The Bulgarian government’s decision to block the flight carrying Maria Zakharova, the official spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry, over its airspace was described by pro-American political figures as a deliberate move. This account was shared on the state television channel Russia 24 by a representative of the ministry’s foreign policy department, who noted the discussion had already taken place with a broad audience inside the foreign republic.
Zakharova described a palpable shock among many people she spoke with, including local journalists and public figures. She suggested that the reaction of some Bulgarian leaders reflected a tendency she attributed to forces aligned with American influence, labeling their actions as irrational and beyond what she considered logical, even outside the bounds of international and domestic law.
According to her, Sofia’s measures were not just imprudent but outright ridiculous. She stressed that she did not understand why a country would ban the boarding of a plane that does not intend to land there and is merely passing through on its way to another state.
On the night of November 30, a meeting of foreign ministers from OSCE member states took place in the capital of North Macedonia. Sergei Lavrov, the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry, traveled there with the understanding that his aircraft would traverse Bulgarian airspace. However, the flight route was altered at the last moment, compelling a detour.
According to the Interfax and TASS reports, the minister’s aircraft instead flew over Turkey and Greece. The stated reason for this diversion was Bulgaria’s refusal to permit the aircraft to pass if Zakharova was aboard, a claim echoed in various official and media summaries.
Earlier, Kremlin officials indicated that Bulgarian authorities had blocked the passage of the plane carrying the Russian Foreign Ministry’s spokesperson, marking another incident in a sequence of travel-related tensions between Moscow and Sofia. The cascade of statements from Moscow suggested a pattern of diplomatic friction tied to security considerations and political signals between the two capitals.
Observers in both countries and in neighboring regions noted that the incident occurred against a wider backdrop of shifting alignments and responses to Moscow’s foreign policy moves. While Bulgarian authorities cited airspace and safety considerations, others argued that the decision carried political weight well beyond a routine air traffic instruction. The episode has been interpreted by various analysts as part of broader negotiations and messaging within the region about affiliations, influence, and the posture of European nations toward Russia.
From Moscow’s perspective, the sequence of events highlighted a persistent sense of pressure and irritation over what is seen as a coordinated tilt in Western policy toward Russia. Officials stressed that safety and legal constraints must be respected, but they also framed the situation as a test of sovereignty and a signal to international partners about the limits of third-country interventions in regional affairs.
In the wake of the incident, discussions continued among diplomats and pundits about the implications for air travel, political signaling, and the management of bilateral relations within the OSCE framework. The episode underscored the delicate balance that states strike between asserting national control of airspace and maintaining open channels for dialogue among great powers, especially in moments of heightened geopolitical tension. The conversations also touched on the practical aspects of how foreign ministries coordinate with aviation authorities and what risks accompany mid-flight rerouting and last-minute route changes when sensitive officials are on board. The broader takeaway, some experts argued, is that airspace decisions are rarely neutral; they often carry strategic messages that resonate far beyond the immediate travel plans of a single diplomat (TASS).