Upcoming Events

 	
СОФИЙСКИ ФОРУМ ЗА СИГУРНОСТ
SOFIA SECURITY FORUM 
www.sofiaforum.bg

С Т А Н О В И Щ Е
На Софийския форум за сигурност

ОТНОСНО: дискусия „Националното измерение на Европейската програма за отбранителна промишленост: интегриран подход между институции, индустрия и наука"


Приветстваме идеята за търсене на възможно най-добрия механизъм взаимодействие между институциите, индустрията и науката в областта на производство на отбранителни продукти. Това напълно съответства на амбициите за модернизиране на Българската армия, така и на Европейския подход за повишаване на отбранителния капацитет на Европа. 
Български фирми и научни звена могат успешно да произвеждат въоръжение, техника и продукти за нуждите на Българската армия, за отделните страни-членки на ЕС и НАТО или да участват в общоевропейски проекти. Особено важно е намирането на възможността български компании да се привлекат в производството на продукти за българската отбрана и сигурност. Това ще позволи част от бюджетните средства да се реализират в страната, както и да се изнася продукция за други страни. Понастоящем общите европейски средства за съвместна разработка и закупуване на въоръжение и техника са относително малки, но амбицията на ЕК е в следващия бюджетен период да има около 100 млрд. евро за такива проекти. Освен това, се очаква европейските държави да увеличат разходите си за отбрана. За 2024 година те са около 326 млрд. евро. 
Общият анализ показва, че все още малко български фирми участват в модернизацията на БА. Малък е и броят на фирмите, които са включени в различни европейски проекти, най-често като част от консорциуми без да имат водеща роля в тях. 
Сериозен проблем представлява непропорционалното разпределение на Европейската отбранителна и технологична база. Основните предприятия, които произвеждат цели отбранителни продукти, които имат и по-голяма стойност, са в страните, чиято промишленост е изградена на базата на НАТО/ЕС стандарти, докато  страните, които са се присъединили към НАТО и ЕС голяма част от продукцията е все още по стандарти на бившия Варшавски договор. Ето защо следва да се настоява пред органите на ЕС за насочване на общи фондове и проекти, които да намалят това неравенство. 
Военното дело навлиза в нова фаза, която води до появата на нови или промяната на значението на съществуващи отбранителни продукти, като безпилотните системи /морски и въздушни/, нови системи за комуникация, изкуствен интелект, роботизирани и автономни системи, новости във военната медицина и други. Все по-мащабното се използват хибридни средства за постигане на военните цели. Всичко това дава основание да се счита, че по-широк брой фирми могат да се включат в производството на продукти за нуждите на отбраната. В националните и европейските програми за модернизация на въоръжените сили следва да се привличат както предприятията от традиционната отбранителната индустрия, така и нови предприятия от гражданския сектор, институти и университети. 
България, както и другите държави-членки на ЕС и НАТО, ще изразходва в идните години сериозен процент от БВП. Приоритет на правителството следва да бъде в две насоки, а именно придобиване на най-нови и ефективни продукти, като в същото време максимална част от бюджета за отбрана се реинвестира в страната, което ще способства за развитие на българската промишленост. От друга страна, със съдействието на държавни органи следва да се подпомагат български предприятия да участват в европейски проекти или проекти на други държави и чрез това да се придобиват нови технологии. 
Подпомагането на български фирми да участват в европейски консорциуми или в създаване на общи предприятия за консолидиране на отбранителното производство в Европа също следва да бъде приоритет на правителството.  
Възможни решения.
