Unwanted and Unwelcome? Bulgarian LGBTI+ migrants speak

(Originally published in Bulgarian on Out.bg on 5 November 2021)

At the end of July, we began publishing the series Unwanted and Unwelcome^[1] whose aim was to provide a space for LGBTI+ Bulgarians who live abroad to speak about their experiences with migration. The series remains open and we would love to continue publishing your stories (if you’re interested in contributing, see more here). However, after publishing 19 stories, I decided to write this article, in which I share my impressions and conclusions of the series as a guest editor.

The idea for the series was born out of several discussions I witnessed in LGBTI+ groups on Facebook. I don’t remember the specific comments but they were familiar to many Bulgarians: “I can’t stand it here anymore”, “I’m thinking about leaving”, “I’m tired of this country”, “the only way out is Terminal 1 or Terminal 2 [of Sofia airport]” and so on. The reasons for these comments are also familiar to everyone: the shamefully low salaries and pensions, the drained social and healthcare systems, the ubiquitous corruption, and the many problems with democracy and rule of law. For people in the LGBTI+ groups, however, there was another, just as important, reason: the lack of social acceptance and legal protections for LGBTI+ people, the constant insults hurled at us in the media and public space, the violence or threats of violence, and the deafening silence by political and social figures.

I’m interested in the topic of migration both personally and professionally: I’ve been living abroad for twelve years and I work in the field of migration and human rights. I’ve noticed that migration is highly visible and on the minds of many people in Bulgaria – not only through comments like the ones above. In villages and small towns, houses that are bigger and prettier than most are often built with money remitted by migrants; while rundown houses and weeded yards probably belong to people who live abroad and don’t return anymore. Strangers or distant acquaintances you meet on the street spontaneously say things lie “there’s nobody left here” and “everyone went away” or ask you “where do you live now?” and go on to tell you where and how their children and relatives live. Practically everyone has stories of migration – their own or of their friends, family members, or neighbours.

At the same time, migration rarely features in public discourse – at least to the extent that I follow Bulgarian media. Occasionally, we hear about “Bulgarians abroad” (the most common way migrants are referred to) – how we are the largest source of direct foreign investment and how there should be a strategy to attract us back to the country. Rarely does anyone ask who we are, why we go abroad, how we live there and if or why we would return.

Therefore, the aim of Unwanted and Unwelcome was to touch upon these issues from the perspective of LGBTI+ people. We published a call for contributions where we invited LGBTI+ Bulgarians who live abroad to tell us about their new lives. We proposed concrete questions like why they migrated, how they live there, whether they miss Bulgaria, and whether homophobia played any part in their decisions and if yes, what, and whether they consider returning one day.

We wanted to provide a space for LGBTI+ people to tell their stories. This is important in itself: in the Bulgarian context, where we are constantly attacked and insulted, there’s a tendency for us to speak in defence – to explain that we’re not sick or crazy, that we don’t want to corrupt anyone’s children or destroy their families, that we need pride and legal protections, and so on. It’s not often that we have the opportunity to speak about our problems and successes the way we want to – regardless of whether they are related to our sexuality or gender identity or not. Besides, I strongly believe that there must be space in public discourse for the stories, views, and analyses of “regular” people – not just politicians, celebrities, or social media “influencers”.

A secondary aim of the series was to see if and to what extent homophobia in Bulgaria contributes to “brain drain” and prevents LGBTI+ emigrants from returning. And to travel a little – to get a brief idea of life in other countries from the perspective of fellow LGBTI+ Bulgarians.

I proposed Unwanted and Unwelcome as the series title because the phrase is well-known and catchy, and the eponymous novel by Ivan Vazov tells the story of Bulgarian émigrés. In a more literal sense, I was thinking how LGBTI+ Bulgarians may feel “unwanted and unwelcome” in our home village, city or country because of our sexual orientation or gender identity, and this may be one of the reasons to emigrate. In a new place, however, and especially in a new country, we may face other difficulties, like discrimination or suspicion, finding a job or community, learning a language and, in more extreme (but not rare) cases, isolation and exploitation. In other words, LGBTI+ Bulgarians may feel “unwanted and unwelcome” in our home country as LGBTI and abroad – as immigrants.

