History educates – if it does not spare the inconvenient things 

Prof. Ivan Ilchev, Rector of St. Kliment Ohridski Sofia University

Prof. Ivan Ilchev was elected Rector of St. Kliment Ohridski Sofia University at the end of 2007. He was born on June 25, 1953 in Sofia. Graduated in History (Modern and Recent General History) from Sofia University and started his academic career as an assistant professor in the Faculty of History (1978). Candidate of historical sciences (1981), Bulgaria in the British Balkan Policy 1913-1918. Associate professor in modern and recent history of the Balkan nations (1987); Doctor of History (1993), My Homeland – Right or Wrong! Foreign Political Propaganda of the Balkan Nations. Professor in modern and recent history of the Balkan nations (1995). Dean of the Faculty of History of St. Kliment Ohridski Sofia University (2003-2007).
Guest professor at the Ohio State University, Columbus, USA (1984-1985), the Maryland State University, USA (1985-1986), Woodrow Wilson Center, Washington, USA (1990-1991), Chiba University, Japan (1999-2000).
Specialized and lectured in the universities in Leipzig, Thessaloniki, Oxford, Durham, etc.
Author of many monographs, scientific articles and studies, popular science film scripts.
Chairman of the Public Council on Museums with the Ministry of Culture, member of the Public Council of the Bulgarian National Television.
Fluent in English, French and Russian, working knowledge of Serbian and Romanian.

“The highest position in the state is the teacher’s chair”… Prof. Ilchev, do you share this concept and do you think we need such understanding today?
I wouldn’t say this is people’s understanding, on the contrary, in the last decades the prestige of education in general, and of the teachers in particular has been gradually dropping. This incessant whining how the prestige of the Bulgarian teacher has waned, how it could not be compared to the respect he commanded 50-100 years ago, when he was the first man in the village or town… But this is a perfectly normal process. In the time remembered with nostalgia, the teachers were as a rule more highly educated than most people. Today, a large part of society has some good education, and in every school at least half of the students’ parents have higher or at least equal education as the teachers. The entire education structure has changed, the values change – the rare and exotic is appreciated. On the other hand, the criteria are going down all the time – for example, the so-called elite high schools, for which even demographically there are no sufficient candidates. A host of higher schools are emerging, which claim to be universities and which nearly any secondary school graduate can enter… In practice, unfortunately education does not stand on pedestal.

But don’t you think it should be otherwise, and why are we in this situation anyway?
At the time there was a song and the refrain said “we create the goods with the sickle and the heavy hammer”. I think this idea is imbedded in the subconsciousness of the Bulgarian and at the moment it renders him a bad service. It is high time to say frankly and openly that education is the most significant sphere for the development of society, it is vital for the economy. States, which have realized this and have an adequate policy, reap great successes. Take Australia for example, one of the most advanced countries in the world, with extremely high national revenue. A state, which – let’s put it this way – is laid on the wool of its sheep, it has formed its economy on stockbreeding. Australia radically changed its policy in the field of education and it turned out that education products rank fourth in its export list, surpassing by far the traditional export of wool, fabrics, etc. But Australia has many sheep too. We must understand that a country of limited natural resources as Bulgaria has nothing to rely on but a highly qualified manpower, working in the country and within the European Union.

Some 20 years ago we used to say we know more about the other countries and peoples than they do about themselves, now the parents from our generation say their children know nothing of nothing. Do young people have sufficient general knowledge? Isn’t education becoming more fragmented and is this better?
The structure of knowledge is changing, the type of training too. I think these are natural processes which we don’t have to fight desperately. Only 20 years back, 90% even 95% of the education was received on the basis of traditional products – reading that is. The present-day young generation greatly relies on the visual perception, on images, on untraditional methods of gaining knowledge, on Internet. And this should be used maximally.

When you were elected Rector of Alma Mater, you said the principal point in your program is Sofia University to train thinking people. What should be done further to make Bulgarian education commensurate with the European and recognizable by the world universities?
The fact is that Bulgarian education is recognized in the world, at least the education given at Sofia University is recognized universally. What we want is to be equal, at the level of the good – I can’t say the best (for many reasons) – European, American, Asian universities. This is the task at hand and it is many-sided. It concerns, in the first place, the outdated admission of students, because the entrance examination as it is evidently cannot provide the answer as to who is best. The entrance examination is a snapshot of the state of the candidate student. It may be that before this moment he was much better. In Bulgaria we do not employ all possibilities to check his qualities. In many countries there are practically no entrance examinations, but there they see the student’s progress over the past two years – whether he participated in study circles, in sports and social activities at school…

The task of the university, which is a classic liberal institution by definition, is not to produce a know-all but to create a thinking personality that would be useful to society. This man may not know in greatest detail the history of the Persian king’s march against the Greeks and he need not do so – all he has to know is where to find it in case of need. However, it is very important that this man graduates from the university with a critical mind, to be able to assess which of the versions offered by the ancient historians about the march of Xerxes seems most authentic, most objective, and why. And he should not allow, he should be trained not to allow and to fight actively when a small clique, anywhere, is trying to usurp his rights and to speak on his behalf.

