Simeon Radev about the Rapprochement with Russia - a Successful Move in the Foreign Policy of Dr. Konstantin Stoilov

Every book by the great Bulgarian writer, ethnopsychologist, memoirist, diplomat and historiographer, Simeon Radev, is a real challenge and an occasion to view our past and the historical facts from a different angle, much richer and more meaningful.

In the present study - Dr. Stoilov’s Foreign Policy and the Rapprochement with Russia – in Documents, Conversations with Contemporaries and Personal Memories - Simeon Radev recreates the real drama of events, the spirit and atmosphere of the political life in Bulgaria during the term in office of Dr. Konstantin Stoilov and his government’s efforts to restore the broken diplomatic relations with Russia.

It will not be an exaggeration to say that we are yet to get acquainted with many unpublished and ‘arrested’ works of this unusually gifted and rarely talented Bulgarian writer. By a concurrence of circumstances, many of them, both during his lifetime and after his death in 1967, with the exception of the two volumes of Builders of Modern Bulgaria and Early Memories, were doomed to sink into oblivion for decades. Among the many reasons for this, there is one that was looked upon as a protest against the new government.

Shortly after the ‘victory’ of September 9, 1944, influential political figures from the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences proposed that Simeon Radev should be awarded the title of Academician. However, Radev flatly declined the ‘honour’ and fell into disgrace. Later on, pressed by scarcity and in order to provide for his family, Radev took the advice of Todor Pavlov and agreed to write his memoirs of the time he lived in against a modest remuneration. The fruit of his hard work – about a dozen bulky volumes of Bulgarian history - were never published. They remained ‘arrested’ in the archives since they did not comply with the established ideological paradigm of class-party approach to historical events.


The unpublished works of Simeon Radev are now kept in the archives of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, waiting to be published.

Among these are: The Bulgarian Governments 1899-1901 and their Problems, My Stay in Belgrade and My Mission in Paris, The National Question during the First Term in Office of Dr. Danev’s Government, People and Events of My Time, in six volumes, etc., (to mention just some of them).

One of these is Dr. Stoilov’s Foreign Policy and the Rapprochement with Russia – in Documents, Conversations with Contemporaries and Personal Memories, written more than 50 years ago but coming out only now, after Radoslav Popov’s book Bulgaria and Russia - 1894-1898, published in 1985, in which the author repeatedly refers to Simeon Radev’s unpublished work and writes on the three main topics: the foreign policy of Dr. Stoilov’s government, the anointing of Knyaz Boris and the rapprochement with Russia and the problem of schism and the emigration issue, analysed in the three chapters of Radev’s book. In her History of Diplomacy Elena Statelova also quotes Simeon Radev. Several modern annalists have devoted works to the time of Dr. Konstantin Stoilov’s government: Vasilka Tankova, Todor Panayotov, Vasil Kolev and others.

The publication of Simeon Radev’s book on the foreign policy of Konstantin Stoilov so many years after it was written (1961) in no way diminishes its importance. The extensive factual material collected through an in-depth study of the Austrian archives, personal conversations and observations, including many public events and a gallery of political portraits, contribute to its significance.

The investigated period is not long, spanning from 1894 to 1899, the time when Dr. Konstantin Stoilov’s government was in power and when diplomatic relations with Russia were recovered, following the 8-year break during the term in office of Stefan Stambolov.

On May 19, 1894, Prince Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg unexpectedly accepted the 14th resignation of Stefan Stambolov. Until then, his supporters thought him irreplaceable. “Who can replace him?”, asks the Svoboda (Freedom) newspaper. Radev’s study starts from that moment on and with the answer to that question. Still at the very beginning, the leaders appear on the political scene one by one with their individual features: Dragan Tsankov with his opportunism and bigotry; Petko Karavelov – standing firm behind his principles, but indecisive and choleric; Grigor Nachovich – with a realistic mind and firm convictions but with elusive techniques and overwhelmed with dark passions; Dimitar Grekov – a wise mind in a wild personality; Stefan Stambolov - a former revolutionary who quickly matured for the responsibilities of the State government; Konstantin Stoilov - capable to justify the people’s hopes for reconciliation with Russia and overcome Ferdinand’s wayward mistrust and suspiciousness and to convince the Great Powers that there will be no turn in the foreign policy.