1. Да се установи нов подход на взаимодействие между Министерството на отбраната и фирмите, произвеждащи продукти за нуждите на отбраната. Една от възможностите за това е като още на етап планиране на отбранителни способности се провеждат консултации с фирми, които биха могли да участват в производството им. Приоритет да се дава на закупуване на продукти от български производители при условие, че продуктите притежават необходимото качество и ефективност. Това следва да се прилага успоредно с ясни принципи, антикорупционни политики и установяване на конкурентна среда. 
Целесъобразно е този процес на взаимодействие да бъде изведен на ниво заместник-министър на отбраната или заместник-министър на икономиката. 
Като цяло трябва да се установи по-тясно сътрудничество между държавни органи, фирми, научни организации, тинк-танкове и други с оглед на представяне на държавния интерес на различни нива.
Например, Софийският форум за сигурност участва в европейска платформа EDINA – European Defense in a New Age. Анализатори от различни европейски държави изготвят и представят на органи на ЕС позиции по въпроси на отбраната и сигурността. Чрез тази платформа ние изразяваме позиции в интерес на България, но по-тясното сътрудничество с министерства и ведомства ще бъде от взаимна полза. 
2. Процесът на взаимодействие между МО и фирмите би могъл да се подобри ако се създаде единна информационна платформа, която да съдържа информация за необходимите отбранителни продукти, които Министерството на отбраната ще търси, както и данни за българските фирми и техните производства. Съществуването на такава информационна среда може да си използва също и за информиране за възможности по линия на Европейския фонд за отбрана, ЕДА или други инструменти, както и да се координира като цяло участието на български фирми в европейски проекти. Това ще облекчи и процеса на подпомагане на участието в проекти по линия на НАТО и ЕС, тъй като за участие в някои се изисква издаване на документ за подкрепа от МО, сертификати, или осигуряване на финансово участие на държавата.
3. За производство на някои изделия, които са на висока стойност или ще се изисква дългосрочност и значителни бюджетни средства, е възможно да се създаде държавно предприятие, в което да се инвестират целево средства. По този начин ще има реинвестиране на държавни средства, а производството ще остане в страната. 
Също така, целесъобразно е да се оцени възможността за консолидиране под някаква форма на изследователски и научни звена на БАН, държавни университети, Института по отбрана, а възможно и частни компании, за участие в разработване или тестване на отбранителни продукти. Има подобни добри практики в други държави. 
4. Да се даде възможност за финансиране на фирми или отделни проекти за производство на отбранителни продукти чрез Българската банка за развитие. Следва да се отбележи, че Европейската инвестиционна банка започна от 2024 година да отпуска средства за нуждите на отбранителните производства. 
5. Да има информационни кампании, насочени към фирми от гражданското производство, които могат да произвеждат продукти за нуждите на отбраната. Партньори в тези кампании могат да бъдат различните индустриални камари и асоциации. Софийският форум за сигурност си партнира с Българската търговско-промишлена палата за информиране на членовете на палатата за възможностите за участие в различни европейски проекти. 
6. Министерството на отбраната и Министерството на икономиката и индустрията да оценят кои проекти по линия на Европейския фонд за отбрана, ЕДА, ПЕСКО, военната мобилност, проектите на НАТО, различни регионални инициативи и други представляват интерес за страната и да насърчават фирми и организации да участват в тях. 
Оставаме на разположение за бъдещи съвместни дейности и инициативи. 
С уважение,            
                                                                                                         
