As Europe faces a growing security crisis, Slovak Defence Minister Róbert Kaliňák has sparked outrage by suggesting that Ukraine’s resistance to Russian aggression may be futile. Drawing a parallel to the 1968 Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia, Kaliňák remarked, “Eventually, the Russians will leave,” implying that prolonged resistance would only lead to unnecessary loss of life and that a “faster peace” could be a better alternative.
This statement undermines Ukraine’s right to self-defence and aligns disturbingly with Moscow’s preferred narratives. In a moment when Europe must demonstrate unity and resolve, Kaliňák’s comments raise serious concerns about Slovakia’s commitment to supporting Ukraine and its broader role in the continent’s collective security.
With U.S. foreign policy shifting away from its traditional defence commitments, Europe faces a pivotal moment. The continent must take responsibility for its security by supporting Ukraine militarily, increasing national defence spending, and fostering EU-wide unity. In this context, a recent statement by Slovak Defence Minister Róbert Kaliňák warrants deeper scrutiny.
Do not worry, the Russians will leave
Referring to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Kaliňák remarked: “Eventually, the Russians will leave.” Drawing a parallel to the 1968 Soviet occupation of Czechoslovakia, he suggested that resistance might lead to unnecessary loss of life, implying that a “faster peace” could be preferable to prolonged conflict. This framing not only undermines Ukraine’s right to self-defence but also reflects a broader shift in Slovakia’s political landscape—one that risks aligning more closely with Moscow’s interests.
Kaliňák’s statement cannot be viewed in isolation. It fits into a troubling pattern of Slovak-Russian collaboration spearheaded by top political figures. Former police chief and now vice-chairman of the Slovak National Council Tibor Gašpar, a key figure in Slovakia’s defence and security establishment, recently travelled to Moscow under the pretext of energy discussions. His visit followed secret talks with the Russian ambassador to discuss cybersecurity—raising serious concerns given his familial ties to Slovakia’s intelligence chief, Pavol Gašpar. This deep-rooted connection between Slovakia’s security institutions and Moscow highlights fears of Kremlin influence penetrating the highest levels of Slovak intelligence.
Prime Minister Robert Fico further deepened these concerns by meeting Vladimir Putin in December 2024, ostensibly to secure affordable energy supplies. However, his silence regarding Russia’s suggestion that Slovakia could host peace talks between Moscow and Kyiv has been interpreted as tacit endorsement of Kremlin narratives. Fico’s actions fit into a broader strategy of appeasement, with critics accusing him of trading Slovakia’s international credibility for economic concessions while legitimising Russia’s ongoing aggression.
The alignment with Russian interests extends to Andrej Danko, the leader of the pro-Kremlin Slovak National Party, who has openly praised the Kremlin’s role in World War II and opposed the expulsion of Russian diplomats implicated in the Vrbětice attack. His visits to Moscow and repeated engagements with Russian officials, including Sergey Lavrov and Vyacheslav Volodin, symbolise Slovakia’s shifting diplomatic allegiances. Meanwhile, Foreign Minister Juraj Blanár has held more frequent meetings with Lavrov than with any other foreign counterpart, positioning Slovakia as an outlier within both NATO and the EU. Under Blanár’s leadership, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has purged experienced diplomats and hired new staff reportedly educated at Russian institutions, raising concerns about ideological infiltration into the country’s diplomatic corps.
Vice-chairman of the ruling SMER-SD party, Ľuboš Blaha, has also made overtures toward Moscow, meeting with Dmitry Medvedev and promoting the idea of “Slavic mutuality” even as Russian forces continue their war against Ukraine. Since 2018, Blaha has consistently pushed Russian foreign policy narratives, frequently echoing Kremlin propaganda that undermines Western alliances and supports Russia’s geopolitical aims. His rhetoric, marked by extreme hostility toward the EU, NATO, and pro-Western voices within Slovakia, has earned him a suspension from Facebook for violating the platform’s hate speech policies. This narrative of cultural and political alignment with Russia is further reinforced by Slovakia’s refusal to send military aid to Kyiv—an explicit contradiction of NATO’s collective stance.
The pattern of pro-Kremlin positioning deepens with Fico’s government, which has been accused of manipulating Slovakia’s intelligence services to suppress dissent. Recent allegations suggest that fabricated intelligence reports were used to frame peaceful domestic protests as a foreign-backed coup attempt, mirroring Kremlin-style tactics aimed at discrediting civic resistance. These claims come amid mass protests involving over 120,000 Slovaks—a clear rejection of Fico’s authoritarian rhetoric and attempts to undermine democratic governance.
Beyond diplomatic posturing, there are growing fears of Russian infiltration within Slovakia’s security services. A wave of bomb threats classified as cyber incidents—paired with Tibor Gašpar’s clandestine meetings with Russian diplomats—has raised questions about the extent of Russian influence within Slovakia’s intelligence agencies. The replacement of seasoned pro-Western diplomats with Russian-educated recruits further erodes confidence in Slovakia’s commitment to EU values and its position within NATO’s security framework.
Source: Victor Breier | Slovak Media Monitor
