Suzanne
23-03-06, 02:25 PM
If something I describe below didn't happen before my eyes, I would have never believed it!
Some four years ago I was a guest of Bulgaria's Ambassador to the USA Elena Poptodorova at the residence in Washington. Although it was quite late, the telephone kept ringing. All calls were from the American lobbying firms, which were offering their services to facilitate Bulgaria's accession to NATO. Naturally, for a generous reward. Mrs. Poptodorova was politely declining their offers with the explanation that hiring lobbyists was not the official stance of the Bulgarian government. Later she told me that actually it was her personal viewpoint that she was trying to impose. She was absolutely convinced that "we are the best lobbyists for our own cause" and there's no sense in throwing money in the wind, which, by the way, at that time was blowing into our sails. She proved to right. Bulgaria joined NATO without favors done by lobbyists.
Most probably the Bulgaria's EU membership is a different case. The political weather has changed along with the wind direction. As a result, such information sources as Euobserver came up with comments saying that Bulgaria is obviously gravely concerned over the issue. The it turned out that the criminal record of the person who won the tender was not clean. It comes out that so far all attempts at lobbying have yielded only negative results.
The sound common sense of the Bulgarians prompts that we shouldn't squander money in vain. If we really have cash to burn, then why should we give it away to lobbyists whom we cannot control? I have always been thinking that they are as helpful as, for instance, the director of a waterfall.
The lobbyists claim that they have terrific connections and have to pay ample sums for maintaining them. Read between the lines it means that they know whose palm they can grease without hurting anybody's feelings.
The fact that Bulgaria is head over heels in corruption-related problems is a widely commented fact, but doest it really mean that we have to give a bribe for our EU membership?
Couldn't we allot more generous entertainment allowances to our diplomats instead? Thus they would be able to throw parties or give receptions to local politicians and businessmen whose word carry weight rather then spend evenings idly watching TV. Because this is what diplomacy is about - important decisions are often made over a drink. Since this logical decision hasn't been taken I could offer two plausible explanations. Both sound sad. First, it seems that the heads of the Foreign Ministry don't give enough credit to our diplomats. No matter if they have grounds or not to do so. And second - the Bulgarian leaders have apparently started to believe in miracles again.
Georgi Gotev
www.standartnews.com
Some four years ago I was a guest of Bulgaria's Ambassador to the USA Elena Poptodorova at the residence in Washington. Although it was quite late, the telephone kept ringing. All calls were from the American lobbying firms, which were offering their services to facilitate Bulgaria's accession to NATO. Naturally, for a generous reward. Mrs. Poptodorova was politely declining their offers with the explanation that hiring lobbyists was not the official stance of the Bulgarian government. Later she told me that actually it was her personal viewpoint that she was trying to impose. She was absolutely convinced that "we are the best lobbyists for our own cause" and there's no sense in throwing money in the wind, which, by the way, at that time was blowing into our sails. She proved to right. Bulgaria joined NATO without favors done by lobbyists.
Most probably the Bulgaria's EU membership is a different case. The political weather has changed along with the wind direction. As a result, such information sources as Euobserver came up with comments saying that Bulgaria is obviously gravely concerned over the issue. The it turned out that the criminal record of the person who won the tender was not clean. It comes out that so far all attempts at lobbying have yielded only negative results.
The sound common sense of the Bulgarians prompts that we shouldn't squander money in vain. If we really have cash to burn, then why should we give it away to lobbyists whom we cannot control? I have always been thinking that they are as helpful as, for instance, the director of a waterfall.
The lobbyists claim that they have terrific connections and have to pay ample sums for maintaining them. Read between the lines it means that they know whose palm they can grease without hurting anybody's feelings.
The fact that Bulgaria is head over heels in corruption-related problems is a widely commented fact, but doest it really mean that we have to give a bribe for our EU membership?
Couldn't we allot more generous entertainment allowances to our diplomats instead? Thus they would be able to throw parties or give receptions to local politicians and businessmen whose word carry weight rather then spend evenings idly watching TV. Because this is what diplomacy is about - important decisions are often made over a drink. Since this logical decision hasn't been taken I could offer two plausible explanations. Both sound sad. First, it seems that the heads of the Foreign Ministry don't give enough credit to our diplomats. No matter if they have grounds or not to do so. And second - the Bulgarian leaders have apparently started to believe in miracles again.
Georgi Gotev
www.standartnews.com