Slovakia stalls new Russia sanctions, demands stronger energy guarantees
In a Facebook post, Fico said the Commission's proposals 'do not provide Slovakia with sufficient guarantees,' and confirmed that Bratislava's representative in Brussels had been instructed to request a postponement of the vote.
Since returning to power in 2023, Fico's government has blocked or delayed several EU-wide initiatives targeting Moscow, aligning Slovakia more closely with Hungary — arguably the EU's two most Kremlin-friendly nations.
Slovakia is currently blocking the new sanctions over energy security concerns, as the country remains heavily reliant on Russian gas. Hungary's refusal to back the sanctions is reportedly connected to its backing of Slovakia's stance.
'The government coalition rejects the idiotic proposal by the European Commission to cut off Russian gas flows by 2028,' he wrote, but added that it is open to negotiating a deal that would 'guarantee a certain level of comfort' for Slovakia beyond that deadline.
Fico reiterated that Slovakia would not obstruct EU efforts if it received credible assurances to mitigate the impact of phasing out Russian energy.
He insisted that the most viable solution would be an exemption allowing Slovakia to honour its contract with Gazprom until it expires in 2034—something the Commission currently rejects on principle.
While much of the EU has weaned itself off Russian energy since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Slovakia and Hungary remain heavily dependent.
What the Commission offered
In a letter sent on Monday, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen set out a series of proposed guarantees aimed at alleviating Slovakia's concerns.
These included creating a task force to support and monitor Slovakia's energy transition, developing a solution for cross-border oil and gas tariffs, and clarifying technical mechanisms — such as allowing spot market operations to adjust existing long-term contracts. The Commission also pledged to support the implementation of new and existing energy measures, fast-track approval of state aid schemes, and explore the use of EU funds to offset the impacts of the Russian gas phase-out and to assist with diversification efforts.
Fico said he had forwarded the Commission's letter to the leaders of all Slovak political parties to gather their views.
The ruling coalition party Hlas-SD welcomed the guarantees, while coalition party SNS has not commented on the issue.
The ruling Hlas-SD party welcomed the Commission's proposals, while coalition partner SNS has yet to comment.
Opposition parties, however, criticised Fico for failing to secure concrete concessions in Brussels and accused him of 'disgracing the country's name.' Still, they called on him to ensure Slovakia supports the sanctions package.
(aw)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euractiv
7 minutes ago
- Euractiv
Why Europe should fear Trump's deregulatory blitz
Sunday's EU-US trade 'deal' – if you can call it that – was a political catastrophe for Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission, and the EU's 27 member states. Fortunately, it was not an economic one. Most analyses of the agreement – which will see most EU exporters hit with a blanket 15% US levy – estimate the total cost to the bloc's GDP to be around 0.5%: a serious blow that could push Europe's anaemic economy into a recession, but which pales in comparison to the devastation wrought by the 2009 financial crisis (when output shrank by 4.3%) or the Covid pandemic in 2020 (when it plunged by 5.6%). Why is the damage, in relative terms, so small? There are multiple reasons, but the main ones include the 'price inelasticity' of many EU exports (rich Americans will, for instance, still buy Porsches even if they're far more expensive); the likely redirection of trade flows to other regions (such as South America); and many European firms' deep reluctance to relocate production to America (because of massive legal uncertainty and general Trump-induced insanity). Indeed, the basic structure of the EU-US trade relationship, coupled with the 'Tariff Man's' desire to wage a trade war on the entire world, virtually guarantees that the harm inflicted on Europe would always be economically manageable, albeit painful for certain specific industries (especially the export-dependent pharmaceutical and auto sectors). Although the US is the EU's largest trading partner, the €532 billion in EU exports shipped across the Atlantic last year still amount to less than 3% of the bloc's annual GDP – meaning that, even if all EU exports to America were to immediately cease (which is practically impossible), the net impact would still fall well short of the harm inflicted by the Great Recession and Covid-19. (Nitpicky economists would point out that a complete collapse of EU exports would likely have harmful 'secondary' effects, such as skilled workers fleeing the continent, that would further hinder growth. But you get the point.) Furthermore, Trump's desire to impose tariffs on literally every single country (and occasional penguin-inhabited island) means that the relative competitiveness of EU exporters has actually increased as a result of Sunday's agreement. Mexico and Canada – America's two largest trading partners – currently face 25% and 35% tariffs, respectively, on most exports to the US; China, the US's third-largest trading partner and Europe's second-largest, has also been hit with a 30% US levy: twice as high as the EU's rate. (In a thinly veiled allusion to this fact, EU Trade Commissioner, Maroš Šefčovič, wrote on X this morning that 'EU exporters now benefit from a more competitive position'.) These considerations – and the fact that the EU has already successfully withstood a 10% US blanket levy since April – explain why analysts have largely shrugged off the anticipated impact of this week's EU-US deal. 'It is not obvious that the EU is paying a much higher price than had been anticipated,' Deutsche Bank wrote in a note, as they increased the forecast impact of Trump's tariffs on the bloc's output from 0.4% to 0.5%. Bloomberg Economics similarly noted that their anticipated impact of Trump's tariffs on Europe remains 'broadly unchanged' at 0.4% of GDP, although they warned that an 'escalation' of duties on specific sectors, in particular pharmaceuticals, could 'shave off' another 0.3%. Historical fears Arguably, the intense focus on Trump's trade war has come at the expense of media attention on US policies which could, in fact, inflict just as much harm as the 2009 financial crisis – namely, by triggering another financial crisis. In fact, US policymakers themselves have openly sounded the alarm about the potential impact of Washington's push to massively deregulate America's financial sector. In a fascinating speech delivered at the Washington, DC-based Brookings Institution last month, Michael Barr, a governor of the US Federal Reserve, warned that periods of deregulatory zeal preceded all three of the most infamous financial meltdowns over the past century, namely the Great Depression in the 1930s, the 'Savings & Loan' crisis in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and the 2009 global financial crisis that almost triggered the collapse of the euro area. During the ensuing Q&A, Barr said that he 'certainly worried' about the historical parallels to today's situation, in which Washington has sought to slash banks' capital buffers, weaken 'stress testing' requirements, and erode federal supervision of highly volatile cryptocurrencies. 