20 percent of the investment funds. The share of
investors' own resources, including funds of local governments,
increased from 36 percent in 1965 to 52 percent in 1971. Budgetary
investment funds are being increasingly concentrated on projects in the
fields of services and raw materials production.
A satisfactory explanation of the shifts in the pattern of investment
financing is not feasible in the absence of adequate information on the
changing methods of financing economic enterprises and organizations.
The announced government policy is to shift financing progressively from
the budget to the economic trusts. The shifts did not alter the
fundamental fact that all investment funds, excluding the small private
investment, remained public property subject to governmental controls
and that the difference was merely one of bookkeeping. The change in the
channeling of public investment funds was introduced in the hope of
increasing the effectiveness of their use.
The realization of major investment projects, particularly in industry,
has been made possible by very substantial technical and material
assistance from the Soviet Union. Nevertheless, serious shortcomings
have been officially reported in the implementation of investment
programs, both in industrial and in residential construction. The main
problem has been posed by the initiation of building programs that
exceed the capacity of the construction industry and the consequent
scattering of limited resources. The situation has been aggravated by
frequently poor project planning, inferior design, delays in the
delivery of machinery and materials, poor organization of work, and
slack discipline.
As a result of the difficulties in construction, the completion and
commissioning of new industrial plants has often been delayed, and
housing construction has fallen chronically short of the volume
planned--by as much as 25 percent in 1972. The consequent failure of the
anticipated output from new plants to materialize created shortages in
various areas, thereby affecting production and market supplies
adversely and necessitating revisions of the economic plans. In an
effort to minimize these difficulties, the government adopted various
administrative measures in 1971 and 1972, including the formulation of a
list of nationally important construction projects, direct supervision
of which was assumed by the Council of Ministers. The number of projects
included in the list for 1972 was variously reported as thirty-five and
thirty-nine out of a total of more than 3,000 projects. The listed
projects consisted mainly of plants for the production of industrial
materials.
BUDGET
The budget constitutes the basic financial plan of the country's
leadership. It is the monetary expression of the annual socioeconomic
plan and provides for the financial flows implicit in that plan. The
budget is comprehensive; it takes into account all aspects of the
economic, social, and cultural activities of the country. In line with
the government's policy of gradually placing economic trusts and their
branches on a self-financing basis, a progressively larger share of the
funds budgeted for the economy is being retained by the trusts rather
than channeled to the budget. The sums thus retained by economic
organization rose from about 3 billion leva in 1971 to a planned level
of more than 5 billion leva in 1973. Ultimate control over the use of
these funds, nevertheless, remains with the government, and their
disposition is subject to the provisions of the budget.
The national budget is formulated by the Ministry of Finance along lines
dictated by the BKP leadership and must be approved by the National
Assembly. As a rule only very minor modifications are made in the
process of legislative review. Budgets for local governments are
prepared as a part of the national budget; in 1972 and 1973 their total
amount was equivalent to about 17 percent of the overall national
budget. The Ministry of Finance is also responsible for ensuring the
scrupulous implementation of the budget. It is assisted in this task by
a nationwide network of state and local inspectors and by agents of the
banks. Actual budgetary results are directly affected by deviations from
the annual economic plan and therefore seldom, if ever, correspond to
the original estimates, which have the force of law.
Systematic publication of budgetary data was discontinued in the
mid-1960s. Since then only scattered figures have become available
through press reports on the presentation of the budget to the National
Assembly and occasional articles by the minister of finance or other
ministry officials.
The annual budgets have grown steadily larger. The approved budget for
1973 called for revenues of 7,057 million leva and expenditures of 7,035
million leva. In 1970 actual revenues totaled 5,723 million leva, the
expenditures amounted to 5,650 million leva. Usually about 90 percent of
budgetary revenue has been derived from operations of the economy, and
the remainder has been raised through a variety of levies on the
population. The largest single item of revenue--more than 30 percent of
the total--has been collected in the form of a turnover tax on sales
that has been passed on to the ultimate consumer. The second most
important revenue source has consisted of levies on enterprises in the
form of a profits tax, a tax on fixed capital (interest charge) and
miscellaneous other deductions from income. Social security taxes based
on payrolls have been the third major source. Levied at a rate of 12.5
percent through 1972, the social security tax was raised by 20 percent
in 1973 in order to meet rising costs. In 1972 about four-fifths of the
turnover tax and two-thirds of the revenue from taxes on profits and
capital was to be derived from industry.
In December 1972 the BKP Central Committee plenum embarked upon a
gradual modification of the income tax system that would eventually lead
to a total abolition of income taxes for wage earners and collective
farmers by 1980. Initially, the existing system is to be improved by
introducing unified taxation for all blue- and white-collar workers and
collective farmers and by establishing a tax exemption equal to the
official minimum rate of pay. Gradual elimination of all income taxes
for these population groups in the 1976-80 period is to be synchronized
with the contemplated reform of wage scales. At the same time a system
of progressive taxation is to be introduced on incomes derived from
activities in the private sector that are not in conformity with the
amount of labor invested.
