There Will Be Serious Repercussions
- 19.09.2025, 10:25
Robert Fitzo's cynical stance under the guise of "national interest".
Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fitzo recently made it clear that his country will not support new sanctions against Russia, hinting at some "benefits" for Slovakia that he is guided by. Fitzo also questioned the effectiveness of the current sanctions policy, saying that if 18 packages of sanctions did not stop Russia, why will the 19th one?
Fitzo linked support for sanctions to a number of conditions not directly related to the war. He demanded that the European Commission relax tough climate targets and take into account the needs of Slovakia's auto and heavy industry, as well as propose measures to reduce electricity prices. In fact, Bratislava has given Brussels an ultimatum: the sanctions will be approved only after these demands are met.
This position looks cynical and manipulative, because under the banner of "national interest" it undermines the foundations of European solidarity. The European Union can only confront the aggressor with a united front, sharing the costs. By saying that Slovakia will support sanctions only if they do not harm it, Fitzo rejects the principle of shared burden. This plays into the Kremlin's thesis that sanctions hurt the EU more than Russia itself.
But such tactics are not safe. In the name of short-term gain, Fitzo weakens the common front against aggression, undermining collective security. He himself admitted that he put the brakes on the 18th package of sanctions for the sake of guarantees of gas supplies. Moreover, he called the EU's plan to abandon Russian fuel a "huge mistake." Not surprisingly, Slovakia's EU neighbors are alarmed. Czech Prime Minister Peter Fiala urged Bratislava not to destroy Europe's unity in confronting the aggressor and reminded of its responsibility to the common values of freedom and solidarity.
Fitso's position is objectively favorable to Moscow, since it weakens pressure on the Kremlin and sows discord among allies. It is not without reason that his theses coincide with the rhetoric of Russian officials. Immediately after his election, the Slovak leader embarked on a course of rapprochement with Moscow. He stopped military aid to Ukraine and met with Vladimir Putin on several occasions. At the same time, Fitzo claims that sanctions are hurting Europe more than Russia and opposes military aid to Kiev, saying it only prolongs the war. This almost verbatim repeats Kremlin propaganda, where the aggressor is portrayed as a peacemaker and the blame for the continuation of the conflict is shifted to the West.
Robert Fitzo's rhetoric can be considered pro-Russian manipulation for several reasons:
Legitimizing surrender. Calling for "peace" at the cost of withdrawing support from Ukraine actually means agreeing to the aggressor's terms. This logic only encourages Moscow to keep up the pressure.
"National interest" as a screen. Appealing to the interests of the people, Fitzo uses them as a cover for abandoning moral obligations to allies. However, Slovakia's real interests lie in the long-term security of Europe, not in short-term gain. References to "damage to the economy" serve as a convenient pretext. It is telling that the parliament explicitly called for resisting sanctions under this guise.
Defeating EU unity. Bratislava's veto is stalling agreement on new sanctions requiring unanimity. When one country issues an ultimatum, the others are forced to soften common pressures. Such a split is exactly what the Kremlin is counting on.
The case of Robert Fitzo is a disturbing example of how narratives favorable to the Kremlin and undermining European unity are being promoted under the banner of "national interest." And the consequences of such actions could be much more serious.
The basis of today's Europe is the idea of solidarity, when everyone works together to solve common problems. Including security problems, which is where NATO comes from. Small economies of medium-sized European countries, among which Slovakia belongs, can offer something to the outside world only by acting together, only together they can claim an international role. The same applies to security, which in the case of Slovakia can only be collective. Can some cheap Russian oil be an adequate equivalent of destroying the entire system on which the well-being of Slovakia and Eastern Europe rests?
But politicians like Fitzo convince their citizens that it is. That it is possible to destroy long-term ties for short-term gains. And this will have serious consequences not only for Slovakia.
Petr Oleshchuk, Doctor of Political Science, Professor of Taras Shevchenko National University, specially for Charter97.org.