The result of this fight for voters with the far-right Republic and CIS is the fact that Robert Fico did not support the conclusions of the European Council on Ukraine for the first time. He was also against Slovakia’s guarantees for the agreed loan to Ukraine from the EU budget. He did it at the summit, which was existential for Ukraine.
Without European financial aid, it would have collapsed financially and been at the mercy of Putin. Fico did not openly support the EU’s common position and joined Viktor Orbán, thus fulfilling his promise to make Slovakia “a pariah of the Union”. What not so long ago sounded like a theatrical pose for domestic voters turned into reality in Brussels on December 19.
A virtue for Fico, a warning for others
He subsequently declared this step as the fulfillment of a promise to voters and a manifestation of sovereignty. However, in this understanding, sovereignty does not mean the ability to promote the interests of the state in alliances based on long-term political and personal respect. It means a demonstrative, downright ragged stand against the vast majority of EU member countries. As if political isolation were the highest virtue, not a warning sign.
In order to defend his position, he also resorted to a purely personal argument: that the person who wanted to assassinate him also cited his “peaceful attitude” towards Ukraine as one of his motives. Tragic personal experience thus became a substitute for rational security argumentation. This is unprecedented in European politics – and worrying.
Even in such an emotional way, he pushed his narrative to the voters that the culprit of war suffering is not the aggressor, but those who try to face the aggression. That the restoration of peace is not prevented by Russian President Putin, but by the European Union, its aid to the attacked state.
The joint photo with Orbán and Babiš also demonstrates open disagreement with the strategic assessment of Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk: if we do not help Ukraine with money today, we will pay in blood tomorrow. Together with the Czech prime minister, the Slovak prime minister not only rejected the Polish security warning, but also sacrificed the renewal of cooperation in the V4 – just so that he would not have to give up the political epitaph of Viktor Orbán.
Fic’s fake mark
With this move, Robert Fico confirmed that his “peace policy” was a false brand from the beginning. From the slogan “not even a bullet for Ukraine” to today’s “no money for Ukraine”. However, while Robert Fico claims that the conflict has no military solution, Vladimir Putin, whose policy he effectively legitimizes with his stance, repeatedly declares that there is a military solution.
Peace in Fico’s, Orban’s, and most recently Babiš’s understanding means only one thing: not allowing Ukraine to defend itself and forcing it to accept the Russian ultimatum. .Even this time there was not a single word of criticism of Russian aggression and the massive suffering and damage it caused to Ukraine. Only the European Union was criticized because it allegedly “finances the war”.
According to this logic, peacemakers are those who take away Ukraine’s chance to survive, and warmongers are those who help it. Fico thus indirectly spoke out for the financial and military collapse of Ukraine in the event that it does not receive support from the EU. In Slovakia, this revived a fundamental dispute about what is its national interest today and what its place in the European Union should look like.
While Robert Fico repeatedly emphasized after the summit that Slovakia “will not be part of any military loan”, the opposition evaluates his action as a strategic mistake. Former Minister of Foreign Affairs Ivan Korčok points out that the prime minister “deliberately misleads when he talks about the financing of the war”, and emphasizes the security risks:
“Russian revisionism will not stop in Ukraine. If it succeeds, it will try to return the states of Central Europe, including Slovakia, to its sphere of influence.” The Chairman of Progressive Slovakia, Michal Šimečka, says that Slovakia behaves like a “black passenger” – it uses the benefits of EU membership, but avoids co-responsibility at a key security moment. He describes aid to Ukraine as an investment in stability, not as a manifestation of war enthusiasm.
Pellegrini set the boundaries
President Peter Pellegrini also entered the discussion, declaring that “no one has the right to force Ukraine to give up part of its territory” and that peace cannot mean the surrender of the attacked state. In doing so, he indirectly marked the boundary beyond which Slovak politics would come into conflict with international law, and he also argued with Robert Fico.
The dispute over the prime minister’s policy at the summit is therefore a dispute over Slovakia’s strategic orientation at a time when the issue of changing borders by force is reopening in Europe and the real threat is posed by Russia’s revisionist policy of restoring former spheres of influence.
In the short term, the Prime Minister’s policy can mobilize part of his voters. However, for a long time, Slovakia is deprived of trust, influence and the ability to promote its own interests in the European Union – especially at a time when decisions will be made about the new financial framework and security architecture of the continent.
The photo from Brussels is not just a symbol of who was sitting there in the middle. It is also a warning of where Slovakia is moving – and what price it may pay for it.
