Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico’s secretive visit to Moscow, public condemnation of Ukraine, and latest open letter to EU leaders expose him as a key enabler of Russia’s hybrid warfare strategy to weaponize energy against Europe. By echoing Kremlin narratives that frame Ukraine’s resistance as the primary barrier to peace, Fico advances Putin’s agenda of fracturing EU unity and prolonging dependence on Russian gas. His exaggerated warnings of economic catastrophe, rooted in unverified claims, undermine NATO and EU efforts to reduce reliance on Russian energy. Through direct coordination with Putin and unilateral offers to host peace talks, Fico positions himself not as a neutral diplomat but as an active participant in destabilizing Europe from within.
Fico’s open letter to the European Commission paints a dire picture of economic fallout from Ukraine’s plan to halt Russian gas transit after January 2025. However, closer scrutiny of his key assertions exposes exaggerations and unsupported projections, reflecting rhetoric that aligns with Russian strategic interests.
Fico’s covert visit to Moscow, just days before the letter’s release, has deepened suspicions of his alignment with Russian interests. The unsanctioned trip, made through undisclosed means while Slovakia’s government planes remained grounded, raises serious transparency concerns. Remarkably, news of the visit was first leaked by Serbian Prime Minister Aleksandar Vučić, not Slovak media or government channels. Following the meeting, it was Russian state media—not Bratislava—that shaped the public narrative, an unusual and troubling development. Adding to the intrigue, Fico appeared to travel without aides, a rare and unorthodox move for such high-level diplomatic engagements, further fuelling speculation over his discussions with Putin.
One of the central claims in Fico’s most recent appeal to the European Commission is that Ukraine’s decision to end gas transit will severely harm EU competitiveness, describing the move as a unilateral act with grave economic consequences. This assertion, however, is highly misleading. The European Commission has already factored the termination of transit into market expectations, projecting minimal impact on gas prices. Contrary to Fico’s depiction of impending economic strain, EU assessments suggest that the halt will neither destabilize markets nor significantly alter energy costs.
Another striking claim in the letter estimates that the transit stoppage will raise gas prices by 10 to 12 EUR per megawatt-hour (MWh), burdening European households and industries with additional costs of up to €50 billion annually. Yet, this projection is unsupported and exaggerated. The European Commission anticipates minor financial repercussions, noting that market mechanisms have already adapted to Ukraine’s planned actions. The projected costs Fico cites appear inflated and out of step with broader EU analyses.
Fico Accuses Ukraine of Prolonging War by Rejecting Talks
Fico’s recent rhetoric mirrors his broader positioning in regional diplomacy, where he has framed Ukraine’s resistance as the primary obstacle to peace. In a public address, Fico claimed that President Zelensky’s refusal to accept a ceasefire prolongs the war unnecessarily, directly echoing Russian narratives. He further suggested that halting Russian gas transit would cost the EU upwards of €120 billion by 2026—an assertion that contradicts European Commission estimates indicating reduced dependency on Russian energy.
Fico also suggests that alternative gas transit routes proposed to Ukraine were rejected outright by President Volodymyr Zelensky. However, this assertion is unsubstantiated. There is no public evidence indicating that Ukraine dismissed non-Russian gas transit options. In fact, Ukrainian officials have expressed openness to discussing such arrangements if formally approached by the European Commission.
Perhaps the most alarming aspect of Fico’s rhetoric is his unfounded projection that ending Russian gas transit will deprive European consumers and industries of tens of billions of euros while imposing only minimal financial losses on Russia. This narrative amplifies fears of economic self-sabotage within the EU, echoing longstanding Russian tactics aimed at sowing discord among European nations.
Slovak PM Complicit in Russia’s Hybrid Tactics of Weaponizing Energy
Prime Minister Robert Fico’s recent open letter to EU leaders, following his covert visit to Moscow and subsequent video address blaming Ukraine for prolonging the war, serves as the final piece of evidence solidifying his complicity in Russia’s hybrid strategy of weaponizing energy. The letter, filled with exaggerated economic warnings and unverified claims, completes a pattern of behaviour that directly advances Putin’s efforts to destabilize Europe and maintain energy dominance. Together, Fico’s visit, his rhetoric, and now this letter reveal a coordinated effort to fracture EU unity and prolong dependence on Russian gas supplies.
Fico’s latest offers to host peace negotiations—coordinated directly with Putin—risk legitimising Russia’s position and bypassing NATO and EU frameworks. This unilateral approach casts Slovakia as a disruptor within the alliance, aligning with Russian interests by fostering division among EU member states.
By presenting worst-case scenarios without substantiating them, Fico’s arguments align with Russian hybrid warfare strategies that weaponize energy dependencies to fracture EU unity. His focus on the economic toll to Slovakia and the EU—while downplaying the strategic necessity of reducing reliance on Russian energy—serves Moscow’s objective of maintaining influence over European energy supplies.
Fico’s appeal, rooted in exaggerated economic forecasts and unverified claims, risks undermining EU efforts to foster energy security and resilience. As Slovakia positions itself within ongoing geopolitical energy battles, Fico’s rhetoric signals a worrying shift towards narratives that mirror Russian disinformation, highlighting the broader challenge of maintaining EU cohesion in the face of energy-related hybrid threats.