'An important lesson we can draw from US financial crises is the role that ill-advised weakening of the bank regulatory framework played in those crises,' Barr said. 'It is well within our ability, and is our duty as regulators, to learn from these episodes to avoid making the same mistakes.' Barr's fears are widely shared by financial analysts. Indeed, some fear that the American deregulatory bug may already have spread to Europe. Europe's banking sector is "riding the wave of deregulation fetish even if profitability has been improving dramatically' as a result of the European Central Bank's higher interest rates, said Sander Tordoir, chief economist at the Centre for European Reform. Tordoir added that Europe's push to slash regulations is a 'strange sight to behold' given that Europe, unlike the US and Switzerland, successfully avoided a banking crisis in March 2023, when the collapse of San Francisco-based Silicon Valley Bank sparked widespread market panic that ultimately led to the failure of Credit Suisse and its acquisition by rival UBS. 'The supervision from the ECB and financial regulation put in place after 2008 surely has played a constructive role' in Europe's avoidance of any spillover effects, Tordoir said. 'It was a test and only the eurozone passed it with flying colours.' Stupid risks Tordoir's fears have been echoed by other analysts. Finance Watch, an NGO, recently warned that Brussels' push to 'simplify' the EU's securitisation regulations – a sector that allows banks to repackage and sell loans and which played a key role in the 2009 crisis – could increase 'systemic risk' in Europe's financial sector. Sceptics, however, argue that the risks posed by these efforts remain minimal, especially given that the EU's securitisation market remains multiple times smaller than the US's. Some also note that the overall financial craziness in the US – including Trump's repeated attacks on Fed independence, the passing of a deficit-busting federal budget, and the threatened imposition of US capital controls – has deterred EU policymakers from treading a similar path. 'Six months ago, there was a view that, if the US relaxes capital requirements, Europe would have to do the same to preserve the level playing field,' said Nicolas Véron, a senior fellow at Bruegel and the Peterson Institute for International Economics. 'But now the idea of the level playing field with the US under the Trump administration doesn't really pass muster; the growing consensus in Europe is that Trump's policies are dangerous and reckless.' Véron also noted that Europe's ability to withstand the 'somewhat remote' possibility of a US-induced shock has improved over the past decade due to improvements to its banking supervision and overall financial architecture (e.g. the creation of the European Stability Mechanism, or euro area rescue fund). 'At this point the risk is no longer so much that the US will do something stupid and we will do the same stupid thing, but that the stupid things that happen in the US may create risks for Europe,' he said. Economy News Roundup The EU and US clinch trade deal. The agreement, announced on Sunday, averted the imposition of a 30% US blanket tariff on 1 August that threatened to upend the €1.7 trillion transatlantic trade relationship. The deal will see the EU face a blanket tariff of 15% on most goods; EU firms will also purchase $750 billion worth of US energy and invest $600 billion into America over and above what they have already pledged, Brussels said. Read more. France condemns deal as 'submission'. 'It's a dark day when an alliance of free peoples, united in their values and in the defence of their interests, resigns itself to submission,' Prime Minister François Bayrou said on Monday. European Affairs Minister Benjamin Haddad added that it was "urgent" for the EU to prepare to activate its "bazooka" anti-coercion instrument – the bloc's most powerful trade weapon that could limit the American service industries access to EU markets. Read more. The agreement was clinched to ensure support for Ukraine, says Brussels. 'It's about security; it's about Ukraine; it's about current geopolitical volatility,' EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič told reporters on Monday. 'I cannot go into [all the] details [about] what was discussed yesterday, but I can assure you it was not only about trade.' The comments come amid deep concern in Europe over the durability of US support for Ukraine, which continues to face escalating Russian attacks more than three years after Moscow's full-scale invasion. Read more. Brussels and Washington offered sharply different accounts of the deal's details. The disagreements include whether some of the EU's steel and aluminium exports to the US will be exempt from Trump's 50% tariff; the timeline for the imposition of tariffs on the EU's pharmaceutical exports; and how – or if – Brussels will 'streamline' the sanitary certification procedure for American pork and dairy. 'There's plenty of horse trading still to do,' US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told CNBC on Tuesday. Read more. The eurozone economy grows by 0.1%. The modest expansion in the second quarter of this year represents a slowdown from the 0.6% GDP growth recorded in the first quarter, but exceeded the zero growth predicted by economists in a Reuters poll. Stronger-than-expected results in Spain and France helped offset an unexpected contraction in Italy. Germany – the eurozone's largest economy, whose export-dependent industries are heavily exposed to US President Donald Trump's sweeping levies – also shrank by 0.1%, in line with analysts' expectations. Read more. Brussels proposes freezing €1.5 billion in EU funds to Ukraine. The move came after Kyiv fell short of implementing reforms linked to tackling corruption and the rule of law. It also came after President Volodymyr Zelenskyy faced rare EU criticism and the first major anti-government protests since Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022 over sweeping changes to two key anti-corruption bodies. (The changes have since been reversed.) But people familiar with the matter said the suspension of the payout was unrelated to Zelenskyy's moves. Read more.