                                                         Йордан Божилов
                                                             Председател на Софийския форум за сигурност 




Conference on Black Sea Security, Bucharest, Romania, 06 February 2025

Speaking Notes of Mr. Yordan Bozhilov
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The Black Sea holds immense significance for Bulgaria, impacting every aspect of our life—from transportation to culture, economy, and beyond. It is particularly vital for those living in settlements around the sea basin, as their lives are deeply connected to the sea. The Black Sea serves as a hub of economic growth, home to a coastal population that constitutes 10% of Bulgaria's total.
The Bulgarian Black Sea coast is not only a popular tourist destination but also a crucial pillar of our economy. Tourism plays a vital role, while maritime transport is equally significant, with approximately 70% of Bulgaria's transport activities passing through its seaports.
Beyond its economic importance, the Black Sea region is a key link between Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Its vast gas reserves and potential for energy connectivity—from south to north and east to west—underscore its strategic significance. The ability to transfer electricity and diversify gas supply routes further enhances its role in regional stability.
Bulgaria, alongside Romania and Türkiye, recognizes the immense potential of the Black Sea and works together to manage risks while seizing opportunities. However, we all understand that without security, the opportunity to develop our economic potential cannot be realized.
First Thesis: The Region is Important for Both the Black Sea Countries and for Europe
Unfortunately, until recently, the region did not attract much attention from the EU and NATO. Bulgaria still lacks a commonly accepted strategy for the Black Sea or a unified assessment of the security situation, largely due to political instability over the past three years. Moreover, political divisions have further complicated the process of forming a cohesive approach.
The war in Ukraine represents the gravest threat—not only to Ukraine's independence and territorial integrity but to the entire region. Russia will continue this war until it reaches its ultimate goals—unless it is stopped.
Russia maintains military superiority in the region, while NATO faces certain capability gaps. Most analysts believe that, at this stage, there is no immediate military threat to Bulgaria or other NATO littoral states, primarily because there is no land border with Russia. However, incidents cannot be ruled out.
Second Thesis: Russia Still Fears a NATO Response but is Unclear About the U.S. Position
At this stage, Russia is unlikely to directly attack NATO countries militarily. Its provocative activities remain below the threshold of NATO’s Article 5. However, this does not mean the risks should be underestimated.
Third Thesis: Russia is Testing Our Reactions, and We Lack a Unified Response
Russia poses significant hybrid threats—not just through disinformation and propaganda but also through a wide range of destabilizing activities. In 2022, Russia attempted to blackmail Bulgaria by halting gas supplies, as 80% of Bulgaria’s gas was imported from Russia at the time. Thanks to allied commitments, Bulgaria successfully adapted.
Another concerning example occurred in 2023, when Russia declared a large portion of Bulgaria’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) as a "dangerous zone for navigation" under the pretext of military exercises. This not only disrupted maritime traffic but also obstructed key activities, such as fishing and gas exploration. Bulgaria’s response was limited to sending a diplomatic note to Russia. Such actions clearly contradict international maritime law and violate Bulgaria’s sovereign rights. This issue should have been raised more forcefully in the International Maritime Organization and other forums, as it could set a dangerous precedent worldwide.
Furthermore, Russia’s activities, such as jamming or distorting GPS signals, pose a threat to transport and other sectors. Russia is gradually testing our reactions, much like boiling a frog slowly. These activities remain below the NATO Article 5 threshold, making it crucial to establish a coordinated and decisive response.
Fourth Thesis: The Black Sea Concentrates Many and Various Risks
•	Floating Mines: These not only pose a risk to ships but also increase insurance costs for vessels, raising overall service prices. Many shipowners avoid deploying new ships in the Black Sea, relying only on older vessels, which adds additional risks. Cruise liners, in particular, are avoiding Black Sea ports altogether.
•	Environmental Issues: Oil spills, sunken ships, and other ecological threats pose long-term risks to regional stability and safety.
All these risks—combined with Russia’s aggressive behavior—demand greater attention from NATO and the EU. Countering Russian aggression and addressing these security challenges require the deployment of additional joint military capabilities and national capacity-building efforts.
Russia’s actions must be exposed in international organizations, as they could set a dangerous precedent for global security.
Fifth Thesis: The Risk of Weapons Leaving the Battlefield Must Be Addressed
There is a serious risk of weapons from the conflict in Ukraine falling into the hands of criminal groups and terrorists. The possibility of such weapons being used in hybrid activities by Russian or pro-Russian forces cannot be ignored.
Understanding the Interests of Key Players in the Region
Russia’s Objectives:
1.	Russia considers the Black Sea-Balkan region crucial to its strategic interests and will strive at all costs to retain occupied territories, particularly in Ukraine. If necessary, it may seek to seize the entire Ukrainian coastline before any peace agreement or truce is reached.
2.	Russia aims to undermine NATO and EU unity, primarily through hybrid operations targeting individual member states. The Black Sea has become a focal point for these efforts.
3.	Moldova and Georgia are particularly vulnerable to Russian influence.
4.	Russia may seek to halt or freeze the war in exchange for sanctions relief while retaining its occupied territories. However, this would not mean abandoning its ultimate goal of subjugating Ukraine.
5.	For Russia, everything is a single battlefield—it pursues its objectives across different territories and at different times.
United States Position:
1.	The U.S. is focused on reaching a strategic deal and assessing its outcomes.
2.	Ukraine is not a core U.S. national interest, though Washington remains committed to supporting it.
3.	Former President Trump, if reelected, would likely oppose deploying American troops to European soil.
4.	The U.S. may seek to distance Russia from China and Iran, particularly if Iran becomes the next major foreign policy focus.
European Perspectives and the Need for a Unified NATO-EU Response
Different European countries have varying attitudes toward the region. While France and Italy maintain a presence, others seem largely disengaged.
NATO and the EU must avoid focusing solely on specific regions, such as the Baltics, and instead take a comprehensive view of Russia’s actions. For Moscow, every front is interconnected—it determines when, where, and how to advance its interests.
Russia’s objectives within NATO and the EU remain purely destructive, regardless of how they are pursued. As such, Brussels must swiftly develop a unified position with clear, actionable measures to strengthen security in the Black Sea. This is particularly critical for the EU.
Finally, Russia’s influence over our societies through internal actors poses a significant challenge. Addressing this issue requires collective awareness, resilience, and decisive action.
Thank you.



