The “ecological” green movement in Bulgaria has much to be indignant about, in a country that seems determined to allow its natural resources to be drowned in a cesspit. Yet the first thing that the green movement should be indignant about is itself.
I have just finished reading historian RJ Crampton’s splendid Bulgaria (Oxford History of Modern Europe, 2007; available from the British Council library Sofia, when I get round to returning it). The final chapter, on the country’s transition from communism, was a reminder of the part played by the Ecoglasnost movement as one of the domestic forces that helped end the blight that was the “socialist” era. Formed in response to specific issues of environmental degradation during that era, Ecoglasnost served as a means of challenging the state in a form of dissent that was more or less tolerated.
Given this pedigree, the environmental movement in Bulgaria should not lag behind the rest of Europe in its place in the eco and political debate, and it should have a more significant place in society. Yet on both counts the environmental movement is failing.
It was to be expected that some veterans of that movement would leave its credo behind them as they moved into mainstream, multi-party politics. In the context of a country that was tumbled into economic crisis a few years after the beginning of its transition, it can be no surprise that developers with money to spend would be allowed free rein. Money comes through banks, not from trees. For several years, national and municipal governments were compliant in allowing developers to do whatever they wanted. In the face of large sums that may be recorded with pride as investment inflows, those who would hug trees, plead for the use of energy-efficient light bulbs and the separation of refuse seem effete in the face of bigger issues.
It is understandable that for some time the environmental movement would be fractured, disorganised and overwhelmed, but not that its level of debate and engagement would be so simplistic. While elsewhere environmentalists, investors and government have learnt to engage each other on the question of sustainable development (a term that, like the word “development” itself is much-abused and little understood), the “green” response in Bulgaria tends to be knee-jerk. All development, of any kind, anywhere and everywhere, must be stopped. It is an approach that is reminiscent of much that is wrong with Bulgarian politics – the desire solely to obstruct and to bring down, without offering a constructive alternative.
Even though its level of debate trails behind the more sophisticated and complex discussions and standpoints elsewhere, the Bulgarian eco movement cannot be blamed too much for being simplistic. Partly because of the way matters are portrayed by the media, and partly because it suits governments to allow people to think that they are doing something noble by indulging in “eco-friendly” placebos, worldwide the civilian green movement has become captive to a number of conventional wisdoms, revolving around carbon footprints, the planting of trees (hopefully, indigenous to the area and sensibly chosen), the purchase of hybrid cars; and every unseasonable warm day or rain shower prompts sage nods and murmurs of “global warming”. Wind farms are applauded, and probably they should be, and those who point out that they kill migrating birds may suffer being derided as single-issue freaks.
People speak blithely of preserving nature’s balance, yet there is no balance in nature; like the species that live in them, environments evolve. The myth of a “balance in nature”, by the way, is drawn on by those who cull elephants, on the basis of how much land an individual elephant needs, with heavy calibre bullets for inconveniently numerous pachyderms.
Yet, if it could get its act together and learn to engage more eloquently and intelligently with the boardrooms and corridors of power, Bulgaria’s green movement could have an influential future. So influential as to have at least a share of government, as has happened elsewhere.
Consider the public disillusionment that dogs people’s view of politics and politicians in Bulgaria. In part at least, voter turnout has been decreasing in recent elections because Bulgarians perceive their politicians as much of a muchness, incompetent and corrupt, in public life only for their own private gain. Sundry messiahs have come and gone, and the messiah prophesised by the polls to take power next year will, in his time, come and go, as well. Since the formal end of communist power, Bulgarians have sampled every political flavour: rebranded red, blue, yellow, and the current three-layered coalition trifle.
The opportunity in green politics is that it is not a single-issue fashionable cause, or at least it should not be. Every decision in every ministerial portfolio can have reference to its environmental impact, and the very notion of an environmental yardstick in decision-making would introduce a refreshing principle in politics – whether something is the correct thing to do. The environmental movement in Bulgaria, such as it is, has another advantage: many ordinary voters, if they can be coaxed to the polls, are already on its side, if only because they share the same blanket objection to all development.
Even if they do not separate their refuse, seek out biodegradable shampoos and detergents, and anguish about whether their petrol-driven trip is really necessary (by the way, the appalling driving habits on the country’s roads are fuel-wasters in themselves and should have a carbon footprint tally all of their own), people would generally prefer to do without some of the more egregious, more obvious environmental problems like air pollution.
A factor that could make Bulgaria’s green movement politically marketable in future is that many of them are young – although this is equally a liability because it aggravates the movement’s simplistic approach – and therefore, unlike so many of the current generation of political and public “leaders”, are untainted by the communist past or its present-day networks. When considering what and who could emerge after all the current politicians and parties have bleached away, it may be worth a look at a new generation, coloured green.
This is Tarot stuff, of course. Not a prediction nor a certainty, just a possible scenario of what, if the circumstances allow and if people change themselves, could yet be.