We published the stories of 19 people. They live in a total of eleven other countries – New Zealand, a country in East Asia, Thailand, a country in the EU, Germany, Denmark, The Netherlands, France, Spain, UK, and the US; one person who lives in Bulgaria now after studying in the Netherlands and Singapore; and one couple of a Bulgarian guy and a French guy who live in Bulgaria. Eleven contributors were men, six were women, and two were gender non-conforming. Seven sent us short stories and I interviewed twelve.

I hope that everyone who can do so will read all 19 stories. In this article, I won’t detail the main themes that came out in the stories but just share some of my conclusions. They are not new or surprising but I think it’s important to highlight them.

Most of the people who shared their stories love Bulgaria! Boyan said it explicitly and in other stories it became clear from things people talked about. Several said that they miss Bulgarian food, nature, the relaxed way of life, and the way people communicate and relate with each other. For example, Vicky said that in Bulgaria it’s much easier than in the US to make an appointment with friends (something I had experienced in the Netherlands). Everyone still has friends and relatives in Bulgaria, they think about the country, they follow the news and participate in the social and political life as much as possible. Tzetzo, Doro, Ivan, Darina and I are engaged with various organisations or projects. Those who have children are making sure that their children remain connected to Bulgaria: for example, both of Nick’s children have Bulgarian names, Vicky and Darina talk to their children in Bulgarian, which is also what Lilly intends to do when she has children someday. Clément seemed to know more about Bulgarian folklore dances than the average Bulgarian and together with his partner Nick, they constantly discover new pieces of Bulgarian nature, language, history, and cuisine.

I think it’s important to emphasise this because so-called “patriots”, “nationalists” or “keepers of traditional values” often imply that LGBTI+ people don’t love Bulgaria but only “the west”. This is not true. We love Bulgaria too but we want our society to accept us as its own citizens. In most of the stories, I didn’t feel resentment or hatred of Bulgaria but a mix of sadness and frustration from the lack of adequate legal protections or support from political parties or public figures, and the constant hatred and disinformation about us in the media and public discourse.

Most people had not emigrated specifically to escape homophobia and the lack of legal protections and social acceptance in Bulgaria but for several this was a significant reason. A.D., Vladi, Mitko, and Jasmina had witnessed or experienced violence and homophobia, Nick had wanted to avoid them, while Lilly, Vicky, and Darina just wanted to live in a country where their family would be recognised by the law. The lack of legal protections and social acceptance, however, were among the reasons why people did not want to return. For S.T., Boyan, and others who have, or hope to have, partners and children, returning to Bulgaria seemed unlikely.

Another, but related, reason for going or remaining abroad was the more general feeling that Bulgaria is “small” – that there is a lack of diversity of people and opinions, and most Bulgarians are narrow-minded. Peter, Lilly, Nick, and I noted that we live in multicultural cities or countries where there are people from all races, ethnicities, cultures, and nationalities and this enriches us and the countries where we live. This wasn’t just about the size of a country or city – yes, New York, London, or Bangkok have populations larger than Bulgaria’s. However, New Zealand and Denmark are smaller but Nick and Maya appreciated the diversity of people, religions, and views there. Additionally, A.D., Nick and I have Asian partners and were worried about returning to Bulgaria with them because our society is conservative towards people from other races. Others, like Stoyan and Danny, said that abroad they feel free to wear whatever clothes they like while in Bulgaria they have to put up with judgmental looks and comments.

I also want to reflect briefly on the process of preparing the series. Participants shared their stories with excitement, joy, and enthusiasm. Tzetzo said that he found the interview therapeutic; others shared stories that they had not shared before, at least not in front of a large audience. The series also helped create new connections – some participants discovered that they live in the same city or state and made plans to meet; others discovered that, even though on different continents, they share common experiences and connected to express support; still others found long-lost acquaintances or made new friends.

