Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico has openly questioned the legitimacy of liberal democracy, praised the political systems of China and Vietnam—both single-party authoritarian regimes—and suggested that electoral turnover every four years undermines effective governance, prompting warnings from leading democratic voices that his rhetoric reflects a broader strategic realignment away from the European Union and NATO. In a sharply worded commentary, former Slovak Minister of Finance Ivan Mikloš argued that Fico’s remarks, combined with his longstanding alignment with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and recent appearances alongside Russian President Vladimir Putin, indicate not only ideological sympathy with autocratic governance but active participation—knowingly or otherwise—in what some analysts, including political commentator Sergej Michalič, describe as a Kremlin-backed operation to erode democratic institutions in Central Europe. Citing historical precedent from the communist era, when Slovakia was part of a one-party Czechoslovak state aligned with the Soviet Union, Mikloš warned that the Prime Minister’s appeal to “uninterrupted continuity” evokes authoritarian governance models that suppress political competition and constitutional safeguards, and that this ideological shift threatens to isolate Slovakia from the Western security architecture that has underpinned its post-1989 transformation.
Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico has drawn sharp criticism following remarks in which he praised the political systems of China and Vietnam—states ruled by single-party communist regimes. According to Ivan Mikloš, a former Slovak Minister of Finance and president of the think tank MESA 10, Fico’s statements represent not merely ideological divergence but an active threat to the country’s constitutional democracy. Mikloš interprets these comments as signalling a shift toward authoritarian governance and alignment with regimes that fundamentally reject the principles of liberal democracy.
Fico recently declared that liberalism and liberal democracy had failed, calling them ineffective forms of governance. He proposed that Slovakia should seek inspiration from authoritarian models that, in his view, offer stable and efficient rule through long-term strategic planning uninterrupted by electoral turnover. The Prime Minister argued that Slovakia’s democratic system is hampered by the cyclical replacement of governments every four years, which he sees as an obstacle to effective governance. Mikloš contends that this viewpoint elevates autocratic stability above democratic legitimacy, and implies a desire to move away from foundational constitutional norms.
The regimes Fico praised—those of China and Vietnam—are not merely efficient technocracies but tightly controlled authoritarian states where elections, political freedoms, and civic liberties are systematically suppressed. Slovakia, while not explicitly defined in its constitution as a liberal democracy, enshrines liberal democratic values throughout its legal framework. Mikloš warns that a call for “uninterrupted continuity” in governance echoes not democratic reform but a return to single-party rule.
This ideological shift is not occurring in isolation. Mikloš argues that Fico’s stance must be understood within a broader geopolitical context, in which authoritarian regimes are attempting to destabilise liberal democracies from within. The Prime Minister’s repeated expressions of alignment with Russian President Vladimir Putin—widely condemned for aggressive authoritarianism and military aggression—underscore what Mikloš sees as a direct challenge to Slovakia’s credibility within the European Union and NATO. These Western alliances, he stresses, are vital for the country’s sovereignty and protection against external coercion.
The article suggests that this ideological repositioning is not accidental. Mikloš references commentary by political analyst Sergej Michalič, who has described the trend as a “special political operation”—a term used by Russia itself to justify its invasion of Ukraine. Mikloš agrees with this framing and adds that such an operation aimed at decoupling Slovakia from the West is likely already underway, coordinated from Moscow. He leaves open the possibility that Fico may either be fully aware of his role in this process or be serving it unknowingly. In either case, the implication is that the Prime Minister is now functioning as a domestic conduit for external authoritarian influence.
Historical context further deepens Mikloš’s warning. He recalls that Slovakia, as part of former Czechoslovakia, lived under a communist dictatorship from 1948 to 1989, where “uninterrupted continuity” meant totalitarian rule enforced through controlled elections, economic centralisation, and the absence of political freedom. During this time, the country’s economy fell dramatically behind democratic neighbours. While Czechoslovakia once had a higher GDP per capita than Austria, four decades of authoritarian planning left it economically and socially diminished. Mikloš points out that today, despite decades of recovery, Slovakia still lags behind Austria, a discrepancy he attributes to the enduring effects of that regime.
Contrary to Fico’s claim that frequent electoral change hinders long-term development, Mikloš argues that successful governance in democracies is both possible and proven. He cites the examples of Denmark, Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland—countries that have achieved consistent development within systems that allow regular government turnover. In contrast, he argues, Slovakia’s stagnation results from poor leadership and governance—particularly under successive administrations led by Fico’s political party.
Finally, Mikloš draws a distinction between economic and political freedom, noting that while some autocratic regimes have achieved economic growth, they do so at the cost of civil liberties. Using data from Freedom House, he shows that countries admired by Fico—such as China, Vietnam, and Turkey—are categorised as “not free,” with Hungary, governed by Fico’s ideological ally Viktor Orbán, ranked as only “partly free.” He announces that this issue will be explored further in a future article.
Author: Ivan Mikloš | Source: SME.SK