What else is aid down in your program? In the year of the 120th anniversary of the foundation of the oldest and most prestigious higher school in Bulgaria, what are your priorities, what would you like to see Sofia University like?
I am a historian, I always say this, I like to speak in the past tense. Not about what I have done personally but what the university has achieved. In the recent years the academic staff has done no small things, however not all of them have become public knowledge. As a rule, the public is aware of the crises. These are more curious than the positive developments. The previous rector’s leadership struggled with these crises very hard, and we are continuing the struggle. But along with that many language laboratories have been set up, repairs have been carried out, a lot of equipment has been introduced, maybe too much – I don’t think the society is obliged to provide every lecturer with a computer. What the lecturers cannot do by themselves and we must provide to the maximum extent is, say, the opportunity to demonstrate and compare his attainments at international conferences. Because the lecturers can buy computers but they cannot afford the travel and accommodation expenses for three days in The Hague with their current salaries.

No less attention is given to the university life. The definition of “university” is a corporation. In this entity in principle the students, staff and teachers are equal, the governance is consensual, very rarely majority decisions are taken. Step by step we are approaching the realization that all are part of a community. We have completed the project for the park renovation in the inner courtyard and the project for modifications inside the university building. Thanks to our Medical Faculty overall prophylactic checkups are done for the entire university staff at the University Hospital. We are trying to enhance the ties between our colleagues. In this respect I hope the program to mark the 120th anniversary of Sofia University will play an important role. It envisages various initiatives of this type – promoting the idea of unity of the academic staff.

How do you see the cooperation between education and business? Besides funds for education and science, it would contribute to attracting the young specialists to stay in the country.
A major question indeed. In this respect the rector’s leadership has already done a few things, other are in the process or at an advanced stage of realization. Sofia University in principle is in a more unfavourable position than the rest. It is the only higher school in the classic sense, where all branches of knowledge are taught. We serve the society as a whole, and not its individual segments. The Technical University, for example, which is a good university, is oriented at specific sectors: engineering, economics, business; there the salaries are higher, because these generate taxes. Its graduates can start with higher initial salaries than the Sofia University graduates. The business is much more interested in them. The owners of cement plants or other large enterprises would more readily support the Technical University, the professionals who produce machines necessary for their production. It is logical, rather than support, say, our wonderful specialist in history of medieval philosophy Prof. Tsocho Boyadjiev and the group around him. No one else in Bulgaria supports such a group, only Sofia University. Therefore I say we are in principle in such position (which, by the way, the government is trying to compensate in other ways, I cannot deny). No one, except the state, is particularly willing to support the training of teachers in Bulgarian language and literature. Another example – the business is more interested in the Medical University, too.

We are trying to find our place in this scheme and I’d say we have the first results. On March 13 we held a national business meeting, where we invited the rectors of the largest Bulgarian universities – the Technical University, the University of National and World Economy, etc., the managing board and representatives of the Confederation of Employers and Industrialists in Bulgaria. We agreed to hold a second meeting in the autumn. As a result of this meeting we have contracts for the training of cadres for the business. We also agreed to start a special course in the autumn where lectures will be read by its representatives, practical specialists.

Any moment now the project for establishment of Lifelong Education University Centre will be submitted to the Academic Council. This Centre will not centralize, but – I want to emphasize – coordinate the various efforts of the faculties, which have different kinds of postgraduate courses, courses for bachelor degree holders or secondary school graduates, students. The aim is to bring together the numerous certificates that the university holds – more than 60, for different types and degrees of education.

We signed a contract with Devnya Cement and the plants in Zlatna Panega. The contract envisages ecology training of their managers in our Botanic Garden in Varna. We are preparing a program by which our chemist lecturers will lecture at the training centre of the company. Under another program lecturers in business administration and public administration from the university will read lecture courses for the training of their cadres.

We have another kind of partnership, too – with companies that equip laboratories and lecture-halls at the university. And only in half an hour with the Ambassador of Greece we shall sign an agreement for the first in Bulgaria Department of Finance, financed entirely by the Hellenic Bank Association. The department will function at the Faculty of Economy.

The participation of the state?
We can’t do without the state. Ever since it was created as a form, the states develop as a result of conflict of interests. We cannot expect the cherished dream of Ostap Bender to come true: the state to hand us a million on a gold-ribbed blue saucer. That will not happen. We must convince that what we are doing is important to the state. I think the state understands it, few are the statesmen who think strategically. A politician would be interested in the most favourable program he can implement so that he would be re-elected in the next elections. Investments in education are repaid strategically in the long-term.