I think the series was also interesting for the LGBTI+ community in Bulgaria. The materials were among the most read ones on Out.bg. On social media, people commented, raised questions, and empathised with the stories. I joked that Unwanted and Unwelcome became like a TV show that some people eagerly await and discuss (we published new materials every Wednesday and Saturday, which contributed to my sense of it being like a TV show). But more seriously, my assumption that the community would be interested in reading the stories of “regular” LGBTI+ Bulgarians proved correct.

Based on these conclusions, I make two recommendations. First, this series provided concrete evidence that the lack of social acceptance and adequate legal protections forces some LGBTI+ Bulgarians to leave the country and stops others from returning. It is well-known that homophobia has negative impact on economic growth and this argument can no longer be dismissed as unrelated to Bulgaria; we now have real people whose stories confirmed this. The series can serve as a tool for LGBTI+ advocacy groups to use as another piece of evidence for the need to combat discrimination and homophobia in Bulgaria. It can also serve as an inspiration for organisations or researchers to conduct a larger, quantitative study on the reasons why LGBTI+ people leave the country or how homophobia affects Bulgarian economy and demographics.

And second, LGBTI+ organisations and media can continue with similar initiatives that provide space to LGBTI+ people to tell their stories. Storytelling is an established method for empowerment of marginalised groups and can contribute to community-building and to broader acceptance of LGBTI+ people in society. Stories help us see others as people just like us and recognise that there is more that unites us than divides us. As Nigerian feminist author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie said during a lecture in the University of Cape Town, “How we relate to people who are different from us, people who we might never get to see, who we might never have a personal interaction with, is very much shaped by the stories we consume of those people, how they are portrayed in media, and it seems to me that because we are unfamiliar with the stories of one another, we are then unfamiliar with one another.”

Such initiatives can focus on intersecting identities, for example, people who are LGBTI and Roma, Muslim, immigrants, or with special needs. This may help foster alliances between social movements for rights and justice and lead to greater acceptance of LGBTI people in society. These undertakings should not simply be an invitation to send an essay because not everyone has a computer or the time and capacity to write. Interviews are time-consuming but as our series showed, rewarding.

I conclude with two more quotes from the above-mentioned lecture by Ngozi Adichie: “we need more stories because they have the power to change the world” and “here’s to a world in which not only do we tell more human stories but that we’re more open to hearing – actually hearing those human stories”.

 

---

[1] This is my own loose translation of Немили-недраги (Nemili-nedragi), the title of a nineteenth-century novel by Ivan Vazov that tells the story of Bulgarian revolutionaries exiled in Romania.

Human trafficking in Bulgaria - interview with Nadia Kozhouharova

This interview was given by Nadia Kozhouharova from Animus Association/La Strada Bulgaria for the newspaper Lichna Drama. I'm translating it with Nadia's permission from Animus' website.

La Strada International is a European network of independent non-government organisations working to prevent human trafficking and support its victims. The members are based in Belarus, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Macedonia, Moldova, The Netherlands, Poland and Ukraine. La Strada's focus is on women from Central and Eastern Europe and its main goal is to advocate for the protection of their human rights, including the right to migrate, work abroad and be protected from violence and abuse. Nadia is the national coordinator of La Strada in Bulgaria. 

- Mrs. Kozhouharova, why is human trafficking so widespread? 

- In this time of globalisation more and more people become victims of human trafficking. The profits from this crime worldwide, according to UNODC, amount to 7-8 billion US dollars annually, which is only comparable to the profits from the illegal sale of drugs and arms. Bulgaria is considered one of the main countries of origin for people trafficked to Germany, Belgium, France and other European countries. The main root causes of human trafficking are poverty, unemployment, gender inequality, violence and discrimination. People migrate in search of a better life abroad and as a way to make a living and become vulnerable to exploitation. 