SECURITY RISKS AND CHALLENGES IN THE BLACK SEA REGION

In the light of the developments caused by the Russian aggression against Ukraine, the strategic value of the Black Sea region acquires a renewed and more consistent relevance. Given these circumstances, it is high time for a strategic EU approach to the Black Sea, which should aim at a more coordinated response to the threats and challenges in the wider region.
The region is important for the EU from many perspectives. Just to mention some: Enlargement policies, energy and energy security, environmental policies and dealing with environmental risks, transport, tourism, and others.
There are important underwater communications. Black sea is important for the global food security.
It is important from the point of view of the future of the European security architecture, and also with the global legal order. Everyone is looking at how the war is developing, what are the actions of NATO and the EU in addressing Russia's war against Ukraine. This is also important for the determination of the global South. This has implications for the future settlement of the world.
=================================================
Security issues are now prevalent in the region. The Black Sea region represents an extremely complex and complicated security environment. 
1. Russia's war against Ukraine is the biggest threat to regional and European peace and security. The war can still take on different dimensions and it is not clear when and how it will end. Russia has the potential to fight a long war.
I don't think Ukraine was Putin's ultimate goal. He thinks in other categories. Since his power in Russia is unlimited and unchallenged, he himself determines the future of the country according to his vision.
His views raising Russia as a global player, and tries to restore a mini USSR, creating zones of influence.
Russia has military superiority in the Black Sea, while other countries have deficits and cannot be overcome at sea due to Turkey's position on the straits.
NATO is strengthening the eastern flank by deploying land forces.

2. New problems associated with the war
- Thousands of incidents of air, water and land pollution and the degradation of ecosystems have already been identified. They affect not only Ukraine but also the neighboring countries.
- Explosions of ammunitions are associated with spread of toxic gases and particles. 
- Fires in forested areas cause damaging the entire ecosystem. 
- The weapons used during this war will raise the carbon footprint in the region.
- Multiple industrial facilities, warehouses and factories have been damaged, some storing a range of hazardous substances.
- Air pollution and potentially serious contamination of ground and surface waters is a huge problem. Russia is targeting also Ukraine’s water infrastructure, including pumping stations and purification plants.
- Large volumes of military waste, including destroyed military vehicles, creates a major clean-up challenge.
- The use of explosive weapons in populated areas also creates pollution from building materials including asbestos, metals, and combustion products. 
 - On the first day of the invasion, gamma radiation in the Chernobyl zone was reported to be approximately 28 times the annual limit. It was the result of heavy vehicle movements.
- There are many outdated coal mines in the Donbas region. And these mines pose a huge danger in Ukraine. Because when a mine is shut down it cannot be abandoned for good.
- Huge amount of land mines are planted on the Ukrainian territory.
- Blocking Ukraine's exports
- Blocking by Russia of the EEZ of the Black Sea countries /Bulgaria/.
- Free floating sea mines. 
- Millions of refugees and internally displaced persons.
- Devastated Ukrainian economy, destroyed houses and infrastructure. 

3. Besides the war, there are many other problems.
States are very heterogeneous in their constitution, interests and strategic goals.
- Old unresolved issues/conflicts – Transnistria, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Armenia and Azerbaijan.
- Slow progress by countries to modernize their democracies, societies and economies. Weak economies, weak democracies. Russia has mechanisms to influence internal processes.
- Turkey is a special player. Turkey takes the role of custodian of the  Montreux Convention and doesn’t allow entrance of military vessels of non-littoral states. NATO will have deficits in the naval domain. 


4. Russia is ready to escalate.
Russia can use all these vulnerabilities to its advantage.
Russia has influence over old and new risks and can use them to its advantage. Russia has military superiority in the Black Sea region.

Russia will continue using all sorts of malicious influences on our countries for years, like disinformation, propaganda, cyber-attacks.
Nationalism, populism, anti-democracy, anti-EU - all these are parties that are ideologically close to the Kremlin.

Russia may try to challenge NATO unity through limited aggression against a NATO state. Will the country itself invoke Article 5 and will others risk nuclear war?
The Black Sea is the most vulnerable region now for aggression and provocations against the EU and NATO. Because of the overlap of different risks, because of the weakness of democracies in different countries, because of different interests and especially because of the revisionist Russia. We must be ready to respond. We must have a good analysis and predictions about possible provocations. Let's be ready for a collective response.
It is necessary to have a better knowledge of the region and the ongoing processes. Obviously, there are different EU policies that are intertwined in the region, but how do we have a common approach? Is an approach like RAN possible? To cover many things in a single approach, research and policy proposals?
Many analysts believe that the EU should develop its own long-term strategy for Russia.



