Conflict and necessity: British–Bulgarian relations, 1944–56

Abstract

This article surveys political, economic and cultural issues of British–Bulgarian relations. It argues that neither Bulgaria nor Britain appeared to have interest in total isolation. Therefore, Anglo-Bulgarian relations were about more than political tension and confrontation. The multifarious nature of the Cold War was displayed in this case – while Britain was losing its political influence in Bulgaria its trade with the country reached levels higher than before the war. Besides, Bulgaria tried to develop a cultural presentation in Britain in order to foster a positive image of the regime and thus respond to Western critiques regarding communist dictatorship.

Notes

Vasil Paraskevov is an assistant professor of modern Bulgarian history at Konstantin Preslavsky University, Shumen, Bulgaria. His PhD dissertation was entitled ‘The Bulgarian Agrarian National Union: Nikola Petkov, 1945–1947’. He is currently conducting postdoctoral research on British–Bulgarian relations during the Cold War.

  [1] Pantev, ‘Anglia i vanshnopoliticheskite problemi na Balgaria (1879–1914)’, 25–33.

  [2] Genchev, ‘Razgrom na Burjoaznata opozicia v Balgaria 1947–1948’; Kukov, Razgrom na Burjoaznata opozicia v Balgaria (1944–1947); Isusov, Politicheskite partii v Balgaria 1944–1948.

  [3] For historic discussions regarding traditionalist and revisionist interpretation of the Cold War's origin see Maddox, The New Left and the Origins of the Cold War. For new discussions regarding the origins of the Cold War and new tendencies in the field of Cold War studies see Westad, Reviewing the Cold War: Approaches, Interpretations, Theory.

  [4] Pintev, Balgaria v Britanskata diplomatsia 1944–1947; Kalinova, Balgaria i pobeditelite (1939–1945).

  [5] Rothwell, Britain and the Cold War, 1941–1947; Bol, Studenata voina na Balkanite; Kent, British Imperial Strategy; Dimitrov, Stalin's Cold War.

  [6] Todorova, ‘Kam nachalnata istoria na balgaro-britanskite otnoshenia sled Vtorata svetovna voina’, 379; Kalinova and Baeva, Balgarskite prehodi 1939–2002, 196–7; Ognyanov, Diplomatsiata na savremenna Balgaria, 96–8.

  [7] Zubok, A Failed Empire, 163.

  [8] White, Britain, Détente and Changing East–West Relations; Young, Winston Churchill's Last Campaign; Greenwood, Britain and the Cold War.

  [9] Nikova, ‘Savetskoto ikonomichesko pronikvane v Balgaria’; Nikova, ‘Ograbvaneto na Balgaria sled Vtorata svetovna voina’; Vachkov, ‘Izpalnenieto na finansovo-ikonomicheskite klauzi na saglashenieto za primirie s Balgaria’.

 [10] Popisakov, Ikonomicheskite otnoshenia mezhdu NR Balgaria i SSSR; Nakov, Balgaro-savetski otnoshenia 1944–1948; Zlatev, Balgaro-savetski ikonomicheski otnoshenia (1944–1958).

 [11] Kent, British Imperial Strategy and the Origins of the Cold War, 1.

 [12] In January 1944 Ivan Maysky, the Soviet ambassador in London, proposed in a letter to V. Molotov, the Soviet Minister of Foreign Affairs, that the Soviet Union should gain after the war a strategic sphere of influence in Europe and Asia. Later, in October 1944, Maxim Litvinov, the deputy minister of Foreign Affairs, outlined in a memorandum that the Soviet sphere should include the Balkan countries (except Greece), Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Finland and Sweden – Zubok, A Failed Empire, 8.

 [13] Stankova, ‘Kakva shte bade sadbata na Balgaria’; Dimitrov, Stalin's Cold War, 58–60.

 [14] Churchill, The Second World War, 203.

 [15] Seton-Watson, The East European Revolution.

 [16] The ACC was created according to the Armistice between Bulgaria and the Big Three signed on 28 October 1944. The aim of this commission was to observe how Bulgaria implemented the Armistice clauses.

 [17] Toshkova, SASHT i Balgaria, 160–79; Spasov, Problemi na novata balgarska istoria, 200.

 [18] The Economist, 9 September 1944.

 [19] The Fatherland Front was a coalition of leftist parties such as the Bulgarian Agrarian National Union, Bulgarian Social Democratic Party, Political Circle ‘Zveno’ and a group of independent intellectuals.

 [20] Otechestven Front, 18 September 1944.

 [21] Pintev, Balgaria v Britanskata diplomatsia 1944–1947, 75–6.

 [22] United Kingdom National Archives (henceforward UKNA), Foreign Office (henceforward FO) 371/48219, Foreign Office Minute Sir O. Sargent, 13 March 1945.