- How long have you been working on the La Strada programme in Bulgaria? 

- Bulgaria joined La Strada in 1998. In 2004 we were among the founders of the International La Strada Association, which is recognised by national and international institutions as the leading European NGO network in the are of preventing of human trafficking and supporting the victims. To Animus, La Strada is much more than a programme - it's a way of thinking, belonging and motivation for development. It's the framework in which we place all our activities against human trafficking. It makes us feel a part of the broader community of the European civil society, which develops contemporary policies and practices for combating human trafficking. Personally, I have been working at Animus Association since 1995. 

- Haven't Bulgarians become more informed, haven't they learned to protect themselves better from becoming victims of trafficking? 

- There are certain differences, but unfortunately mostly in the fact that nowadays more people become victims of labour exploitation abroad, while in the area of sexual exploitation there isn't much change. In the past, human trafficking was referred to as "white slave trade" or "trade in human flesh" and the attitudes towards the victims were very negative. Now the methods of recruitment of victims have changed. For example, in the past, they were mostly lured by newspaper job ads for dancers or waitresses abroad but today it's different - it happens mostly through a close romantic relationship. Nowadays trafficking happens not so much through severe violence or kidnappings but through a more subtle deception - as I said, often through acquaintances or a romantic relationship. Also, many victims of trafficking now know that they will be working in the sex industry abroad. But we need to make a clear distinction here - they leave with the intention of working in the sex industry and not of being exploited. The characteristics of human trafficking are very clear - deception, coercion, violence, exploitation...

- How do you help victims of labour exploitation? 

- Bulgaria has a serious problem with labour migration. We know that many people go for work abroad but are not aware of the risks of being exploited. Unfortunately many Bulgarians who migrate for work do not check carefully the source of the job ads or their rights in the destination country. Unlike women who've been sexually exploited, victims of labour exploitation don't always need accommodation in a crisis centre or psychological counselling, but they need to know their rights and claim them and we can help them with this and, if necessary, connect them with a lawyer. 

- How do victims come into contact with Animus? 

- Usually through our broad network of partner organisations abroad. There is usually a police raid, where victims are identified and referred to counselling centres. There they can stay for different periods of time and explore their options - whether they can and want to stay in the country or come back to Bulgaria. If they decide to come back, the partner organisation connects them to us. We meet them literally at the airport and take it up from there. Trafficked persons more rarely seek help on their own initiative. As you know, Animus Association manages the only crisis centre in Sofia for survivors of violence. In the past 15 years it has accommodated 1600 women and children victims of violence and trafficking and almost 3000 have used the crisis intervention and counselling programmes. 

- What kind of people are usually vulnerable to being trafficked? 

- It's different for the different forms of trafficking. For sexual exploitation usually young women are recruited. I can't say that there is a clear tendency that they are Roma. It's more or less 50/50 from the people that our organisation has supported. These are women who want to improve their lives, who seek better future. When human trafficking for labour exploitation is concerned, the age group and the gender is usually different. Both men and women, also in their 30's and 40's, are exploited in agriculture, construction or as domestic help... Of course, children are also trafficked. Here there is a clear tendency that they are from Roma origin and are usually exploited for begging and petty crime, which is also a form of human trafficking. 

- Is there a specific case of a victim of human trafficking that particularly moved you? 

- I can say that lately we've been working with very difficult cases of women who have been trafficked because of their extreme vulnerability. We work more and more often with victims with mental illnesses that hinder their perception of reality and risks. They've been abused because of their illness. Other difficult situations are those where the victims are completely illiterate. They can't read or write, they don't know in which countries they've been or which borders they crossed. In both cases we are talking about people who don't know how to help themselves or claim their rights. 

- What advice would you give to people planning to go abroad? 

