I don't think that anything short of Bulgaria doing something spectacular can derail accession at this stage. Is there even any legal basis for doing so? Does anyone dislike the Bulgarians particularly?
Plus the aggressive pro-American stance of the Romanian government certainly does not help in Paris...
Speaking for myself, my own experience of the two countries is limited to a drive through both late in the summer of 1992. Bulgaria appeared to be less backward and brainwashed to me than Romania. (for instance, you could find petrol stations on the road...) In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
BTW the Austrian giant OMV bought Petrom so there are plenty of modern "petrol" stations all over the place now ;)
Pax Night and day you can find me Flogging the Simian
The "no" vote has made some people take the "see, I told you we wouldn't get in" perspective. Some conspiracy theorists are voicing the argument that Latin-language Romania will get in while Slavic-language Bulgaria will not, despite the fact that Bulgaria has been a stronger supporter of the European line than Romania with respect to the International Criminal Court. Bulgaria didn't sign a special agreement with the US, Romania did. It cost Bulgaria $20 million in US military aid.
(And before Soj is mean to me, I understand entirely that this is an unfair depiction of the country.)
And yes I agree with both you and the Diarist about the pro-US stance, although I should mention Romania is slated to get just one US base while Bulgaria is slated to get six. And if you think the US will station troops there without an Article 98 exemption, you're nuts.
I'm still betting that Bulgaria won't sign. Simeon's government said "no" and if the Socialists win, then it's definitely "no" on that one.
