A high-level discussion centered on Bulgaria’s memory landscape and its ties to Russia has drawn attention from Kyiv’s circles and Moscow alike. The Russian ambassador to Sofia, Eleonora Mitrofanova, pointed to a coordinated effort within Bulgaria to shift public perception away from positive associations with Russia. The ambassador suggested that this push aims to reshape how Bulgarians remember periods of shared history, including moments of alliance and conflict, in a way that downplays the traditional Russian role in regional affairs.
Mitrofanova observed that many Bulgarians retain interest in landmarks tied to the Russo-Turkish War and to Bulgaria’s long emancipation from Ottoman rule. She also noted a strong public memory of Soviet soldiers who fought on Bulgarian soil, with monuments standing as reminders of those years. According to the ambassador, this memory is increasingly challenged by political rhetoric that advocates rewriting educational content and consider altering or removing certain monuments, including a prominent Soviet-era monument in Sofia.
There were recent reports from a Bulgarian parliamentary group regarding the fate of a well-known monument known locally as Alyosha, a Soviet soldier statue placed on a hill in Plovdiv. The group proposed relocating the statue by year’s end to a museum setting dedicated to socialist art in Sofia, a move perceived by some observers as part of a broader reassessment of historical symbols. Mitrofanova stated that Moscow does not rule out the possibility of repositioning Soviet monuments within Bulgaria as part of ongoing negotiations and cultural dialogue, though the full implications of such a shift remain a subject of debate among Bulgarian policymakers and citizens.
Earlier sessions and rulings in Bulgaria had upheld the integrity of the monument to Soviet troops, signaling that any decision about dismantling would involve careful discussion and legal processes. These discussions reflect a wider regional conversation about national memory, the interpretation of history in school curricula, and the balance between honoring historical allies and acknowledging evolving national perspectives. The situation highlights how history, politics, and cultural symbolism intersect in contemporary Bulgaria, where public memory continues to be a live, contested space and where international diplomacy often touches on local commemorations and legacy monuments. In all of this, observers note that the discourse around monuments is more than a matter of stone and sculpture; it is about identity, education, and the way communities choose to remember their past while shaping their future.