But who of them and which party could head the next government?
The choice, according to Simeon Radev, was determined by the internal political circumstances because two of the eminent leaders - Petko Karavelov, jailed in the Black Mosque and the self-exiled Dragan Tsankov – were excluded as possible contenders. The leaders of the former Unification Party – Ivan St. Geshov and Mihail Madjarov who had recently returned from emigration in Russia – were already obedient to Prince Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg, and nobody gave a thought to Grigor Nachovich any more. There was no formal obstacle only for Dr. Vasil Radoslavov but he did not enjoy Ferdinand’s confidence since he had earlier demanded the re-election of Battenberg (p. 7-8).

Dr. Konstantin Stoilov remained the only possible choice for a prime minister, possessing the necessary training, qualities and background. He had graduated from the famous American Robert College in Istanbul and in Law from the Heidelberg University, he spoke several languages ​​- German, English, Latin, Greek, French and Turkish, in the most dramatic and uncertain nights for Bulgaria after the dethronement of Battenberg, he was entrusted the country’s foreign policy by Stefan Stambolov and had gained considerable political experience.

“Even the most sceptical put their faith in him,” concludes Simeon Radev. Only Prince Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg had misgivings about him and his distrust remained during his entire tenure because Ferdinand was aware of the sympathy which Battenberg felt to the head of his political cabinet. He knew that Stoilov was aware of his fickle character and Ferdinand knew about Stoilov’s attempts to bring Battenberg back to the throne. He was also informed about Stoilov’s statement at the secret meeting of the majority on the eve of his election: “He is not prepared to be knjaz, but he was born to be a knjaz”.

The political landscape and the focus on some traits of Stoilov’s character show the significant role which the subjective factor – the personality – played in history. This is one of the great virtues in the works of Simeon Radev. They make his historiographic works alive and populated with interesting characters who influence the historical processes.


The government of Dr. Konstantin Stoilov set a new course for Bulgaria’s domestic and foreign policy. By means of the numerous restrictive laws passed in parliament for a year and a half he strengthened internal order and security in the country. In his foreign policy he relied on both the Treaty of Berlin and the Exarchate Firman to strengthen the national sovereignty and create conditions for Bulgaria’s national unification.

Stoilov vindicated this position with regard to Russia and Turkey, the Great Powers and Austria. “He showed valuable qualities in his foreign policy”, notes Simeon Radev. The National Assembly passed two important laws: one on excise duties and another – on patents, which Austria was refusing to acknowledge to its subjects on the basis of Capitulations Bulgaria inherited from Turkey as its vassal principality. During the negotiations on the excise duties in Vienna, held by Stoilov in person, he stood up so firmly that Nachovich, for whom the friendship with Austria was a dogma, got scared and warned him that if it things came to a break-up he would leave the government.

Statesmanship and composure are typical of Dr. Konstantin Stoilov, according to Simeon Radev. In 1897, during the uprising in Crete and the Greek-Turkish war, he personally defied the opposition which insisted that the government should take advantage of the weakness of Turkey and obtain a decision on the Macedonian issue. Guided by the maxim that politics is the policy of the possible rather than the desired solutions, Stoilov managed to get Sultan’s Decrees for three bishops in Macedonia and Bulgarian consulates in Turkey under the name of commercial agencies and a promise to connect the Bulgarian railways to the Turkish ones via Kyustendil and Kumanovo (p.35- 37).

However, it is not the benefits gained for Macedonia and the two important laws on excise duties and patents or the numerous other laws adopted by Parliament, that determine the place and importance of Dr. Konstantin Stoilov in Bulgaria’s political history. According to Simeon Radev, the most significant and most important event assigning him a deserved place in Bulgarian history is the restoration of the broken diplomatic relations with Russia and the recognition of Knyaz Ferdinand. This is a milestone in Bulgaria’s policy with Russia and in the attitudes of the Great Powers towards Bulgaria.

Simeon Radev follows in detail the path walked to the rapprochement with Russia and reveals the interests of each of the Great Powers in the process of Knyaz Ferdinand’s recognition.


