The analysis explores public perceptions of foreign influence in Bulgarian elections, focusing on responses from a nationally representative survey. The field work was carried out by Alpha Research in late 2024 based on a methodology developed by Boyan Zahariev from the Open Society Institute – Sofia and Nikolay Marinov from the University of Gothenburg who authored the analysis. The survey assessed how Bulgarians view external interference, specifically from the European Union (EU) and Russia, in their democratic processes.
Two thirds of respondents perceive foreign influence in Bulgarian elections negatively. However, about one-third believe its impact varies depending on the source and intent.
Most citizens (80%) consider the political system vulnerable to external interference, with only a small fraction (6%) believing that no political entities are influenced.
There is some asymmetry in attitudes toward potential EU versus Russian interference. While 32% believe the EU should protest against confirmed Russian interference, 15% think Russia should respond similarly to the EU, while 70% of respondents think Russia should take no action if the EU interferes in elections. Half of respondents believe that EU should take no action in the case of Russian interference. Among respondents with higher education, 42% support EU protest compared to 20% of those with lower education levels.
At the background of the differences in Bulgaria’s historical and institutional ties to the EU and Russia, the public’s perception of influence remains nuanced and situational.
Awareness of foreign interference has minimal overall impact on voter turnout intentions. While 61% report no change in their motivation, 20% say it would increase their likelihood of voting, and 10% state it would decrease their motivation.
Higher education levels correlate with increased motivation to vote against perceived external influence, especially when attributed to Russia.
Opinions on external influence often align with political affiliations. For instance, voters of certain parties (e.g., BSP and “Vazrazhdane”) are more inclined to believe the EU should not react to Russian interference.
Younger and elderly voters are less supportive of active EU measures against foreign interference compared to middle-aged groups.
Although net changes in voter turnout might be minimal, foreign interference could significantly shift election outcomes if it mobilizes specific voter groups, especially those reacting against perceived influence. Though net voter turnout may only change slightly, 10% of voters say interference could influence their choice of political party.
While direct impacts on voter participation appear limited, the broader implications for electoral outcomes and public trust in democratic institutions are considerable. The survey highlights a need for robust safeguards and public education to address vulnerabilities and bolster electoral integrity.
Full text of the report (in Bulgarian only).