- Everyone has the right to be happy and to seek their happiness abroad. We do not judge anyone for the choices they make. When people strongly desire something, they are likely to forget about the risks or to underestimate even their own "gut feeling" that something is not right. People should trust their intuition and their support networks. If they have even the slightest suspicion of possible abuse, they should not ignore it but take precautionary measures. I would advise everyone to not be afraid to claim their rights and to contact the respective authorities. This is the only way to receive help, if in need. Our hotline +359 2 981 7686 is also always available. 

Slavery, sex trafficking, exploitation and child labour - some nuances

Slavery

In the latest episode of Game of Thrones (season 4, episode 10), an old man comes to Daenerys the Targaryen to share his grievance. Daenerys had recently freed the slaves of Mereen and become Queen of the city. However, the peasant doesn't find this action as noble as we and Danny would like to think... You should really see the scene, it's just 2.5 minutes, until around 3:05, because I don't want to type the whole thing and it's very interesting but embedding is disabled for this video, so I can't put it here. But in short, the man explains that when he was a slave, he had a roof over his head and was a teacher to his master's children. Now he's a free man but "he's nothing" and lives on the streets. The conditions in the shelters and food banks (or whatever they are called) that Danny set up, apparently are difficult. "With my master I was a teacher. I had the respect and love of his children", he says. "Your Grace, I ask you to let me sell myself back to Master xxx" is what he wants. "There are many outside, waiting to beg the same of you", he adds. In her infinite wisdom and heavenly gorgeousness, the Mother of Dragons agrees to grant him his request: "... But freedom means making your own choices. I will allow you to sign a contract with your former master..." The man is grateful and exits. (Seriously, though, see the scene, very interesting exchange).

Daenerys freeing the slaves of Mereen a few weeks ago was a beautiful and epic scene (you can see if from this moment or watch the whole video if you like GoT). And what she did was brave, noble and just and so on. And she gave choice and purpose to the previous slaves she freed - they now stand behind her as her soldiers on their own free will. But here in Mereen we have a moral dilemma. Is slavery wrong, degrading and against human dignity? - Of course! Was this man better off as a slave than as a free man? - I think he would say "Of course"!  Or to paraphrase Milton, is it really and always better to be a free man in Hell than serve in Heaven? Are freedom and independence a "one size fits all" solution? 

Similarly in the anti-trafficking world, I notice more and more often the nuances in the personal experiences of trafficked people. What is voluntary and what is forced? Should you submit yourself to exploitation when you have no other means to support yourself and your family? Is it a crime to help a person find a job and then demand payback for your time and efforts? Like the old man from GoT, are the Cambodian prostitutes rescued by Somaly Mam better off as garment factory workers than as "sex slaves"? Who defines the line between helping your parents, and by extension, yourself, and being "deprived of your childhood" through child labour? If people don't regard themselves as victims, why are we so quick to label them "victims", based on definitions and indicators? 

Of course I am fully aware of the cases of trafficking, exploitation, slavery and child labour involving violence, abuse and coercion, but I would like to share my thoughts here on the more grey areas, the nuances, the situations that are wrong from the point of view of the law, the outsiders and society in general, but are more complex from the point of view of the individual that we perceive as the victim. 