Simeon Radev presents a multilayer display of the internal political environment in which the Russophiles had a majority in the government. Any rush on their part could be detrimental to the cause. The rapprochement which had become a credo for Konstantin Stoilov’s foreign policy could encounter resistance on the part of the Great Powers if not well prepared in advance. It could even be rejected by Russia itself. Ferdinand was not less hard nut to crack, in whom only Turkey had confidence, but not the Great Powers. With his impatience and unbridled character, striving to receive recognition from Russia as soon as possible and to strengthen the Coburg dynasty, he could frustrate the policy for restoration of the broken diplomatic relations with Russia, followed by Stoilov. The rumours that some conditions had been set to Bulgaria by Russia, spread by the opposition, were also a threat. They were constantly igniting fears that Russia would demand from Bulgaria to concede to it the ports of Varna and Burgas, guide its foreign policy, conclude a defensive and offensive alliance with it and entrust senior command positions in the army to Russian officers. This distracted Ferdinand and he would stay awake all night. Of course, there was nothing true about these rumours, says Simeon Radev, because before his return from emigration, Dragan Tsankov had personally heard from Girs that Petersburg wanted nothing from Bulgaria. The only condition was that it should not be an enemy of Slavs and of the Orthodox religion. Last but not least was the pressure on the part of the people who found that the relationships with Bulgaria’s Liberator, Russia, were not normal.

However, an event of external nature - the illness and death of the Russian Emperor - accelerated the rapprochement.

The consideration and hesitations regarding the telegrams of condolence to the successor to the throne, Nicholas II, are shown in all their complexity. These were aerobatics in diplomacy. Nobody in the Bulgarian historiography has analysed with such subtlety the diplomatic moves as Simeon Radev. Throughout the study readers can breathe the atmosphere of the time in which these historical processes took place, we can feel the real life, the drama and responsibility of that historical moment. The psychological and historiographic details come to life through actual meetings, discussions and conversations.

Simeon Radev analyses in detail and not as an end in itself the role of the subjective factor in historical events and Konstantin Stoilov’s decision to send two telegrams of condolence on the death of Alexander III to the new Emperor. The hesitation of Nachovich and Ferdinand as to the need of doing that and to whom the telegrams should be addressed, the doubts of MPs after Russia’s response, show the importance of small steps in politics with regard to the Great Powers, in this particular case - Russia.

The events that followed - the anointing of Knyaz Boris, the preparation, the emotions of Clementina – a deeply believing Catholic – who had to become reconciled with her son’s baptising against her will, Ferdinand’s visit to the Pope to pray for approval of the transition to the Orthodox religion, enrich the historiographic landscape and thicken the picture of our past, lacking until now a personal approach in the explanation of historical facts. Evidence in this direction is also the handing of the firman after the recognition of Ferdinand, his visit to Istanbul and to Russia.

The problem of lifting the schism is also analysed from various aspects. After the rapprochement, this issue again came to the fore because Russia was seeking to unite the Orthodox Church. A retreat connected with the lifting of the schism, desired by Russia, would have meant the removal of the Exarchate from Constantinople and depriving Bulgarians from their representative to the Sultan. And bishops in Macedonia would become dependent of the Greek Patriarch.

These concerns are elucidated in detail in connection with the emigration question that emerged after the mutinies in Russe of 1886-1887 when part of the officers involved in dethroning Battenberg emigrated to Russia and later on became a burden for the Russian government.
It is impossible to mention all the merits in Simeon Radev’s analysis of the policy of Dr. Konstantin Stoilov because although his attention is focused on it, he also devoted a considerable space to the other figures in Bulgaria’s political life, such as Teodor Teodorov, Dragan Tsankov, Vasil Radoslavov, Dimitar Grekov, Alexander Lyapchev, Malinov, Girs, Lobanov, Ferdinand and others.

Simeon Radev is capable of turning history into literature and literature into history. His approach to the analysis of historical events makes all his books great and important literary works, expanding our knowledge of the past, acquainting us unostentatiously with the history of diplomacy and politics, creating a gallery of portraits of Bulgaria’s political leaders, teaching us to defend our national interests with wisdom and dignity.

Прочети цялата новина

Свързани новини: