site.btaMedia Review: July 16

BULGARIA'S WITHDRAWAL FROM COALITION OF WILLING FOR UKRAINE

Despite the shift in position and Prime Minister Rumen Radev’s refusal to participate in the Coalition of the Willing meeting in support of Ukraine, Bulgaria’s Foreign Minister Velislava Petrova signed a declaration in Kyiv on Wednesday that recognizes the coalition’s work and expresses “readiness to strengthen” Bulgaria’s participation in it, Dnevnik.bg reports.

The meeting of Southeast European leaders in Kyiv, where Sofia was represented at a lower level than the other participating countries and whose participation had not been mentioned by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, was finally referenced in an evening press release, but even there the declaration was not mentioned.

Bulgaria signed a similar document last year under the previous regular government. Once again, as last year, the only country that did not join the document was Serbia. However, Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic was present in Kyiv and, unsurprisingly, told RTS television that he had come only to state Belgrade’s position. Serbian media reported that he also took part in a ceremony honouring Ukrainian soldiers (something Minister Petrova did as well).

Prime Minister Rumen Radev repeated on Wednesday that Bulgaria had decided not to participate in the Coalition of the Willing because it believed that “strategic awakening” should begin with negotiation efforts and the creation of a “sustainable and effective security system.” He added that he had gone to Paris only out of respect for the host.

***

“There is no change in Bulgaria’s position regarding the Coalition of the Willing. Although Bulgarian Foreign Minister Velislava Petrova signed a declaration together with all the other European foreign ministers in Kyiv, it is merely aspirational in nature. We are not obstructing the Coalition of the Willing and we will not participate in it. We do not intend to provide money to Ukraine, even though the declaration includes commitments for military and financial support,” MP Yavor Gechev of the ruling Progressive Bulgaria said on the morning show of Nova TV.

“Europe will continue to be divided over the war in Ukraine. This dialogue is very sensitive, and every statement is interpreted as being either ‘for’ or ‘against.’ But we are part of Europe,” Gechev explained.

***

Capital.bg reproduces a commentary by Alexander Detev of Deutsche Welle. The author asks whether Bulgaria’s place is among those queueing at petrol stations after Prime Minister Rumen Radev explained that Bulgaria’s place is not within the Coalition 

The leaders of Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Ukraine, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom met with representatives of dozens of other countries, including Moldova and North Macedonia, to discuss support for Kyiv, joint military exercises, and the protection of Europe from Russian threats. According to Bulgaria’s prime minister, the country’s place was not there.

Europe’s leading economies announced the creation of an Anti-Ballistic Missile Coalition, which would provide an “architecture for missile defence designed to deter and counter future missile threats.” Beyond security considerations, this also means multi-million-euro investments in the countries that participate. Bulgaria is absent once again.

Radev claims that such decisions are made only within the context of the EU and NATO, and officially this is indeed the case, but the behaviour of the Bulgarian leader in Paris carries an important symbolic meaning. This is because Europe’s relations with post-war Ukraine and Russia are the elephant in every diplomatic and political room.

Ukraine’s army is considered the strongest and most effective in Europe, as recently confirmed by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio as well. In this context, the partnership with Kyiv is of exceptional importance for Europeans, whose primary goal is to guarantee their own security, expand their military capacity in the coming years, and ensure their protection from Russia, which continues not only with hybrid actions but also with military provocations against NATO.

The security cooperation agreement signed by Andrey Gurov’s caretaker government, but strongly criticized by Rumen Radev, is a symbolic step precisely toward guaranteeing the Bulgarian army’s access to Ukrainian capabilities and know-how.

The bilateral and multilateral European defence projects, whose foundations are being laid at forums such as the one in Paris, will secure investments worth billions. Bulgaria, where in recent years the arms industry has generated more than 4% of GDP according to data from the Ministry of Economy, can only benefit from its participation.

European investments in Bulgarian arms production are also being called into question. Recently, Economy Minister Alexander Pulev announced that the large-scale project of the German arms giant Rheinmetall would be revised.

And finally, the post-war reconstruction of Ukraine is expected to be Europe’s largest project since World War II. It will require enormous investments in infrastructure, energy, and industry. It will create major opportunities for European companies in construction, engineering, energy, and information technology. And who will have no place there? Bulgaria — a country that, at the very moment when the Ukrainian army is turning the tide of the war, and European sanctions together with Ukraine’s advance are pushing the Russian economy toward collapse, is talking about ending military and financial assistance to Kyiv.

***

Valerie Hayer, chair of the Renew Europe group in the European Parliament, told the Bulgarian National Radio that Prime Minister Rumen Radev has used the parade in Paris to make an anti-European statement.

Hayer said she was shocked by the remarks and added that they isolate Bulgaria from the broader European dynamic and undermine trust in the EU and NATO.

“With this statement, he has once again isolated Bulgaria from the European dynamic and from the European commitment, damaging trust both in Bulgaria and in the European Union and NATO. For me, this is a serious political mistake,” she said.

On July 14, Radev said that he had turned down a request from French President Emmanuel Macron for Bulgaria to join the Coalition of the Willing in support of Ukraine.

ENERGY

In a Capital.bg interview, Evangelos Gazis, Aurora’s market lead for South Eastern Europe, says that Bulgaria is becoming one of the first markets in Southeast Europe where batteries are no longer just a future policy objective but an operational part of system dispatch, as the deployment of energy storage systems is unusually concentrated and is being driven strongly by support policies.

Aurora's Q1 2026 Bulgaria Flex report states that more than 14 GWh of energy storage capacity has already been awarded through various support schemes, compared with the 1.28 GW target set in the National Energy and Climate Plan for 2030. If these projects are completed on schedule, Bulgaria could reach approximately 5.5 GW of battery energy storage system (BESS) capacity before 2030.

This means the country could very quickly transition from a market with a shortage of flexibility to one where competition among energy storage systems becomes apparent much earlier than in larger electricity systems.

On 29 April, Bulgaria generated more electricity than its domestic consumption required, while at the same time 1.67 GW of battery capacity was charging, making batteries a significant source of daytime demand.

As a result, Bulgaria's role is changing - from a net exporter with conventional baseload generation and growing solar capacity to a regional flexibility hub: a country that absorbs low-cost electricity during periods of surplus, reduces renewable curtailment, and can potentially export electricity or offset imports during evening peak demand hours.

Asked whether it is too early to describe Bulgaria as a potential regional energy storage hub, Gazis says: “It is not too early to say that the first signs are already visible, but it is probably too early to call Bulgaria a mature energy storage hub. Building such a hub requires more than just installed capacity. It also depends on these assets operating consistently across the day-ahead, intraday, and balancing markets, reliable availability of interconnection capacity, and a proven track record of bankable revenues.

Interconnection capacity, congestion, emergency outages, distribution limits, and the integration of intraday and balancing markets will determine how much of this theoretical regional optimization can actually take place. Cross-border interconnections enable batteries to monetize regional price differences, but grid constraints will determine the extent to which Bulgaria can practically function as a regional energy storage hub.

***

A piece in Sega.bg caps that the Kozloduy nuclear power plant funnels hundreds of millions to Lukoil and thermal power plants, as electricity subsidies are draining the nuclear power plant's finances

The financial position of Kozloduy Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) is deteriorating. The company's profit has fallen sharply—from BGN 221 million in 2024 to just BGN 12 million last year. There are many reasons for this decline. Prof. Georgi Kaschiev, who was dismissed a few days ago as chairman of the plant's board after serving only three months, pointed to several of them: poor management, excessively inflated expenses, and problematic public procurement procedures and contracts.

The nuclear expert revealed that last year the nuclear plant had to take out a loan to cover salaries and other urgent operating expenses.

MP Vladislav Panev of Continue the Change highlighted another reason for the dramatic decline in Kozloduy NPP's profits: what he described as the irrational redistribution of billions of leva in energy-sector subsidies.

“The contribution of the plant to the Electricity System Security Fund in 2025 increased to BGN 589 million (compared with BGN 389 million in 2024). These are contributions determined by the government and paid when the price of the electricity sold exceeds a certain level, essentially a kind of windfall tax,” Panev commented in a post on Facebook.

The purpose of these contributions is for companies such as Kozloduy NPP, which produce electricity cheaply and earn strong profits when market electricity prices are high, to support companies for which electricity costs are higher. This problematic redistribution takes place precisely through the Electricity System Security Fund.

Panev explains that the main expense items of the fund are subsidies for the combined production of electricity and heat. The main recipients of this money are Toplofikatsia Sofia and thermal power plants associated with Hristo Kovachki - Bobov Dol, Brikel, and around a dozen others. The other major expense category is compensation for non-household consumers. There, the largest share of the funds goes to Lukoil Neftochim.

The issue raised by Panev was addressed by Traicho Traikov, who served as caretaker Minister of Energy in the Gurov cabinet. In a post on Facebook, he asked when the Electricity System Security Fund will comply with the Council of Ministers’ decision, based on a report by the Ministry of Energy, to make data on the recipients of compensation payments public.

At present, the way these huge amounts of money are distributed remains a closely guarded secret. A major question also remains unanswered: why should powerful private companies, such as the Burgas oil refinery, receive support from the state-owned Kozloduy Nuclear Power Plant=

Energy Minister Iva Petrova owes the public an answer regarding the disclosure of the subsidies and their recipients. Prime Minister Rumen Radev also faces questions. After all, he became prime minister promising transparency and a fight against oligarchic influence.

SOFIA'S EFFORTS TO MAKE MICHELIN CULINARY SELECTION

TrudNews.bg writes that a Michelin culinary audit has revealed the truth about Bulgarian tourism.

“We need to look honestly in the mirror, without getting offended,” said Ivelin Kichukov, chair of the Bulgarian Tourism Association.

The culinary inspectors from Michelin completed their first assessment in Sofia without awarding a star to any restaurant in the capital. According to Ivelin Kichukov, chairman of the Bulgarian Tourism Association (BTA), this is not a failure but rather a signal to the entire sector. He commented that the international guide has not rejected Bulgaria, but has instead held up a mirror in which the tourism and restaurant industries should take an honest look at themselves.

Kichukov says that the problem is in the lack of a clear decision about what model of tourism the country has been developing for more than three decades—cheap and mass tourism, or high-quality tourism built around identity and high added value.

Kichukov insists that the industry must listen to the criticism. There is a mismatch between price and quality, with outdated establishments, compromises in product quality, and a lack of professionalism. In his view, the problem is not high prices themselves, but unjustified prices that discourage tourists

Kichukov calls for a real “Brand Bulgaria” built around local products, regional culinary routes, and a clear identity for the country’s nine tourism regions. He emphasizes that local products are not created through Facebook posts, but through logistics, certification, and functioning regional clusters connecting hotels, restaurants, producers, and municipalities.

***

The Michelin evaluation process has not been finalized; there has been no “no” decision. The process will be very lengthy and will continue over the next 4–5 years. During this time, Michelin inspectors will continue to visit and provide feedback. More than 20 restaurants in Sofia have already been visited, said Anton Penev, head of the tourism company at Sofia Municipality, on Nova TV.

He explained that Sofia Municipality is in direct contact with the guide, but everything else remains confidential.

Reports from the independent consulting company describe a dynamically developing restaurant scene in Sofia, one that is diverse, offers good food, and where local Bulgarian flavours are easily appreciated by foreign visitors.

There are also some challenges, but they can be easily addressed through the programme prepared for next year. The recommendations concern achieving a higher level of service. Another focus is promoting local wine and cuisine. This is something that distinguishes every destination, Penev noted.

The evaluation also considers the urban environment. A visitor lands at the airport, travels through the city, and that journey is part of the overall experience.

Chef Boris Petrov, whose restaurant received the highest rating by the Michelin inspectors, said that, according to information from the Michelin inspection, the guide had not approved Sofia. The reasons are not limited to one issue, but the main concerns were poor service and high prices for low-quality offerings.

The prestigious evaluation is comprehensive, with the greatest importance placed on service, the menu, the cuisine, and the overall restaurant experience.

Parts of the report were presented to restaurant and hotel owners last week, and a new inspection to assess progress in the Bulgarian restaurant sector is expected to take place in a year.