Ladies and Gentlemen, 
Today’s discussion is dedicated to the Black Sea region. I remember 20 years ago, when I would come to this building as a representative of the Republic of Bulgaria to meet with representatives of all Black Sea countries to exchange information about the armed forces and exercises in the Black Sea and extend invitations for port visits within the framework of the regional security architecture. This was the spirit of positivism and cooperation, the time for new initiatives for peace and partnership. All our speeches would start with the optimism for the future of the Black Sea region as a crossroads between continents, cultures and economies. This positivism faded in 2008 following the Russian invasion in Georgia and completely disappeared in 2014 after the illegal annexation of the Crimean Peninsula and the military venture in Eastern Ukraine. 
Today full-scale war is back on the continent of Europe. The war Russia is waging against Ukraine brings suffering and destruction not only to the Ukrainian people, but is a blow to the entire system of international relations. It shatters all efforts in the post-World War II period of seeing Europe peaceful and free. A Europe of free peoples that choose their own paths for development or organisations to be part of. 
Despite the Russian disinformation and propaganda, despite the efforts to misrepresent or to paint Ukraine or other states as responsible, we have a touchstone for this war. In periods of such trials, we turn to the wisdom embodied in the philosophical understanding of human nature in the works of the renowned philosophers of our time. One such is Tsvetan Todorov, a Bulgarian and French philosopher, who grew up in Bulgaria but worked in France - one of the founders of contemporary critical humanism. 
Humanism considers human well-being as the ultimate goal of all public actions. Tsvetan Todorov firmly believes that the end does not justify the means, especially if war is the means. Tsvetan Todorov sees another reason for wars. As he puts it: “Power needs no explanation outside of itself; it is an end, not just a means.” He is in line with the German philosopher Immanuel Kant, according to whom “War itself requires no particular motivation; indeed, the desire for glory inspires men to it.” Deep down, I doubt that Russia's war of aggression, will bring Russia any particular glory. As a representative of the humanism Tsvetan Todorov rejects the aggressive war as inhuman.
We pledge solidarity with the Ukrainian people, who are fighting for their nature to be Ukrainian people and not to be formatted according to the image the Kremlin devises for them. This is a fight for the principle of freedom. Because war is not only war for territory. Territory must be respected. This is a key aspect of international relations; however, it is for the people in the territories, about their future. What is unacceptable is not only breaching the borders but also the submission of the population, forceful deportation, castigating people and inflicting unbearable suffering on civilians. 
The Russian war of aggression tests not only Ukraine and its people, but it is also an attack on the security and perspectives for development of the Black Sea region. The region is vital for Bulgaria and other regional countries. In our interest is building security, stability, prosperity and resilience against territorial and economic threats in the Black Sea region. The Black Sea has a great potential as an important transport, energy and economic corridor that provides connectivity between Europe and Asia. This potential is seriously impaired today. 
The importance of the Black Sea transcends the regional aspect. In the context of Russia's war against Ukraine, the geostrategic importance of the region is clearly seen. We have witnessed how Russia's blocking of Ukrainian grain exports had negative impact on the global food security. Stability and security of the region is directly linked to the stability and security in Europe. 
The Black Sea is one of the regions where Russia projects military force against freedom and democracy to impose its vision of a new world order. The events of the past year have confirmed that Russia is using all means at its disposal to maintain its sphere of influence in the region.
Russia’s military buildup in the Black Sea created significant imbalance in the military powers in the region in favor of Russia, which is a matter of serious concern for the other littoral states. Russia is expanding its control over the northwestern Black Sea basin, adjacent to the territorial waters of other riparian states, where it imposes restrictions on economic activities, poses direct challenges to maritime transport and impedes the freedom of navigation.
Obviously, we are facing complex security environment in the Black Sea region, combination of military and hybrid threats. We shall not forget the frozen conflicts or vulnerabilities of critical infrastructure. In this context it is necessary to look for broader approaches to solving security issues in the region, as they have implications going far beyond the regional dimension.
Thank you for your attention.


HOW DOES BULGARIA SEE THE EUROPEAN DEFENSE COOPERATION?

SUMMARY
1. Bulgaria supports the development of European defense and participates in all common initiatives, although it has no separate strategy for participation in them.
2. Efforts to build European defense should not duplicate NATO, which remains the backbone of common defense, especially territorial defense. 
3. Bulgaria sees the development of the European capabilities as a tool to cope with numerous challenges.
4. The country's participation in European defense projects is an opportunity to increase the capabilities of the Armed Forces and to modernize the technological and production base.


Undoubtedly, the Russian aggression against Ukraine is the most serious challenge to peace and security of Europe and globally. It was a wakeup call for many politicians in the country that security and defense have to be taken more seriously. The question of the role of NATO and the EU in the defense of Europe and in particular of Bulgaria became central in the public debates, which included the role and participation of Bulgaria in common defense.
It has to be noted that despite the predominant assessment that the war in Ukraine is the most serious challenge to the European peace and security, the attitude of politicians and Bulgarian society towards the war per se and towards Russia itself remains not clear-cut. After the start of hostilities, the approval of Putin among Bulgarians dropped dramatically, but the majority of Bulgarian society still keeps a positive attitude towards Russia. This can be explained primarily by the long-standing historical, cultural and other ties between the two countries along with other factors. At the same time, the vast majority of Bulgarian people remain staunch Europeans and Euro-Atlanticists.
On November 3, 2022, the newly elected Parliament, by a large majority condemned the aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine as “the most significant threat to peace and security in Europe”. With the same decision, it voted to provide direct military aid to Ukraine, but some of the parties, socialists and nationalists, categorically opposed the donation of arms to Ukraine. Some political parties and many Bulgarian citizens still see the war in Ukraine as a bilateral conflict between Russia and Ukraine, and not as a major geostrategic rift and a crisis of the international security architecture.
At the same time it is hard to define “the position of the Bulgarian government” regarding the war or military assistance to Ukraine. There are rather diverse positions of different governments depending on political parties participating in the coalitions. Since 2021 Bulgaria has been in a constant political crisis with frequent changes of governments. For example, the previous regular government in June 2022 assessed the Russian military aggression in Ukraine in a categorical manner “as a threat to peace and security in Europe and a direct challenge to NATO and the EU”. The current caretaker government has a different assessment. This was most clearly expressed by the Minister of Defense on 13.12.2021, who stated in the Parliament that “because of the war in Ukraine there are risks for national security because of the proximity of the conflict, but there is no real threat to the country’s security at the moment”. These risks are seen as a secondary consequence of the war, such as refugees, floating mines in the Black Sea, problems with energy sources, inflation, etc. The war is not perceived as having a direct impact on the country. 
As mentioned above, the population remains divided in the assessment of the war due to many reasons, just to mention the general positive attitude to Russia as a liberator from the Ottoman Empire, cultural ties,  widespread pro-Russian propaganda, divergent messages from different political parties, lack of common strategic communication and many other factors. 
The fact that war is being waged just a few hundred kilometers from the state borders heightens the sense of risk and pushes the politicians to look for means to mitigate that risk. Despite the differences in the assessments of the war, the vast majority of political parties agree that the defense capabilities of the Bulgarian army have to be further developed. Undoubtedly, NATO and the EU are seen as the major factors for protection of the security of the country. Bulgaria strongly supports all measures by NATO and the EU aimed at strengthening the Eastern flank, providing aid, including military, to Ukraine and putting pressure on Russia to stop the aggression and withdraw its troops from the Ukrainian territory. A multinational battalion battle group, led by Italy, was deployed on Bulgarian territory as part of the measures. 