Sex trafficking 

This part is pretty much just a shorter version of "Who are these human traffickers?" by Felicia Anna. Anna is a Romanian sex worker in the Amsterdam Red Light District and as such she cannot be dismissed as "unrepresentative" since everyone in The Netherlands will tell you that the majority of prostitutes come from Eastern European. In her blog Anna writes about another side of the Red Light District - one that you will rarely see in anti-trafficking studies. And about the nuances in "sex trafficking". Her post is quite detailed, so I will try to present the idea more concisely here. Whether this is Anna's story or not, I don't know, but I'm sure it's the story of a lot of women (and at least some men) who come to The Netherlands to sell sex. A low-level street/highway prostitute in, for example, my home country Bulgaria, doesn't make a lot of money - from what I've heard, it's 5-10 Euros for a blowjob, and not more than 25 for intercourse and because of the uncertain legal status, prostitutes are often arrested and forced to give sexual services to policemen to avoid being detained. So imagine that a friend or an acquaintance tells one such girl that in the Netherlands she can earn 10 times more and do her job legally. She wants to but she doesn't have any money to move, to settle down, doesn't speak a foreign language and doesn't know the procedures how to get started. He offers to help her - to lend her money, arrange documents, find a place for her to live, a place to work... for a certain price, of course. Now add together the price of a plane ticket, (at least) one month's rent and one deposit, costs for legalisation of a birth certificate, costs for the Chamber of Commerce, for renting a window and who knows what else, and you easily come to 3000 Euros or more, including the cost of the "friend's" time and help. And since she can't start making money as soon as she lands at Schiphol but at least one month later (if everything is to be legal and right) she actually starts off with a huge debt and has to work long hours and meet a lot of men to clear that debt. If, for whatever reason, she can't pay this debt regularly, the "friend" becomes abusive. Now personally I'm not prone to violence and I'm convinced that violence is not the answer but there have been occasions when friends have owed me 1000-2000 Euros for months on and I've really wished I were bigger, stronger and more violent! I mean, banks and other institutional creditors have their ways of getting their money back, right? And they have millions of Euros and plenty of time to wait, while private people - not so much.. Again, I don't condone violence, but I also think that when you borrow money you have to repay it or face the consequences. In anti-trafficking terminology we call this debt bondage and coercion, but in this case, is it really so much different in effect from other business transactions involving credit? 

In my previous job at an NGO providing services to victims of violence in Bulgaria, we would often meet victims of trafficking who refused counselling, shelter or any other services and refused to press charges - they just wanted to go back home (and in some cases probably find another way to migrate to sell sex). Perhaps they were deceived, abused and exploited but did they perceive themselves as victims? - No. And it wasn't necessarily because of dissociation or denial, the trauma, PTSD, Stockholm syndrome or threats of retaliation. It's because they saw the whole experience as going abroad to find a job and make money and ... failing. So then who are we to tell them they're victims more than any of us are victims of society, social prejudice or... capitalism? Why do we claim to know better than them who they are and what they need? 


In the interest of readability, I will continue about labour exploitation and child labour in another post (I've been told my posts are too long!:-) 

Bulgaria's new "tougher policy" towards illegal immigration

Last week I read this article in Capital.bg (in Bulgarian - title "The Cabinet is preparing a tougher policy towards illegal immigrants") about the Bulgarian government's new policy plans and then I also read the press release of the Ministry of Interior (in English).

First I want to clarify that I will use the more humane term "undocumented/irregular migrant(s)" because no person is illegal, migrant or not. What a person does (e.g. cross a border without the proper documents) may be illegal but the person him/herself cannot be illegal. Sadly, the Bulgarian government and media still use the outdated term "illegal immigrants".

So the first thing I noticed when reading the press release of MoI is the confusing information about the new plans - the title states "for solving the issue with the increased migration pressure", while the first sentence explains that the aim of the plan is to manage "the crisis resulting from a massive influx of asylum seekers". Then the first measure talks about "illegal immigrants", while the second - about refugees. The fact that one policy is supposed to address these very different groups - undocumented migrants, asylum seekers and refugees - is worrying in itself.

Then the first objective of the plan is "... to limit the number of entering people and accelerate the rate of removal from the territory of those who have no reason to be here". Now "having no reason to be [t]here" is a bit of an oversimplification - surely no one just wandered off across the border and reached Bulgaria. But back to the point - the article in Capital explains in more detail - "the government’s goal is to reduce three times the number of people entering the country illegally and at the same time increase three times the number of people who have been expelled from Bulgaria". Reading this target that the Ministry of Interior has set, my first thought is that anyone without the proper documents, including victims of human trafficking, refugees and asylum seekers, will be immediately treated as an undocumented migrant and expelled, without much concern about his/her human rights and personal situation, simply in order to meet the targets, proclaim the new plan as a success and justify the need for more funds, equipment and manpower. This suspicion becomes even more real by another planned measure (mentioned only in the article of Capital), namely, significantly shorter periods for removal of undocumented migrants. The combination of shorter periods and a target of more removals is a recipe for human rights violations. And to illustrate my concerns, I recently read a country study on the position of victims of trafficking in the criminal and other legal proceedings in Bulgaria (not yet published) where I found this short example:

