Railway history - twentieth century Research Papers (original) (raw)

Since the Liberation up to the end of the First World War military operations
the geographic region of Macedonia took an extremely important place in
the railway policy of Bulgaria. The railway connection between them and the development
of this transport communication were considered to be one of the main
components in solving the national question. In competitive conditions the young
country defended, up to the level it was able to, its priorities and developed a strategy
for transport network development. Aiming to preserve its sovereignty on the
railway transport it allowed some compromises in connecting with its neighbours
and in the establishing of the European network Vien – Belgrad – Sofia – Tsarigrad
but without giving a priority to it. What had been achieved during the Conference
of the four countries was a prerequisite for imposing a state monopoly over the
railways in Bulgaria. State institutions were managing all stages of building, exploitation
and control of the railway network.
Monopoly legalizing enabled the implementation of centralized railway policy
carried out by the government bodies in Bulgaria. National Assembly, Council
of Ministries and Monarch were the state authorities that had obtained the right to
manage it. These three factors were in constant collaboration although they had
contradictions on some issues. The National Assembly was the place for legalization
of firsthand assignments that formally concerned acceptance of concrete
railway project but in fact were a part of a global strategic plan. This statement is
hard to be revealed out of the available short legislative cases but it is quite evident
in plenary hall discussions. The Bulgarian railway policy regarding Macedonia obtained
enviable consensus and the contradictions between the government and the
opposition emerged mainly in taking unpopular negative decision. Uncertainties
in several details of the followed strategy were also items of conflict but often the
shown parliamentary harmony dominated over the cliquishness and the populism.
Mainly, this was a consequence of the fact that the party formations took the Bulgaria
railway policy to Macedonia as an important element of the strategy for the
national unification. On this ground an unique succession and continuity can be
ascertained in caring it out by the different governments which immediate priorities
and opportunities influenced upon them.
The Council of Ministers is an institution that both initiated and accomplished
the railway policy. Several basic ministries distinguished with their significance.
Home political issues were managed by a specialized body that had passed through
several alterations. After 1893 these functions were assigned to Minister of Public
Buildings, Roads and Communications and after 1911 to Minister of Railways,Posts and Telegraphs. Foreign political issues were assigned to the Minister of Foreign
Policy and Religion. Military Minister also had a decisive role especially in
determining strategic characteristics. The Prime Minister didn’t just coordinate the
railway policy but also sometimes managed country’s diplomatic activities or led
the railway department. Among those persons with great contribution to Bulgarian
railway policy towards Macedonia distinguish D. Tsankov, P. Karavelov, S. Stambolov,
D. Grekov, G. Nachovich, K. Stoilov, R. Petrov, D. Stanchov, A. Malinov,
St. Paprikov, I. Geshov, A. Lyapchev and others.
Monarchy body had also an important role. From the Liberation up to the end
of the military operations of the First World War there were only two monarchs
reigned over the Bulgarian country – King Aleksander I and King Ferdinand I.
Their involvement revealed mainly in caring the Foreign policy out. They took part
in diplomatic activities, led government delegations that accomplished the railway
strategy. The long reigning period enabled Ferdinand to outstand as one of the unchangeable
and most important factors. He had his own idea on the railway policy
that sometimes contradicted with the official position of the other state factors.
Political structures affected mainly the managing and controlling functions.
Operative activity was implemented by specialized bodies established in the three
main ministries and concerning the home and foreign policy aspects. Railway experts
have the decisive word mainly in determining the concrete parameters of each
of the projects. They were responsible for project’s examination, for the permanent
control on building works and for the railroad exploitation. Their opinion was taken
into consideration when implementing the foreign policy activities. The diplomatic
department and its structures abroad accomplished the international aspect. Their
task was more complicated significantly because it combined the satisfaction of
many contradictions. The biggest responsibility was assigned to Bulgarian deputy
in Tsarigrad who led the direct negotiations. Diplomatic abilities were shown by G.
Valkovich, P. Dimitrov, D. Markov, I. Geshov, M. Sarafov, A. Shopv, D. Rizov and
others. The Military were the other experts who had been assigned to manage the
railway policy. Up to the 1912–1918 wars they were responsible mainly for providing
expert statements on developing and following a particular strategy. Their
statements were one of the decisive ones in clearing out priority issues towards
Macedonia. Military subdivisions were also involved in constructing some of the
railway objects. This trend was kept and was given extremely important development
during the Balkan Wars and in particular during the First World War. The
most serious results were the ones achieved in building new narrow-gauge lines
that had more particular specifications but also were with longer-lasting than the
military ones objectives, mainly economic and political.
The foreign political factors also influenced a lot the Bulgarian railway policy.
First, it was the role of the Ottoman Empire, which up to the last months of 1912
ruled the geographic area of Macedonia. The Turkish rulers, especially Abdulhamid
II Sultan and the Military, put number of obstacles against the Bulgarian policy’s
goals. The main reason for this was connected with the established opinionthat along with any successful accomplishment the Bulgarian political influence
would increased.
Great Powers were the other factor which actions could be hardly assessed
synonymously neither in positive nor in negative point. What concretely distinguished
was the influence of Austria-Hungary, which following its interests in
Western Balkans, in particular in Macedonia, opposed most decisively the aspirations
directed to building the project towards Skopje. With some tactical derogations,
this policy stayed stable up to the wars. German interests to the East revealed
later and for them Macedonia was less important. Despite this statement, proved
by their project on the Bagdat railway, at first, they only assisted Vienna’s activities,
but gradually they were getting involved and began showing their expansion
intentions on the Balkans. While Austria-Hungary played pointedly negative role,
German had a significant contribution to accomplishing the Bulgaria policy, especially
through delivering a park and commissioning its representatives in building
the narrow-gauge lines in Macedonia.
The rest of the Great Powers didn’t act so categorically complying with their
direct interests. Russia, Italia, England and France followed their long-term political
objectives and in separate cases supported the Bulgarian activities. A very serious
problem for the governors in Sofia was their impossibility to gain a strategic
ally or to secure more sustainable international lobby.
In different periods building contractors connected with separate or several
Great Powers showed interest to Macedonia and formed themselves as another important
factor. Like a conductor of foreign economic and political expansion, these
foundations didn’t play a positive role on the Balkans at all and were observed with
mistrust by the government bodies in Bulgaria. They acted carefully even in cases
that had established opportunities for achieving mutual benefits.
Though small the Balkan countries should also be observed as an important
factor. Among them Serbia acted as a paranoiac adversary against Bulgarian policy,
including the railway one, towards Macedonia. Greece opposed too but not so hysterically
and stayed a bit calmly. Monte Negro and Romania influenced directly
through their trans-Balkan projects mainly. In such unfavourable situation Bulgaria
carried out its railway policy concerning Macedonia. Foreign political aspect
gained absolutely priority and dominated over the home political one especially up
to the Balkan War.
Within the forty-year period – from 1878 to 1918 – in Bulgaria numerous
projects and draft versions were prepared for connecting and for railway development
in Macedonia. They were many especially along the bordering area because
a lot of compromises were made in chasing the goal. Several general projects were
developed on Bulgarian territory with main center the capital Sofia. The direction to
Skopje was prior, followed by that to Struma River and to Bregalnitsa River gaining
popularity recently. The main trace followed the upper Struma River flow and
the alternatives that were discussed the most were those along the River.