logo
In Slovakia, a frenzy of cultural repression is underway, as we turn back to Soviet times

In Slovakia, a frenzy of cultural repression is underway, as we turn back to Soviet times

The Guardian29-01-2025

In his novel The Noise of Time, Julian Barnes depicts the Russian composer Dmitri Shostakovich as 'a man standing by a lift, at his feet a small case containing cigarettes, underwear and tooth powder; standing there and waiting to be taken away'. He knows that it will soon be his turn to be arrested by Stalin's secret police and is prepared for it.
Power in the Soviet Union had been seized by many who were uneducated and coarse, driven by a vindictiveness amplified by the sense that they were merely taking what was rightfully theirs. Shostakovich, along with writers such as Leonid Andreyev, Ivan Bunin, Alja Rachmanowa and others left strikingly similar depictions of the upheaval caused by the Stalinist purges: society was divided and riven by fear, anxiety, acts of revenge, lists of inconvenient people, destruction. Brute force prevailed over talent, expertise and education. The winner took all.
Slovakia is (for now) a member of the EU, it is (for now) a democratic country and has not (so far) endured a bloody or violent coup. But the atmosphere today feels to me in some ways quite similar to that described in Russia 100 years ago.
Since the populist Robert Fico's return for a fourth term as prime minister in October 2023, Slovakia has pivoted from the west to the east and is drifting away from liberal democracy to what looks like authoritarianism. A long-term critic of the EU and Nato, Fico has questioned Russia's role as the aggressor in the war in Ukraine, threatening to stop electricity supplies to Kyiv.
In December Fico travelled to Moscow for a private meeting with Vladimir Putin, only the third western leader to do so since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. In response, Slovaks have taken to the streets to voice their anger about the country's future, their support for Ukraine and for Slovakia's continued membership of the EU and Nato. The most recent protest, drew more than 100,000 people, many calling for Fico to resign.
But how does one defend democracy if the state's very representatives are involved in systematically dismantling it? And how could the achievements of the 35 years since the Velvet Revolution have been upended so quickly?
Slovakia's artistic and cultural community has always been at the forefront of the pro-democracy cause. That was the case during the Velvet Revolution and in the 1990s protests against prime minister Vladimír Mečiar's government. Thirty years later, in the mass rallies that followed the murder of the investigative journalist Ján Kuciak, it was the voices of Slovakian artists and cultural workers that sounded loudest about the threat to freedom and democratic values. That uprising led to the collapse of Fico's third government.
No wonder, then, that attempts to silence government critics are now targeted on the arts, culture and NGOs. Under the guise of balancing budgets, Fico has brought in sweeping institutional changes and taken a scythe to sources of funding for culture. Those who can't be sacked or silenced are starved and exhausted out of existence.
While the media, judiciary, police, prosecution and security services – key areas by which democracy stands or falls – have been subjected to similarly radical shake-ups, a look back at the assault on the arts over the past year tells an alarming story.
One of Fico's first and most controversial appointments was Martina Šimkovičová. The former TV presenter, who lost her job at a private TV station in 2015 for anti-refugee posts on social media, was appointed minister for culture.
Šimkovičová, a member of the far-right Slovak National party, set the tone for her new role by stating that 'the culture of the Slovak people must be Slovak and no other'. Her head of office, Lukáš Machala, is a man who questions whether the Earth is really round (this is not a joke).
Šimkovičová quickly embarked on a wholesale purge across the arts. She started by sacking a large number of culture ministry staff, followed by weekly dismissals of key employees in almost every state-run cultural institution, including the National Library. Hardly a week has gone by without a leading figure in a well-regarded museum, theatre, gallery or conservation agency being fired. Those who have not yet been removed or demoted are dreading their turn, which they know is only a question of time.
One of the most egregious examples of the purge is what happened at the Slovak National Gallery (SNG). It underwent an extraordinarily thorough and, by Slovakian standards, successful reconstruction under its director, Alexandra Kusá, who turned it into a modern, acclaimed and popular institution. But in August last year, shortly after the big opening of the refurbished galleries, Kusá was dismissed.
This led to a public protest and the resignations of a number of key SNG staff, not only in solidarity with Kusá but citing untenable working conditions. Alarmed by the situation, two partner museums, in Austria and Germany, have taken the unprecedented step of withdrawing from an exhibition they had long planned jointly with SNG, because as their letter noted, 'the current situation poses a potential risk to the items to be lent, for the protection of which the institutions themselves are responsible'. Kusá has accused accused the culture ministry of launching 'an era of bullying and intimidation'.
A hundred National Gallery employees resigned em masse this week and the biggest sponsor stopped its financial support.
The blows keep coming. The functioning of the Slovak Arts Fund (modelled on Arts Council England) has been brought to a complete standstill and rendered incapable of allocating and disbursing grants. With other funding schemes paralysed, thousands of artists, professional and amateur alike, from folklore through literature, theatre and the visual arts face uncertainty as to whether they will be able to survive financially. Even works to restore dilapidated historic buildings have been halted after the abolition of a range of culture ministry departments, including the one tasked with the preservation of monuments.
The director of the Slovak Literary Centre, the agency responsible for promoting Slovakian literature at home and abroad, has been replaced by a figure who is accused of ties with conspiracy platforms. The head of the national heritage office was dismissed in December. As if this were not enough, the writer Michal Hvorecký and the visual artist Ilona Németh say the culture minister has filed criminal complaints against them.
For a year now, the arts community has implored the government to listen to sense, but to no avail. Two petitions for the dismissal of Šimkovičová have appeared in the space of six months, garnering record numbers of signatures.
Castles and historical landmarks have hoisted black flags in protest. At the Slovak National Theatre, another institution whose director was dismissed without notice, actors have taken to reading statements before or after performances.
Slovakia's president, Peter Pellegrini, has ignored pleas from the arts community for a meeting. His continued silence prompted Zdena Studenková, an acclaimed Slovakian actor, to turn down a new year honour.
More than 700 psychiatrists and psychologists have signed an open letter to the PM, as have more than 2,000 academics and almost 6,000 workers in education. But since Fico's Moscow visit, such small-scale protests have widened into the mass demonstrations we've been seeing.
Fico says he has no intention of stepping down. And in the context of other crises plaguing Europe, the dismantling of Slovakian culture may seem insignificant. But a vast machine now appears aimed at unravelling our democracy. Every regional museum closure or curator sacking is a another step in that process. Fico is following in the footsteps of Putin, Viktor Orbán and Alexander Lukashenko.
Monika Kompaníková is a Slovakian journalist and novelist