On 30 October 2003, two women, who had been trafficked to Macedonia for prostitution, managed to escape. Two unfamiliar persons took them across the border on foot, but not through the official check point but through the woods, after which they were detained by the Bulgarian border police officers. The victims told their story to the border police officers and were identified as trafficked persons, however, they were transported to the Kyustendil District Court and sentenced in a speedy proceedings for “illegal crossing of the border” – crime under Article 279 (1) of the Criminal Code [...] [...] the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee (Sofia) lobbies for the abolishment of Article 279 (1), which is also widely applied in regard to refugees. They argue that it is a simply structured crime easy to prove – the person must be on Bulgarian territory – and the border police officers use it to increase their investigation rate...

If identified victims of trafficking, Bulgarian nationals, can be prosecuted by the authorities for illegal crossing of the border to "increase their investigation rate", why should we expect anything different for foreign nationals, who cross the border illegally as refugees or asylum seekers. And the media often reports on the deficiencies (in capacity, funds and staff) of the State Agency for Refugees, which even at the moment cannot cope with the influx of Syrian refugees and they are forced to wait for months (while living in terrible conditions) before their applications are processed and they are granted refugee status. But like I said, the need to speed up the process in order to meet the targets, is likely to result in ... well, just very sloppy work!

The second measure of the government's plan includes "increased police presence ... in the areas populated by refugees." However, Capital.bg refers to this measure as "specialised police raids in areas ...". Whichever way you read it, it means simply police harassment over anyone looking at least remotely Arab (which are allegedly the majority of refugees, asylum seekers and undocumented migrants). The police is obliged to protect society with all its members, not only the Bulgarian citizens and not only against refugees and undocumented migrants. But by pointing specifically at refugees/migrants as potential criminals and a threat to Bulgarian citizens, the government is actually starting and stimulating the vicious circle of scapegoating, prejudice, suspicion and social exclusion which only leads to more violence. This is the opposite of the intended integration - it's downright segregation!

Another planned measure, not mentioned in the press release but already under-way, is the construction of a 30-kilometre fence on the border with Turkey. 25 years after the fall of the Iron Curtain, Bulgaria is building a wall to prevent people from coming in, as if we don't remember what the consequences and human costs of the other wall were... The measure was already criticised by the Council of Europe's Human Rights Commissioner Nils Muiznieks who insists that Bulgaria cannot deny entry of Syrian refugees and that walls are expensive but don't do much good.

Lastly, in the past few months there have been a number of instances of hate speech and hate crimes against undocumented migrants, asylum seekers and refugees. Only a week ago there were three anti-immigrant rallies in Sofia in the same day, organised by different right-wing, nationalistic and football fans groups, including one parliamentary political party, which shouted racial slurs and carried slogans that I don't even want to describe here. The media had a big role to play here too by allowing deranged politicians (again, from a parliamentary party) to describe the Syrian refugees as "terrorists", "man-slaughterers", "AIDS-carriers" who want to turn Bulgaria into a Muslim nation. 

It pains me to say that what I thought was a humanitarian crisis (the influx of Syrian refugees) to which Bulgarians would demonstrate compassion and hospitality, has turned the bigger part of society into raging, blood-thirsty hate-mongers. Bulgaria has always prided itself with the fact that it did not follow Kosovo and Bosnia in the 90's and that in the centre of Sofia, within one square kilometre, there are an Orthodox church, a Catholic cathedral, a mosque and a synagogue which coexist peacefully. Now it seems that the "infamous Bulgarian tolerance" (as the politicians like to call it) has simply vanished, just at a time when it is actually needed!