The most complete recent information on budgetary expenditures is
available from the approved budget for 1972. Out of a total outlay of
6,514 million leva, 3,224 million leva was earmarked for the national
economy, and 2,065 million leva was set aside for social and cultural
needs. The remaining undisclosed balance of 1,225 million leva, or 19
percent of the total outlays, must have included expenditures for
defense, internal security, and government administration. The social
and cultural expenditures included; social security payments, 1,054
million leva; education, 532 million leva; public health, 303 million
leva; culture and arts, 83 million leva; and science, 93 million leva,
in addition to 235 million leva to be provided by research organizations
and economic trusts.
Information on the budget for 1973 was more sketchy. No information had
been disclosed on the magnitude of the expenditure on the national
economy; the usually undisclosed residual was therefore also not
ascertainable. The increase in overall revenues and expenditures over
those in 1972 was about 8 percent. Outlays for social and cultural
affairs, however, were planned to increase by 11.8 percent, including
increases of 18.8 and 15.7 percent, respectively, for public health and
education. These figures reflected the government's announced program
for increasing the well-being of the population.
The BKP and government leadership look upon the budget as a major tool
for executing BKP economic policies. As expressed by the minister of
finance in 1973, the budget contains a whole arsenal of financial and
economic levers--levers that must be used ever more skillfully to raise
the efficiency of economic performance, to improve the structure of
production and consumption, and to bring about a well-balanced economy.
The budget is also considered a tool for exercising effective control
over the entire sphere of production and services, not only to ensure
smooth current operations but also to inhibit any undesirable departures
from official policy.
The disciplinary powers of the budget have yet to be more fully
developed to cope successfully with the officially reported shortcomings
in the economy. One step in this direction calls for the further
intensification of what has been officially called financial and bank
control through the lev, that is, the discretionary use of financial
sanctions, including the denial of budgetary allocations or bank
credits, to enforce strict compliance with specific plan directives.
Another advocated measure is to intensify the public campaign against
waste and the irresponsible attitude toward public funds and for tighter
financial discipline. An implacable campaign is also to be waged against
wrongs done to the citizens in the use of public funds, illegal
formation and misappropriation of funds by economic organizations,
irregularities in the supply of materials, failure to produce consumer
goods despite the availability of needed resources, accumulation of
excessive inventories, and pilferage.
Many apparent violations of economic and budgetary discipline arise
because of the frequently inadequate knowledge or understanding by
personnel at all levels of the economy of the constantly changing laws
and regulations concerning the operation and interrelation of the
diverse economic units, particularly in the area of finance. The changes
in laws and regulations are the result of an unceasing search for a
system that would provide effective incentives toward conscientious and
efficient work to all gainfully employed persons.
BANKING AND CURRENCY
Banking
Since early 1971 the country's banking system has consisted of the
Bulgarian National Bank and two semi-independent banks attached to it:
the Bulgarian Foreign Trade Bank and the State Savings Bank. This
banking system emerged after three reorganizations in the 1967-70 period
and conforms to the general pattern of institutional and management
concentration in the economy. In addition to serving as the central bank
of issue, the Bulgarian National Bank, an independent agency under the
Council of Ministers, is directly responsible for financing all sectors
and phases of the economy other than foreign trade and consumer credit,
in which fields it supervises the activities of the Bulgarian Foreign
Trade Bank and the State Savings Bank. The bank is also responsible for
exercising close control over the economic units that it finances, with
a view to ensuring the fulfillment of all national economic plans and
the scrupulous adherence to existing laws and regulations.
A minimum of current information was available in mid-1973 on the
structure of the banks, the relationships between them, and their
financial operations. Official statistics are limited to annual data on
bank credits for investment and on the volume of outstanding short- and
long-term loan balances for the banking system as a whole. Data on
outstanding loans are broken down by type of borrower and, in the case
of short-term loans, also by purpose. With minor exceptions, no
information was available on the volume of loans extended, on loan
maturities, or on interest rates after 1970. Statistics had also been
published on the volume of personal savings in the accounts of the
saving bank at the end of each year.
The total amount of loans outstanding at the end of the year increased
from 3.6 billion leva in 1965 to 9.2 billion leva in 1971. The
proportion of long-term loan balances rose from 24 percent of the total
amount in 1965 to 40 percent in 1970 but declined to less than 36
percent in 1971. The increase in lending activity to 1970 was a direct
consequence of the partial shift from predominantly budgetary financing
of economic activities to a substantial measure of self-financing by
enterprises and trusts. The subsequent decline was related to the
tightening of investment credit in an effort to reduce waste in the
construction program (see Investment, this ch.). Long-term loans have
been granted predominantly, if not exclusively, for fixed investment
purposes.
Of the 3.27 billion leva in long-term loans outstanding at the end of
1971, 2.61 billion leva was due from state and collective enterprises,
and 660 million leva was owed by private individuals who had borrowed to
finance home construction. Only 12.5 percent of the loan balances was
due from collective farms--an amount equivalent to barely 62 percent of
the sums owed by private individuals. Collective enterprises in industry
and services had outstanding loans of only 13 million leva. In relation
to the value of each sector's fixed assets in 1971, the proportion of
outstanding long-term loans was: state enterprises, 11.3 percent;
collective farms, 16.1 percent; and collective artisans, 2.9 percent.