 [23] Crampton, Eastern Europe in the Twentieth century, 216, 229.

 [24] Pelly et al., Documents on British Policy Overseas. Air Vice-Marshal Stevenson to Bevin, 20 August 1945.

 [25] Pelly et al., Documents on British Policy Overseas. Brief for the United Kingdom Delegation to the Conference at Potsdam, 9 July 1945.

 [26] Pelly et al., Documents on British Policy Overseas. Brief for the United Kingdom Delegation to the Conference at Potsdam, July 1945.

 [27] Centralen darzhaven arhiv [Central State Archive] (henceforward CDA), fond (f.) 28, opis (op.) 1, arhivna edinitsa (a.e.) 589, p. 19.

 [28] On 30 August 1945 during a meeting between Stalin, Soviet officials and Bulgarian Communists Soviet leader declared that ‘the postponement of the elections was unessential concession: ‘No concession anymore. No changes in the government’. Isusov, Stalin i Balgaria, 34–5.

 [29] Hamilton, ‘The Quest of a Modus Vivendi’, 15–16; Dimitrov, Stalin's Cold War, 9–10.

 [30] UKNA, FO 371/48220, Foreign Office Minute Williams, 1 January 1946.

 [31] CDA, f. 267, op. 1, a.e. 72, p. 74; Rabotnichesko delo, 9 January 1946. The negotiation between the government and opposition continued, with some gaps, from January to March 1946. The main point of friction was the control over the Ministry of Interior and the Ministry of Justice. While the opposition insisted on preside over them the ruling coalition was not ready to accept its demands.

 [32] Judt, Postwar. A History of Europe since 1945, 110–11.

 [33] Louis, The British Empire in the Middle East, 1945–1951, 53–4.

 [34] Zubok, A Failed Empire, 36–40; Gadis, Studenata voina, 35–6.

 [35] UKNA FO 371/66965, British Strategic Requirements in the Middle East, Memorandum by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, 2 January 1947.

 [36] UKNA, FO 418/88, The Bosphorus and the Dardanelles, Research Department, Foreign Office, 6 January 1947.

 [37] UKNA FO 371/66965, Future Policy towards Turkey and Greece, Report by the Chiefs of Staff, 1 January 1947.

 [38] Pintev, Balgaria v Britanskata diplomatsia 1944–1947, 199–200.

 [39] UKNA, FO 371/66914, Sofia to Foreign Office, 8 June 1947.

 [40] CDA, f. 146 B, op. 2, a.e. 757, pp. 3–8; Arhiv na Ministerstvoto na vanshnite raboti [Archive of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs] (henceforward AMVnR), f. 23, op. 1 p, a.e. 340, pp. 1–2; UKNA FO 371/66914, Sofia to Foreign Office, 8 June 1947; Bol, Studenata voina na Balkanite, 355.

 [41] Dimitrov, Dnevnik, 565–6.

 [42] UKNA, FO 371/66920, Foreign Office Minute, 6 August 1947.

 [43] Aldrich, The Hidden Hand, 160–74.

 [44] Papers of 1st Earl Attlee, Bodleian Library, Oxford (henceforward MS Attlee): MS Attlee, dep. 77, fol. 22.

 [45] Rabotnichesko delo, 4 September 1948.

 [46] AMVnR, f. 23, op. 1 p. a.e. 272, p. 2.

 [47] Ognyanov, ‘Studenata voina’ i ‘shpionomaniyata’ v Balgaria (1949–1953)’.

 [48] Rabotnichesko delo, 11 February 1949.

 [49] AMVnR, f. 23, op. 1 p, a.e. 272, pp. 20–21; f. 3, op. 6, a.e. 120, pp. 20, 33–6.

 [50] CDA, f. 1 B, op. 5, a.e. 47, pp. 43–4.

 [51] AMVnR, f. 27, op. 1 p, a.e. 551, p. 1; f. 14, op. 4 p, a.e. 142, p. 85.

 [52] Observance in Bulgaria and Hungary of human rights and fundamental freedoms, The General Assembly, 30 April 1949 [cited December 2008]. Available from http://www.un.org/documents/resga.htm INTERNET; Observance in Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania of human rights and fundamental freedoms, The General Assembly, 22 October 1949 [Cited December 2008]. Available from http://www.un.org/documents/resga.htm; Observance in Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania of human rights and fundamental freedoms, The General Assembly, 3 November 1950 [Cited December 2008]. Available from http://www.un.org/documents/resga.htm; Barker, Britain in a Divided Europe 1945–1970, 48.

 [53] AMVnR, f. 3, op. 2 p, a.e. 106, p. 8.