Euractiv
2 hours ago
- Euractiv
European allies start airlifting aid into Gaza
A coalition of European countries, including Germany and France, started airlifting aid into the Gaza Strip on Friday, amid increasing pressure on Israel to allow for more deliveries via the land route. European countries had announced their participation in the operation earlier this week after Israel's government had agreed to allow more aid to enter the region to alleviate the dire humanitarian situation caused by its ongoing military operation. Germany said it had run two flights, dropping off 34 pallets containing 14 tonnes of food and medical aid, provided by a charity based in Jordan. Spain said it had dropped off 12 tonnes of food. French President Emmanuel Macron confirmed that his country had also participated, with the UK expected to join in eventually. Macron stressed, however, that "airdrops are not enough." German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul also noted that "sufficient quantities of relief supplies can only be provided to the people by land." Israel had blocked most aid into Gaza since the first phase of a negotiated truce with Hamas ended in March 2025. However, it had reached a deal with the EU in July to slowly resume humanitarian aid deliveries. It has, however, only sparingly allowed for aid to enter the Gaza Strip via land, leaving the population in danger of mass starvation and prompting increasing criticism from European countries. Israel had occupied the region after Gaza-based Hamas led an incursion into Israeli territory on 7 October. The massacre by Hamas militants and the ensuing Israeli military operation have cost the lives of thousands of civilians. "In our talks, we are urging the Israeli government to allow the UN and international aid organisations safe access and, above all, safe distribution," Wadephul said. Germany's top diplomat is currently completing a two-day visit to the region, leading crucial talks with Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which will determine whether Germany supports sanctions against Israel at the EU level, according to Chancellor Friedrich Merz. The chancellor had announced Germany's participation in the air lift earlier this week, which he called a 'Luftbrücke' (or 'air bridge'), evoking the air drops conducted by the allies to supply West Berlin after it was blocked by the Soviet Union after the Second World War.
Euractiv
2 hours ago
- Euractiv
EU Court deals blow to Meloni's Albania migration deal
The European Court of Justice has struck down the legal basis of Italy's Albania migration deal, casting legal uncertainty over Rome's €653.5 million plan to process migrants outside EU territory. At the heart of the case is the designation of so-called ' safe countries of origin' – nations that, in Italy's view, do not pose risks for returning asylum seekers. According to a ruling published on Friday by the ECJ, such classifications must be enshrined in national legislation and be subject to judicial oversight. The Court added that a country cannot be deemed "safe" if it does not offer "sufficient protection" to all individuals within its borders. The ruling follows preliminary questions raised by judges at the Rome Tribunal regarding the legality of detaining migrants who were rescued in the Mediterranean and then transferred to Albania. Many of those migrants were from Egypt and Bangladesh – countries the Italian government had unilaterally labeled as safe. The ECJ also clarified that its ruling applies under the current legal framework and remains in force until the new EU Migration and Asylum Pact takes effect in June 2026. The forthcoming regulation will allow member states to classify countries as safe with exceptions for clearly identifiable categories of people. However, the judges noted that EU lawmakers retain the power to bring that date forward. In a sharply worded response, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni's office called the ruling ' surprising' and accused European judges of overstepping. ' Once again, the judiciary – now at the EU level – is claiming powers that do not belong to it, at the expense of political responsibility,' read a statement posted on Meloni' s social media. Still, Meloni vowed to press ahead: ' For the ten months remaining before the EU Migration Pact takes effect, the Italian government will explore every possible technical and legal solution to safeguard citizens' security.' However, Italy's National Association of Magistrates (ANM) pushed back on Meloni's claims of judicial interference, national media reported. ' No one was acting against the government,' said ANM president Cesare Parodi. ' Italian judges offered an interpretation that has now been upheld by the European Court. That's a matter of fact, not politics.' (cs)
