For the first time since joining the European Union in 2004, Slovakia has obstructed consensus at an EU summit by withholding support for new sanctions against the Russian Federation—an unprecedented move by Prime Minister Robert Fico that places the Slovak Republic alongside Hungary in a growing bloc of internal dissenters challenging EU foreign policy cohesion. While EU leaders secured agreement to extend existing sanctions in response to Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine, Slovakia opposed the adoption of a proposed 18th sanctions package, citing concerns over energy security and potential litigation from Gazprom, the Russian state-controlled gas monopoly. Fico’s stance—delivered amid closed-door consultations with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen—links future Slovak support to the suspension or delay of REPowerEU, the EU’s flagship strategy to eliminate Russian fossil fuel imports by 2027. Although formal veto power over sanctions lies with the EU Council of Ministers rather than the summit itself, Fico’s defiance has drawn scrutiny across Brussels, where analysts warn of growing alignment between Bratislava and Budapest. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán simultaneously blocked conclusions on Ukraine’s EU accession and justified his position with a controversial domestic referendum widely criticised as manipulated. The double obstruction by Slovakia and Hungary has intensified fears of strategic fragmentation within the Union, as leaders also failed to agree on a collective response to the Gaza conflict, exposing deeper fractures in the EU’s ability to maintain a unified stance on critical international issues.
At a recent summit of the European Union, the Slovak Republic, under the leadership of Prime Minister Robert Fico, emerged as the sole member state to oppose the introduction of new sanctions against the Russian Federation. While the EU’s heads of state agreed to extend existing restrictive measures in response to Russia’s continued aggression in Ukraine, Slovakia withheld support for further sanctions, prompting significant media attention and diplomatic uncertainty. The respected news outlet Euronews characterised the summit’s conclusion as marked by a “veto” from Slovakia, though procedural clarifications later revealed that formal voting authority on such measures resides not with the European Council but with the EU Council of Ministers.
Prime Minister Fico’s objection did not block the extension of current sanctions, which was achieved through unanimous consensus. However, his government’s refusal to endorse the proposed new sanctions package introduces a potential precedent. According to Slovak political analyst Radovan Geist, publishing with the Slovak edition of the Brussels-based portal Euractiv, member states possess veto rights within the EU Council of Ministers—where sanctions are formally adopted—not during summits, which are limited to political declarations. Slovakia has never previously exercised such a veto in this context.
Alongside Slovakia’s position, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán obstructed agreement on Ukraine’s EU accession prospects, further complicating the summit’s outcomes. Prime Minister Orbán has recently conducted a domestic “national consultation” on Ukraine’s membership, a non-binding opinion poll criticised by opposition figures as a manipulated referendum. The Hungarian government presented its findings—indicating broad public opposition to Ukraine’s membership—as justification for its dissenting stance within the EU.
Prime Minister Fico met with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen prior to the summit to outline the Slovak Republic’s concerns regarding energy security and potential legal consequences. According to the Slovak government, there is a risk of multibillion-euro litigation from the Russian energy company Gazprom if long-term gas supply agreements are unilaterally terminated. The European Commission reportedly does not share these legal concerns.
The issue is closely tied to the European Commission’s REPowerEU strategy, an initiative aimed at ending the Union’s reliance on fossil fuels imported from Russia by 2027. This plan forms part of the EU’s broader energy policy and can be approved through qualified majority voting rather than unanimity, limiting Slovakia’s ability to obstruct it. Nevertheless, the Slovak government is calling for either a reassessment or a multi-year postponement of the REPowerEU implementation timeline as a precondition for supporting further sanctions on Russia.
The proposed sanctions package, known as the 18th in the EU’s ongoing response to Russian military aggression, reportedly includes restrictions that are unlikely to significantly affect Slovakia’s domestic economy. Despite this, the Slovak government has linked its opposition to broader strategic concerns, including energy dependence and legal exposure. Analysts cited in the source article questioned the proportionality of this stance in light of the limited practical impact of the proposed measures.
Finally, EU leaders also failed to reach a common position on a proposed response to the ongoing conflict in the Gaza Strip. Countries including Ireland, Spain, and Slovenia expressed strong criticism of Israeli actions under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government. However, Germany and others reportedly opposed formal punitive measures, resulting in a lack of unified EU conclusions on this issue.
Source: Pavol Strba | Aktuality.sk