Bulgaria supports the development of the Common Security and Defense Policy and strengthening European defense capabilities. Being on the Eastern border of both the EU and NATO it considers itself particularly vulnerable to external risks and threats. There is an understanding that Europe should develop mechanisms to realize its priorities. In this regard Bulgaria participates in PESCO projects, for example. At the same time, it can be said that the country participates in the construction of European defense with moderate enthusiasm. The main principle which Bulgarian governments follow is that NATO is the core of the collective defense of the whole Euro Atlantic area. It is stated in the national documents that “NATO and the EU should work together, complement each other and do everything possible to strengthen both organizations. NATO remains the main guarantor of security and achieving the strategic autonomy of the EU is possible only on the basis of the transatlantic bond”.
There is a generally accepted position among politicians that Bulgaria’s commitments and cooperation within the CSDP will be compatible with commitments to NATO. A guiding principle is that the efforts to build European defense should not duplicate efforts undertaken within NATO. This is motivated mainly by financial and economic considerations, as the country cannot afford to allocate more resources to defense and create capabilities for the EU separate from those for NATO. Most political parties accept that NATO is the core for collective defense, including the defense of the European continent. European defense is seen as a European pillar of NATO. 
The war in Ukraine put on the political agenda the need for decisive modernization of the Bulgarian armed forces. However, there is no decision to seriously increase the defense budget, which should reach 2% of GDP by 2024.
No doubt Bulgarian Armed Forces need decisive modernization. The biggest challenge is that the main combat systems are produced according to the standards of the former Warsaw Pact, some of them are produced in the former USSR and are morally and physically obsolete, and incompatible with NATO and EU standards. The main goal of the modernization is to acquire new, modern platforms according to NATO/EU standards. Bulgarian MOD developed an ambitious Modernization program, but the lack financial resources cannot ensure its implementation in a short or even medium term. For the development of key capabilities Bulgarian armed forces will rely on the defense budget, but also on the assistance from allies. In this regard participation in multinational projects within the framework of the EU and NATO is an opportunity to acquire new capabilities, as well as to bring the country to a new technological level. The latter is of key importance, as currently the Bulgarian defense industry is practically excluded from the modernization of the army. 
During the last several years Bulgaria acquired different platforms according to NATO standards, including 16 new F-16 Block 70 fighter jets from the USA, transport aircraft, helicopters and vehicles. A project to build two battleships for the NAVY is underway. There are several other priority projects, which include purchasing new infantry fighting vehicles, radars, drones, etc. 
Of key importance for the modernization of the Armed Forces is the high degree of integration in NATO and the EU. This includes more training and exercising with allies, participation of Bulgarian servicemen in joint operations and activities, etc. A serious challenge remains the chronic lack of personnel. Almost 20% of the positions are vacant with no sign of improvement. There are not enough applicants for service in the Armed Forces as the service in the Armed forces remains unattractive, due to low salaries. At the same time over 70% of the military budget goes to the personnel, which reduces the amount for the acquisition of new systems and armament. It is a challenge to strike the balance so that more funds are spent on personnel, new equipment and training.

In recent years, the Bulgarian defense industry has exported production for about 1 billion euros annually mainly to countries in Asia, Africa and the Middle East. In 2022, exports increased many times because of the war in Ukraine. Large quantities of weapons and equipment were exported from Bulgaria to Ukraine through private companies. 
Most of the companies of the Bulgarian Military production complex were built during the Cold War for the production and maintenance of armament and equipment according the former Warsaw Pact standards. Since Bulgarian companies have enough orders for armament and ammunition on the Warsaw Pact standards, they have no interest in switching to NATO standards.
Currently, with few exceptions, all companies are private, which deprives the state of the possibility to influence the production and provide resources. The state has distanced itself from research and development (R&D). Human resources in the field of research are in constant decline, due to low pay, better opportunities in other industries, or better offers from the defense sectors of other countries.
As companies do not produce military equipment, armaments and ammunitions according to NATO/EU standards, the Bulgarian defense industry in practice is excluded from participation in the modernization of the Armed forces and cannot participate in multinational EU or NATO projects. 
For its Modernization plans Bulgaria has to purchase new systems from its allies without being able to engage its own Military-Industrial Complex, something that is considered to be a serious problem. An essential question is about the division of the countries from different parts of Europe into 'producers' and 'buyers'. This issue has to be addressed at the EU level in order to guarantee the geographical balance of the common European defense market. 
It worth mentioning that there is an interest from Western companies in investing in the local production, but the investments are made, conditional on receiving orders for military supplies. An alternative for the participation of Bulgarian companies in multinational projects is to engage high-tech, innovative companies which develop new technologies or intellectual products. There are currently debates in the country as to how the state can support such companies. 