I will again give an example with the business, which at the moment is in great need of higher school specialists. Largely, with the exception of the biggest business, it has well qualified secondary school graduates. Complaints are heard that the higher education does not produce the needed specialists. But a bachelor program, by which a certain company undertakes to employ one-third of the graduates, takes one year to prepare, at least half a year to be approved, the training is 4 years. Inevitable there are always unforeseen situations, when something new is created it takes time to get established. And in some 8 years we will have a specialist. Therefore the state ought to determine the strategic line for the development of education, there should be long-term planning that would at least partially direct the higher schools to certain areas. Since the type of contacts is different – in the economy, in the European Union…

The solution for faster training of cadres is the masters program. “Tailored” to the business requirements. They can produce a specialist in three to four semesters. The shortest form are the thematic courses with certificates – for certain levels in management, for languages, etc., which last from 3 to 6 months and build up, give theoretical/practical skills.

Let’s talk about history. You were among the first Bulgarian scientists who backed up the young Bulgarian Diplomatic Review magazine, you started and wrote the column Historical Diplomatic Dictionary. You have the reputation of a historian who looks into not so well elucidated details of the past. Do we have to rewrite history?
History is always rewritten. But serious historians rewrite it because new documents appear, new methods of investigation, new aspects of the past occur to them. It is a different matter what part of this comes into mass circulation and what is used in public debate. I can readily give one of my favourite examples. When the Peace Treaty of Neuilly was discussed in Bulgaria in 1918, nearly all experts, with a few exceptions among the Frenchmen, affirmed that Bulgaria was forced to enter the World War, that its claims are just and they should be at least partially granted, in order not to leave the Balkans as a critical point of conflict on the peninsula. This was the unanimous opinion of the experts. Bulgaria ought to have been granted outlet to the Aegean Sea, South Dobrudja to be restored to it, to get Eastern Thrace, part of Macedonia, perhaps not the whole undisputable area but at least the part that is indisputably Bulgarian. All expert reports warned that this should be done as measures for 40 years ahead. The politicians think about when they are going to be elected, they don’t have the time to look so far ahead. Therefore they chose a completely different tactics. The historians’ opinion of the past is one thing, the opinion of those who try to flourish the past as a stick is quite different.

In your opinion, what remains unelucidated in the diplomatic relations on the Balkans? Conflicts from the 13th, 19th and 20th centuries continue to smoulder in the 21st century. Historically, is diplomacy a means to cover them or to resolve them?
If by diplomacy you understand a technique, it is one thing, international relations are another. We do not live in an ideal world. I feel very strongly against the tendency in Bulgaria to make out angels of ourselves. So, we do not forget to remind that Serbia took away from us the Western Outlying Parts after World War I. But we rarely mention that during World War II Bulgaria offered to Austro-Hungary after the war to split Serbia between themselves – Austria to take half of it, and Bulgaria the other half. An objective historian is one who doesn’t forget and doesn’t omit the inconvenient things but tries to explain why they were possible and why they happened.

History teaches us how to live together, and conflicts are a part of life. Even a couple that has had a long and happy married life, looking back would find not a few conflicts in its course. Personally I have always insisted on the historical events to be presented objectively, because there is a great danger in the endeavour to avoid conflicts to castrate history.

Now I remember, there was a project, Prof. Georgi Markov and I wrote a letter of protest. In the instructions for the lower grade textbooks the Serbo-Bulgarian War was omitted. This is no way to educate. You must say there was a war, you must explain its outcome, you can point out the monument in Vidin, which is a unique monument of the Serbo-Bulgarian War – a tired wounded soldier, who feels no hatred…

Not to rewrite it but to write objectively and interpret it…
According to our ideas of it. Each generation sees different things in history. My father, who was a very professional historian, when my book on advertising during the Revival Period came out and he read it, said: “You know, all my life I’ve worked with newspapers as the main source material but it has never occurred to me that advertising could be living history.” Because his generation is interested in political history. My generation started investigating other things. The next generation – still other. This is the real rewriting of history.

Lifelong learning. This is your credo?
Absolutely.

You are in contact with young people every day. Are you optimistic about the future of Bulgaria?
Yes. Definitely yes. We should not forget that in Bulgaria, a country poor in resources, with a population of 7 million, for many centuries for various reasons placed in a situation of self-governance (and in these centuries I include not only the Ottoman and Byzantine domination), the people live – in terms of standard and education – at the level of the top 20% of humanity. Of the nearly 7 billion population on the planet one and a half billion have a good living standard, where no one dies of starvation, people live decently in general. The rest wonder if they will survive the next season. We are not among them, and we should know it, it is not little.

The good thing about the Bulgarians, and most peoples for that matter, is that we are grumblers, but ultimately our dissatisfaction is the guarantee of progress. It would be very frightful if suddenly we clap our hands and exclaim, “Oh, how nice is everything!” and stop there. In criticism and grumbling there is future development and I see nothing bad in it.

How is the historian reconciled with the rector? What haven’t you time left for?
The historian is in a “double Nelson” lock. In the past three months and a half I have been reading only financial documents. I have even restricted my lectures to the students at the moment. God grant soon to return to my customary work.