Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico’s recent participation in official celebrations of Russia’s war in Ukraine—held in Moscow and attended by separatist leaders from occupied Georgian and Bosnian territories—has triggered unprecedented alarm over Slovakia’s strategic realignment away from the European Union and NATO. The visit, carried out without parliamentary mandate or coalition consensus, has been publicly condemned by Róbert Ondrejcsák, Slovakia’s former ambassador to the United Kingdom and a respected European security analyst, who accuses Fico of legitimising Russian aggression and dismantling long-standing foreign policy principles, including support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and the inviolability of borders. In a direct intervention, Ondrejcsák warns that Slovakia’s Western allies now perceive the country as an unreliable partner and calls on President Peter Pellegrini—himself recently elected and constitutionally responsible for safeguarding Slovakia’s foreign policy orientation—to clarify what concrete measures he will take to uphold the country’s commitments to the Euro-Atlantic alliance. The controversy emerges amid a broader pattern of intensified Slovak government engagement with Russian officials, the abandonment of high-level coordination with EU and NATO partners, and the growing adoption of Kremlin-aligned narratives by leading figures in Fico’s ruling coalition.
Slovakia’s recent foreign policy trajectory is under sharp scrutiny following Prime Minister Robert Fico’s controversial visit to Moscow. Róbert Ondrejcsák—security and defence expert, former Slovak ambassador to the United Kingdom, and current director of the London-based European Leadership Network (ELN)—has issued a public challenge in the form of five direct questions aimed at the country’s top leadership. In a strongly worded opinion piece, Ondrejcsák warns that Slovakia is undergoing a radical strategic reorientation, one that is neither rooted in public consensus nor shaped by expert consultation. Instead, he argues, foreign policy is being driven by social media posturing, simplistic symbolism, and a deepening domestic culture war.
Ondrejcsák contextualises his intervention by noting that such a shift is happening outside the framework of democratic process. Unlike normal strategic redefinitions—anchored in formal policy documents and parliamentary discourse—Slovakia’s new direction has emerged without legitimacy, reflecting only a vocal minority. He frames the Prime Minister’s recent presence in Moscow, where he appeared to endorse Russia’s ongoing military aggression, as a dangerous act devoid of electoral mandate or institutional backing.
In rejecting the relevance of the Foreign Ministry in current conditions, Ondrejcsák notes that ministerial statements resemble the output of a “virus-infected ChatGPT,” offering no coherent stance. According to him, Prime Minister Fico has unilaterally assumed control over the country’s international positioning. Therefore, four of his five questions are directed squarely at the Prime Minister, with a final question reserved for President Peter Pellegrini, who, as the formal guarantor of Slovakia’s foreign alignment, faces growing pressure amid signs of systemic divergence from Euro-Atlantic commitments.
Has Slovakia abandoned its stance on Ukraine’s territorial integrity?
Ondrejcsák recalls that just one year ago, Slovakia signed a bilateral declaration with Ukraine affirming strong support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and the non-recognition of Russia’s illegal annexation of its territories. This position was reinforced at the July 2024 NATO summit in Washington, where Slovakia, alongside its allies, named Russia as the aggressor. By contrast, today, the Prime Minister and leading figures of his party appear to openly suggest that large parts of Ukraine will remain under Russian control. Moreover, they promote narratives blaming the West or Ukraine itself for the war—positions that, according to Ondrejcsák, fully align with Kremlin propaganda.
Has Slovakia abandoned the principle of inviolable borders?
Until recently, the author notes, the preservation of state borders was considered an existential interest for Slovakia, with consensus across the political spectrum. He argues this principle is now in jeopardy, pointing to Fico’s alignment with Russian President Vladimir Putin—who is actively engaged in a war aimed at redrawing Ukraine’s borders by force. The Prime Minister’s presence at a celebration of Russia’s war efforts, in the company of known separatists and leaders of puppet regimes created by Russian military aggression, is presented as a signal that Slovakia may no longer oppose violent territorial revisionism. In particular, Ondrejcsák highlights Fico’s public appearance alongside Milorad Dodik, a Balkan separatist leader whose entity, Republika Srpska, is internationally recognised as part of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Also present were representatives of South Ossetia and Abkhazia—Russian-occupied regions internationally recognised as Georgian territory and previously not recognised by Slovakia.
Are NATO and the EU still Slovakia’s primary strategic alliances?
Ondrejcsák questions whether Slovakia still identifies with its Western allies. He asserts that the government is now isolated within the European Union, with its positions on critical strategic issues increasingly aligned with Russia, and out of step with countries such as Germany, France, the United Kingdom, the Czech Republic, and Poland. The Prime Minister’s participation in the Moscow ceremony, according to Ondrejcsák, has been widely interpreted across Europe as an act of political support for Russia. The author references numerous personal enquiries from diplomats, government officials, and journalists across the continent who were perplexed and alarmed by Fico’s alignment with the Kremlin. He warns that by labelling Western allies as “warmongers,” Fico is not only insulting them but also severing Slovakia from its identity as a civilised member of the democratic West.
Is Russia now considered a strategic partner rather than a threat?
The author recalls that official Slovak documents and intelligence reports have consistently designated Russia as the primary security threat to Europe. Slovakia’s own intelligence agency (SIS) has publicly warned of hostile Russian activity on Slovak territory. Despite this, Ondrejcsák argues that the government’s actions tell a different story. High-level Slovak political contacts with Russian figures—once rare and unofficial—have become routine. These include repeated meetings between Slovak Foreign Minister Juraj Blanár and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. At the same time, Slovakia has ceased engaging at the highest levels with its traditional allies, including Germany, the Czech Republic, France, the UK, and Poland. Ondrejcsák concludes that such behaviour reflects a de facto transformation of Slovakia’s alliance architecture, reducing NATO and EU relationships to mere formality.
What will President Pellegrini do to uphold Slovakia’s strategic commitments?
The final question is addressed to President Peter Pellegrini, who has repeatedly pledged to defend Slovakia’s anchoring in the European Union and NATO. Ondrejcsák argues that this guarantee is now meaningless in light of the current government’s contradictory actions. He challenges the President to clarify what concrete steps he will take to defend Slovakia’s Euro-Atlantic orientation and protect its strategic interests, as declaratory statements alone are no longer sufficient. According to Ondrejcsák, Slovakia’s allies have lost trust in such reassurances—“everyone in Europe” now sees Slovakia as an unreliable partner.
The article ends with a stark warning: repeating platitudes about Slovakia being a reliable member of NATO and the EU is no longer credible. The country’s standing among its allies has drastically eroded, and its top leaders must now answer clearly for the direction they are taking the nation.
Source: Róbert Ondrejcsák | Denník N