Author: Victor Breiner | Slovak Media Monitor
Full Text: Fico’s Open Letter to the EU with Complete English Translation
Dear President of the European Council,
Dear President of the European Commission,
As is widely known, the President of Ukraine, V. Zelensky, unilaterally and without any open consultations with the institutions of the European Union or the affected member states, announced that as of 1 January 2025, Ukraine will cease to provide gas transit through its territory to the Slovak Republic and to other recipients in Western Europe.
I emphasise the unilateral nature of this decision because the European Commission, in a letter from December this year addressed, among others, to the Deputy Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic D. Saková, explicitly stated that “concluding contracts for the supply or transport of Russian gas is not prohibited under EU law at this stage, as it is not covered by EU sanctions, and as the import of Russian gas is currently not forbidden by other provisions of Union law.”
I would like to particularly highlight that Ukraine was presented with alternative options for gas transit that did not involve Russian gas, yet these were also rejected by President Zelensky.
Dear President,
Dear President,
I address you not only as the Prime Minister of an EU member state that will suffer significant financial damage as a result of this unilateral decision by the Ukrainian President – particularly in light of the ongoing necessary consolidation of public finances, which the previous government left in catastrophic condition – but primarily as the Prime Minister of a country actively engaged in the vital discussion on how to maintain the EU’s declining competitiveness in relation to other regions of the world. It is undeniable that the unilateral decision by the Ukrainian President will have a significant negative impact on our shared European efforts to keep pace with rapidly developing countries worldwide.
I am not aware of whether the vague approach of the European Commission and the majority of member states stems from a lack of professional analysis regarding the economic impacts of the interruption of Russian or other gas transit through Ukraine – and the matter has been assessed purely ideologically – or whether such an analysis has been conducted but not openly discussed with member states, underestimating the economic consequences of President Zelensky’s decision on the European economy.
In any case, I would like to present Slovakia’s clear stance that, especially now, during a complicated economic situation requiring painful austerity measures, it is absolutely essential to analyse the economic impacts of significant decisions and adopt positions based on thorough knowledge of the matter.
In the absence of convincing objective materials prepared at the level of the European Commission, I requested an expert opinion from the Slovak company SPP, a.s., which is not only the dominant gas supplier in Slovakia but also one of the significant European gas traders, to provide insight into the impact of terminating gas transit through Ukraine on gas prices in Slovakia and European markets.
Allow me to present the key conclusions of this analysis in this open letter.
Although the volume of gas actually transited through Ukraine represents only approximately 3.5% of the EU27’s gas consumption, this amount is crucial to the overall market balance, meaning the situation shifts from stable to tense in terms of satisfying demand. Traders estimate that the difference between continuing and halting Russian gas transit through Ukraine amounts to at least 10 to 12 EUR/MWh of gas for transactions on the key Dutch and German markets. This is reflected in the increase in gas prices from around 35 EUR/MWh to the current approximately 45 EUR/MWh, which can only be explained by the negative outlook associated with the Ukrainian President’s decision.
In practice, this means that at an annual gas consumption level of approximately 4 billion MWh (just under 400 billion cubic metres) for the EU27, the additional cost to European households, businesses, and public infrastructure would amount to 40 to 50 billion EUR annually. Including secondary effects on electricity prices, this figure rises by an additional 60 to 70 billion EUR annually (with Germany, the largest European market, alone accounting for 15 to 16 billion EUR per year). There would also be a direct loss of transit fees of around 800 million EUR for Ukraine (which the Ukrainian President evidently considers insignificant given Ukraine’s large foreign income) and at least 400 million EUR for Slovakia. I must add that in Slovakia’s case, the increase in commodity prices would be significantly higher than the benchmarks cited for the German and Dutch markets. It is highly likely that the possibility of exporting gas from Europe to Ukraine would cease to exist, forcing Ukraine to rely solely on its own production.
The revenues for the Russian Federation from continued gas transit through Ukraine would amount to only approximately 2 billion EUR.
Dear President,
Dear President,
To summarise the facts, we reach a conclusion that must be unacceptable to the European Union and its objectives. The unilateral halt of transit through Ukraine towards Slovakia will deprive European citizens, businesses, and infrastructure of tens of billions of EUR annually, Ukraine of nearly 800 million EUR, and Slovakia of more than 400 million EUR in transit fees and over 1 billion EUR in commodity price increases. The loss to the Russian Federation will amount to only around 2 billion EUR, approximately 3% of the total losses suffered by the 27 EU member states. Not to mention that such a small volume of gas can easily be redirected to other markets, potentially bringing Russia’s losses to near zero. I won’t even comment on the implications for the EU’s competitiveness.
In conclusion, I express the opinion that the silent acceptance of the Ukrainian President’s unilateral decision is absolutely irrational and incorrect and will lead to tensions and reciprocal measures. I also firmly believe it is in the interest of all EU citizens that European efforts to support Ukraine proceed rationally and not through self-destructive gestures that severely harm the EU. For this reason, I kindly ask you to give this unprecedented situation the attention and urgency it deserves, not only on behalf of the Slovak Republic but also in the name of the entire European Union.
Yours sincerely,
Robert Fico
Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic
