Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico on Russia’s state-owned television network, Rossiya 1. Fico, known for his pro-Russian leanings, was interviewed on the popular political talk show 60 Minutes, hosted by Olga Skabeyeva, a journalist widely criticized for promoting Kremlin propaganda. During the interview, Fico criticized Western support for Ukraine, questioned the effectiveness of sanctions against Russia, and accused the West of “prolonging the war” in Ukraine. His statements have provoked condemnation from both Slovak political figures and European officials, with some viewing Fico’s comments as undermining European unity and solidarity with Ukraine.
Former Slovak Prime Minister Igor Matovič did not hold back his disapproval, taking to Facebook to denounce Fico’s appearance and calling him a “horrible treacherous ferret.” Matovič, who led Slovakia from 2020 to 2021, is known for his pro-European stance and alignment with NATO and the EU, contrasting sharply with Fico’s more Moscow-friendly position. Matovič’s harsh critique reflects the deepening division within Slovak politics, as the country’s leadership takes an increasingly polarized stance on foreign policy issues, especially regarding Ukraine.
Fico’s interview on 60 Minutes has sparked controversy due to the host, Olga Skabeyeva, a vocal supporter of Putin’s policies and one of Russia’s most sanctioned propagandists. Skabeyeva has previously dismissed evidence of war crimes by Russian forces, calling the 2022 Bucha massacre a “hoax” staged by the West. Her inflammatory rhetoric has earned her the nickname “the iron doll of Putin TV.” The program 60 Minutes often showcases anti-Western perspectives and criticism of Ukraine, making it a significant platform for Russian state propaganda.
During the interview, Fico accused Western countries of “prolonging the war” by supporting Ukraine with financial aid and weapons. “The European Union tells Ukrainians: ‘Here are your weapons, here is your money, fight, just don’t bother us, we no longer want anything to do with this war,’” Fico said, suggesting that Western support for Ukraine is insincere and merely a tactic to maintain regional stability without engaging in the conflict directly.
In addition to his critique of Western support for Ukraine, Fico questioned the effectiveness of EU sanctions against Russia, implying that the measures have done little to curb Russian aggression or weaken its economy. “Sanctions aren’t working as intended,” Fico argued, positioning himself alongside other populist European leaders who have expressed skepticism about the sanctions. His comments have intensified fears among European policymakers about the growing influence of Russian-friendly leaders within EU borders.
Fico’s statements have put Slovakia at odds with the European Union’s unified stance on supporting Ukraine in its defense against Russian aggression. While most European leaders endorse sanctions as a means to pressure Moscow into negotiations, Fico’s comments reflect an emerging faction within the EU that advocates a more conciliatory approach toward Russia.
Fico’s appearance on Rossiya 1 has drawn sharp rebukes from European politicians, diplomats, and media figures, with criticism spanning across the EU and into Ukraine.
In a social media post, Ukrainian MP Oleksiy Goncharenko lambasted Fico for legitimizing Russian propaganda, urging him to “move to Moscow if he loves Russia so much.” Goncharenko’s criticism echoes sentiments held by Ukrainian officials and citizens who view any alignment with Russian interests as a betrayal of solidarity and support for Ukraine’s independence and sovereignty.
British Ambassador to Slovakia Nigel Baker also voiced his disappointment, describing Fico’s interview as “regrettable.” Ambassador Baker took to social media to rebut Fico’s statements directly, reiterating that the West’s goal is to achieve peace in Ukraine through support for President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s peace plan, which calls for a Russian withdrawal from Ukrainian territories.
Czech European Parliament member Danuše Nerudová shared similar concerns, describing Fico’s stance as “a threat to Europe’s security.” Nerudová’s comments highlight a prevalent fear among EU leaders that leaders with pro-Russian views within the bloc could weaken Europe’s collective approach to Russia and compromise the EU’s response to future conflicts.
Back in Slovakia, Fico’s appearance on Russian state television has deepened political tensions. Opposition leaders across Slovakia’s political spectrum have denounced Fico’s statements as harmful to the nation’s international standing and as undermining its alliances with the EU and NATO.
Michal Šimečka, the leader of the opposition Progressive Slovakia party, labeled Fico’s interview an “enormous disgrace,” suggesting that it jeopardizes Slovakia’s credibility on the global stage. Juraj Krúpa, an MP from the opposition Freedom and Solidarity party, characterized Fico’s decision as “unprecedented,” adding that “not even Moscow-supporting Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán would dare [do that].” The comparison to Orbán, who has himself faced criticism for his lukewarm support of Ukraine, underscores just how provocative Fico’s actions are perceived to be.
Fico’s remarks are indicative of a broader shift in Slovak foreign policy under his leadership, which has shown signs of moving away from the European mainstream on issues concerning Russia and Ukraine. Since assuming office, Fico has pursued closer ties with Moscow and has been openly critical of EU policies he believes infringe on Slovakia’s sovereignty. His stance reflects a populist trend that has gained traction in parts of Central and Eastern Europe, where leaders are increasingly questioning EU policies and advocating for more independent foreign relations.
While Slovakia has traditionally aligned itself with EU and NATO policies, particularly after the fall of communism, Fico’s leadership marks a departure from that approach. His rhetoric aligns more closely with leaders like Orbán in Hungary, who have advocated for a more balanced approach to relations with both Russia and the West, prioritizing national interests over EU unity.
Fico’s interview on Rossiya 1 could have significant repercussions for Slovakia’s relationship with the EU and NATO. His statements risk isolating Slovakia from its traditional allies, particularly as the EU faces growing pressure to maintain a unified front against Russian aggression in Ukraine. By questioning the value of sanctions and denouncing Western support for Ukraine, Fico has positioned himself at odds with the EU’s collective foreign policy, potentially jeopardizing Slovakia’s influence within the bloc.
Political analysts suggest that Fico’s comments may embolden other pro-Russian voices within the EU and could create friction among EU member states regarding their approach to Russia. As European leaders grapple with the ongoing crisis in Ukraine, internal divisions could weaken the EU’s ability to respond cohesively to future security threats.
In a move likely to exacerbate tensions, Fico hinted during the interview that he may visit Moscow in May 2025 to celebrate the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II in Europe. Such a visit would mark a significant departure from the position held by most European leaders, who have largely avoided high-profile appearances in Russia since its invasion of Ukraine.
The prospect of Fico attending the Moscow celebration has drawn additional criticism from political figures in Slovakia and abroad, who argue that such a visit would signal tacit support for Russia’s aggressive foreign policy. Given the symbolic significance of Victory Day in Russia, Fico’s attendance could be interpreted as an endorsement of the Kremlin’s narrative of history and its justification for current policies.