 [54] The Economist, 13 January 1951; The World Today 8, no. 12 (December 1952); The World Today 9, no. 3 (1953). The Soviet impact on Bulgaria and the other satellites had various negative presentations in British media. Prof. N. Dolapchiev, the former Bulgarian plenipotentiary in Britain who emigrated there in the late 1940s, critiqued Bulgarian law under the new regime: ‘Not only is there a complete Sovietization of the Bulgarian legal system, but Soviet methods of interpretation and application of the “Socialist legality” have been adopted, a term which cloaks the political ends of the Communist Party – enslavement and extortion’ – Dolapchiev, ‘Law and Human Rights in Bulgaria’, 68.

 [55] MS Attlee, dep. 117, fol. 138.

 [56] UKNA, FO 371/95054, ‘Bulgaria: Fortnightly Political Summary’, 8 March 1951.

 [57] AMVnR, f. 3, op. 2 p, a.e. 85, p. 75.

 [58] AMVnR, f. 3, op. 3 p., a.e. 85, p. 2.

 [59] AMVnR, f. 3, op. 3 p., a.e. 85 pp. 35-36.

 [60] UKNA, FO 371/100498, Carvell to Eden, 7 January 1952.

 [61] UKNA, FO 371/95057, Foreign Office, 30 August 1951.

 [62] UKNA, FO 371/106221, Carvell to Foreign Office, 15 January 1953.

 [63] UKNA, FO 371/116116, PUSC 51/60, 17 January 1952.

 [64] Such an ‘omission’ had its place in the overall strategy of Britain towards the Communist bloc. As Annex B of PUSC 51/60 showed, the Foreign Office thought that the liberation of the satellites, with exception of Albania, was impossible in the foreseeable future without Western intervention. The precondition for a more vigorous British policy in Eastern Europe was the existence of Western military superiority over the Soviet Union, which could not be attained at the present stage – PUSC 51/60, 17 January 1952, Annex B published in Young, ‘The British Foreign Office and Cold War Fighting in the Early 1950s’.

 [65] UKNA, FO 371/106082, Foreign Office Minute, H.A.F. Hohler, 31 January 1953.

 [66] UKNA, FO 371/106222, Sofia to Foreign Office, 28 May 1953.

 [67] AMVnR, f.12, a.e. 140 a, p. 49.

 [68] UKNA, FO 371/106082, Foreign Office Minute, H.A.F. Hohler, 31 January 1953.

 [69] UKNA, FO 371/106087, Foreign Office Minute, H.A.F. Hohler, 9 February 1953; J.H. Peck, 2 March 1953; H.A.F. Hohler to Sir Francis Shepherd, 7 April 1953.

 [70] UKNA, FO 371/116313, G.W. Furlong to H.A.F. Hohler, 21 January 1955; Foreign Office Minute, H.A.F. Hohler, 15 April 1955; H.A.F. Hohler to G.W. Furlong, 9 May 1955. In March 1955 the Permanent Under-Secretary's Committee argued that negotiations with the Soviets were now possible as the needful situation of equilibrium with them had been reached – Young, ‘The British Foreign Office and Cold War Fighting in the Early 1950s’, 6–7.

 [71] UKNA FO 418/95, William Hayter to Eden, 5 March 1954.

 [72] Bideleux and Jeffries, A History of Eastern Europe, 476.

 [73] UKNA FO 472/6, Problems of the Satellites, Text of a Lecture given to the Imperial Defence College on May 18, 1954, by Mr. H.A.F. Hohler, CMG., Head of the Northern Department, Foreign Office.

 [74] Rothschild, Return to Diversity, 147–9.

 [75] Migev, ‘Sluchayat Beria’.

 [76] Nikova, ‘Planat Marshal, Evropeiskite sili i Balgaria’; LaFeber, America, Russia and the Cold War, 58–73.

 [77] UKNA, Records of the Prime Minister's office (henceforward PREM) 8/1414.

 [78] Britain would exclude from its trade with Eastern Europe only those goods which ‘contribute directly to the production of arms and war materials’ but simultaneously insisted on maintaining trade on an equal basis with these countries – the value for communist countries should be equal to the value for Britain from mutual supplies, a balance which the Foreign Office deemed as attainable with the present structure of the trade. The Foreign Office appreciated the value for their country of the trade with Eastern Europe as long as the significance of East European exchange for the United States was limited. Some economic considerations showed that the Foreign Office took into account the possible Soviet negative counter-reactions if Britain expanded its present control on export. Communist measures would lead to the restriction of East European exports to the United Kingdom. Political issues also were involved in Britain's thinking. In a politically divided world the Foreign Office reasonably found that certain extreme economic measure ‘would tend to aggravate the present state of tension between the East and West’. UKNA, FO 418/91, Bevin to His Majesty's Overseas Representatives, 16 August 1950.

 [79] Zlatev, ‘Balgaria v evropeiskoto stopanstvo (1945–1949)’, 61–2.

 [80] In May 1948 R.A. Sykes remarked after Bennett's gloomy analysis of the communist regime in Bulgaria that the Soviet Union would not be able to supply ‘necessary equipment which the satellite states will require, and if the equipment cannot be supplied then we may be sure that sooner or later a good deal of disillusion will appear, and it will be this which will offer us our greatest opportunity’ – UKNA, FO 371/72143, Foreign Office Minute, R.A. Sykes, 4 May 1948.

 [81] UKNA FO 418/90, D. Kelly to Bevin, 14 July 1949.

 [82] MS Attlee, dep. 66, fol. 175, Foreign Office, 23 January 1948.

 [83] UKNA Board of Trade (henceforward BT) 271/194, C.H. Baylis to C.G. Thorley, 25 July 1950; AMVnR, f. 5, op. 1a p., a.e. 100, p. 38.

 [84] Zlatev, ‘Balgaro-angliiski stopanski vrazki (1945–1975)’, 160–62; UKNA, BT 11/3827, Foreign Office, 18 August 1948; AMVnR, f. 5, op. 1a, a.e. 100, pp. 4–5.

 [85] AMVnR, f. 4, op. 5, a.e. 134, p. 5.

 [86] AMVnR, f. 4, ?p. 5, ?.?. 134 f. 32, op. 8 p, a.e. 334, pp. 2, 20.

 [87] UKNA BT 271/194, C.H. Baylis to C.G. Thorley, 25 July 1950.

 [88] UKNA, FO 371/122099, Trade with the Satellites, C.D. Cambell, 8 November 1956.

 [89] British imports from Bulgaria were worth £107,891 in 1934, £393,321 in 1935, £849,031 in 1936, £1,060,156 in 1937 and £506,655 in 1938. UKNA, BT 271/194, C.H. Baylis to C.G. Thorley, 25 July 1950.

 [90] Leffler, For the Soul of the Mankind: the United States, the Soviet Union and the Cold War, 91–2.

 [91] Naturally, in Bulgaria the Soviet economic shift resulted in support of light industry and agriculture. Znepolski, Istoria na Narodna Republika Balgaria, 286–87.

 [92] UKNA FO 418/95, Soviet Motives in Expanding East-West Trade, Northern and Economic Relations Department, 30 April 1954. See also Conservative Party Archive (henceforward CPA), Conservative Central Office (henceforward CCO) 4/7/130.

 [93] UKNA, FO 371/122099, ‘Future Policy in Trade Negotiations with the Satellites’, Table 4 ‘Trade of W. Europe with E. Europe’.

 [94] CPA, Conservative Research Department, 2/34/7, Conservative Foreign Affair Committee, East–West Trade, 13 June 1958.

 [95] Kalinova, ‘Balgarskata kultura prez pogleda na zapadnoevropeetsa’, 10–11.

 [96] CDA, f. 1 B, op. 8, a.e. 1465, pp. 2–7.

 [97] AMVnR, f. 3, op. 1 p, a.e. 22, p. 1.

 [98] CPA, CCO 4/3/38, 14 June 1949.

 [99] The number of the members of the committee varied during the years but usually was around 300-400 people as well as the audience that attended its presentations – the archives contain data from 20 to 800 people – AMVnR, f. 16, op. 6 p, a.e. 379, pp. 5-11; CDA, f. 363, op. 9, a.e. 34, pp. 1–3.

[100] White, Britain, Détente and Changing East–West Relations, 58.

[101] UKNA, FO 371/116116, Foreign Office Minute, H.A.F. Hohler, 14 December 1955.

[102] Crampton, Bulgaria, 345–7.

[103] Ognyanov, Diplomatsiata na savremenna, 172.

[104] AMVnR, f. 12, a.e. 140 a, pp. 75–6.

[105] AMVnR, f. 12, a.e. 140 a f. 17, op. 6 p, a.e. 395, pp. 190–91; f. 12, a.e. 140 a, pp. 54–5.

[106] AMVnR, f. 12, a.e. 140 a f. 30, op. 8, a.e. 309, pp. 4–6, 32–3.

[107] UKNA FO 469/8, Furlong to Sir Anthony Eden, 29 October, 1954; 371/116351, Sofia to Foreign Office, 3 June 1955; 371/122290, Sofia to Selwyn Lloyd, 31 December 1955.

[108] Bekes et al., The 1956 Hungarian Revolution, 148–50.

[109] UKNA, FO 371/122081, Foreign Office to Sir William Hayter, 26 November 1956.

[110] UKNA, FO 371/116116, Foreign Office Minute, J.G. Ward, 5 October 1955.

[111] UKNA, FO 371/122290, Sofia to Selwyn Lloyd, 31 December 1955.

[112] Dimitrov, Savetska Balgaria prez tri britanski mandata 1956–1963, 4.

[113] UKNA, FO 469/11, Speaight to Selwyn Lloyd, 10 January 1957.