With the exception of participation in several PESCO projects, Bulgaria has not established deeper cooperation within the framework of European defense projects.
Key for the Bulgarian defense is the strategic partnership with the USA. In 2006, an Agreement for Defense Cooperation was signed with the USA, which enables the joint use of facilities and the deployment of a certain number of American troops on Bulgarian territory. Such strategic cooperation has not been implemented with another NATO and/or EU member country. Currently, a multinational NATO battle group, led by Italy, is deployed on Bulgarian territory as part of the efforts to strengthen the Eastern flank. This is considered as an opportunity for the development of deepened bilateral relations between Bulgaria and Italy. 
Bulgaria develops enhanced defense cooperation with neighboring countries, especially with Romania and Greece in areas such as air defense, joint training and others. This cooperation could be extended to the joint acquisition and joint use of armaments and equipment, or the creation of common capabilities, but to date no such project has been implemented.
Bulgaria supports multinational projects in the framework of EU and NATO that would lead to the development of key capabilities and at the same time optimizing the acquisition and maintenance costs of the participating countries. Bulgaria participates in several projects like strategic airlift Capability, AGS, a European missile defense project and others. It is considered that the participation in such projects also leads to better interaction between allies.
Another key issue for the country is to provide support for the investments in the defense companies to manufacture armaments and equipment according to NATO and EU standards. This is why the Bulgarian MOD requires from the foreign companies which participate in the modernization projects to invest in the Bulgarian defense industry. This is seen as an opportunity to obtain not only technology, but also to provide much-needed investment funds. 


ИЗМЕНЕНИЕТО НА КЛИМАТА И ВЪЗДЕЙСТВИЕТО МУ ВЪРХУ СИГУРНОСТТА И ОТБРАНАТА В ЕВРОПА

На 27 октомври 2022г., бе проведена в Националния военен университет „Васил Левски“ научна конференция на тема „Актуални проблеми на сигурността“. 
След официалното откриване от страна на началника на НВУ бригаден генерал Иван Маламов и официалните гости - областният управител на Велико Търново Георги Гугучков и на Бургас проф. д.н. Мария Нейкова, първият пленарен доклад бе представен от ас. д-р Моника Панайотова, в качеството й на заместник-председател на Софийския форум за сигурност и преподавател в катедра „Международни отношения“ в УНСС. 
Д-р Панайотова, заедно с проф. дхн Михаил Харалампиев представиха от различни ъгли предизвикателствата, свързани с „изменението на климата и въздействието му върху сигурността и отбраната в Европа". Стъпвайки върху слогана на НВУ и завета на Апостола на свободата, че „Времето е в нас и ние сме във времето, то нас обръща и ние него обръщаме“, д-р отправи запитване дали ние полагаме достатъчно усилия по темата с климатичните промени, за да го обърнем? Тя насочи вниманието на аудиторията, че глобалното затопляне и климатичните изменения променят тактическата, оперативната и геостратегическата среда, в която оперират военните сили на НАТО и ЕС. В тази връзка д-р Панайотова даде примери как военните сили на двата съюза, както причиняващи, така и понасящи последиците от изменението на климата - повишават устойчивостта на своите способности и инфраструктура, като инвестират в зелени и иновативни технологии и същевременно ограничат своя екологичен отпечатък, без да намалят оперативната си ефективност.
проф. дхн Михаил Харалампиев чрез разработен от него модел, демонстрира негативните ефекти от войната в Украйна върху климата и предизвика аудиторията да търси винаги баланс между универсалните човешки ценности и технологичния прогрес. 
„Началото на 21 век е изпълнено с предизвикателства. Модерният свят е изключително динамичен и в много отношения вече непредвидим. Изправени сме пред множество кризи – политически, междунационални, пандемични, климатични, социално-икономически, демографски и др. Рискът от световна рецесия се увеличава. Всичко това прави проблемите за сигурността, във всичките им семантични аспекти, изключително актуални. И за да не си създаваме страхове, и за да не убиваме надеждата и оптимизма за бъдещето, ще завърша този поглед към съвременната социално-политическа ситуация, с една мисъл на Маргарет Тачър, която казваше: „Предизвикателствата са вълнуващи!“, каза в словото си началникът на НВУ бригаден генерал Иван Маламов. 
Сред уважилите конференцията, инициирана и организирана от подполковник д-р инж. Даниел Берчев, бяха повече от 100 участниците - учени, преподаватели, експерти в областта, курсанти и студенти от България и Югоизточна Европа. 



Briefs

THE NATIONAL DIMENSION OF THE EUROPEAN DEFENCE INDUSTRIAL PROGRAMME

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE BLACK SEA

SECURITY RISKS AND CHALLENGES IN THE BLACK SEA REGION

DEFINING THE BLACK SEA SECURITY

HOW DOES BULGARIA SEE THE EUROPEAN DEFENSE COOPERATION?

CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPLICATIONS ON THE EUROPEAN SECURITY AND DEFENSE