Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic Papers, 1945, Europe, Volume IV

874.00/11–2945: Telegram

The United States Representative in Bulgaria (Barnes) to the Secretary of State

Sofia, November 29, 1945—9 a.m.
[Received December 2—7:30 p.m.]

722. Following is summary of position taken by opposition parties toward November 18 elections as published in Petkov’s Zname after Communist controlled press had refused to publish Lulchev[’s] Svoboden Narod for which declaration was originally written:

Under heading “elections have proved that Govt is rejected by people” declaration begins by stating that elections were held under conditions which did not guarantee freedom, tranquility and security of Bulgarian people in order that they might freely express their will. Leading points are:

(1) Threats were constantly heard at meetings before and during election campaigns that on day after elections non-voters for Govt would be punished and that “Bartholomew night”²² would follow elections.

(2) Slogan “Death to Opposition” was constantly used and written on placards, together with oral statements that “power taken with blood would only be relinquished with blood”.

(3) Armed members of Govt parties, especially Communists and Workers Youths, demonstrated and threatened population.

(4) Militia personnel was not changed and atmosphere of fear was created by memory of violences, excesses, vanished persons, tortures and murders.

(5) Employees and workers were threatened with dismissal and punishment.

(6) Forceful establishment of cooperative farms caused excesses, arrests and beatings in villages.

(7) Opposition party meetings were attacked and dissolved by members of Workers Youths and Communist Party.

(8) Political and criminal prisoners and internees in concentration camps were set free on condition that they write and print at state expense appeals to relatives and friends to vote for Govt.

(9) Machinations on election day included such practices as visiting electors in home and inducing them to vote for Govt by threats; plural voting; marking numbers of ballots on their envelopes; and enforced plural open voting by persons fearful of a repetition of excesses against themselves or relatives.

(10) After elections orders were given to prepare “black lists” of persons not voting. Declaration states, in spite of these methods, Bulgarian people did not give its support to Govt. This is proved by methods used on election day and thereafter in order to alter results of elections to favor Govt and that for several days after elections results in Sofia were not announced. Even now Govt has not announced exact number voters in Sofia and in country and has not published results by precincts and villages. Committees for control of elections did not have opportunity nor wish to control, but accepted official figures.

Govt is rejected by people. According to real data percentage of votes for Govt lists does not exceed 40%. In larger towns and industrial centers votes were considerably less than 40%. Opposition proposes that neutral inquiry be made to establish actual results as well as methods and conditions under which elections held.

On behalf of Govt Interior Minister Yugoslavia [yugov] replied with declaration stating that elections held in complete order and freedom and that this was confirmed by many foreign correspondents in Bulgaria on election day. Elections have yielded brilliant victory to FF (Fatherland Front). Minister states further that officially announced results are incontestable. Figures were taken from documents of election bureaus signed by three bureau members and two designated electors who counted the votes. Documents were sent to regional courts which thereupon approved elections and number of votes and announced names of winners. Presidents and members of electoral bureaus were not appointed by Govt but were chosen by casting lots among teachers and other voters in courts at public sessions. Also vote counting was done publicly and therefore results were made public on very night of elections. Under these circumstances any doubt concerning officially announced election results shows lack of knowledge of electoral system or deliberate misrepresentation of election results and wish to deny facts.

Opposition’s contentions are strengthened by fact that long before elections it drew govt’s attention to threats and intimidation against opposition and non-voters and demanded action to insure atmosphere conducive to free unhampered elections while at same time govt did nothing to curtail militia and Communist intimidating activity nor did it do anything to prove its bona fides by reorganization or otherwise respond to possibilities offered by intervention of Allies at time of August scheduled elections. Also tenor of Georgi Dimitrov’s first speech gave lie to Govt’s expressed desire to return to broader FF formula of September 1944. Hence in my opinion one must conclude in absence of more substant[ive?] proof of Govt’s contention that opposition has best of argument so far; or at least that their demand for impartial investigation of election results is better evidence of their bona fides than those of Govt in claiming that all was perfect with elections on November 18.

Repeated Moscow as 328.

Barnes

22. Reference to massacre of Huguenots in France, August 23–24, 1572.