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Nato chief to call on UK to spend 3.5% of GDP on defence
Nato chief to call on UK to spend 3.5% of GDP on defence

ITV News

time32 minutes ago

  • ITV News

Nato chief to call on UK to spend 3.5% of GDP on defence

Life comes at you fast in Downing Street. It's only a week since the Prime Minister was dodging questions about when he would increase defence spending to 3% of GDP. Today the Nato Secretary General is in town to tell Keir Starmer that actually Britain ought to spend 3.5% by 2035. Its expected the PM will agree with the target. And we are talking big sums here. That extra 0.5% is worth north of £17bn. Put a different way our defence budget of around £60bn would have to rise to more like £100bn to meet the 3.5% which is the new Nato target. Thats an NHS scale amount of money. And it inevitably means spending cuts elsewhere or tax rises or both. There are two reasons for this. The first is Vladimir Putin, the second is Donald Trump. Putin has shown he is ready and willing to attack his European neighbours. Trump has suggested he is less willing to come to the rescue. Today it is Ukraine, tomorrow it could be Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania. That's where we come in. Those three Baltic states are all Nato members. If they are attacked we would be obliged to defend them, we would be at war with Russia; that's the Nato deal. Mark Rutte wants Nato to be big enough, tough enough and determined enough to deter Putin, to make it not worth his while to test the alliance. But Nato's 2035 target is, of course, ten years away. Many defence analysts think that it will only take Putin a couple of years after ending the Ukraine war to reconstitute his armed forces. So here's the key question; are we in a Cold War moment when the threat in Europe will not materialise, or a pre-1939 moment when it will?

Canada promises to ramp up defense spending, met NATO target much earlier
Canada promises to ramp up defense spending, met NATO target much earlier

Reuters

time35 minutes ago

  • Reuters

Canada promises to ramp up defense spending, met NATO target much earlier

TORONTO, June 9 (Reuters) - Canada's Liberal government will pour extra billions into its armed forces and hit NATO's 2% military spending target this fiscal year, much earlier than scheduled, Prime Minister Mark Carney said on Monday. Canada has been under heavy pressure from the United States and other NATO allies for years to increase funding for its military. Canada currently spends about 1.4% of GDP on defense. "Now is the time to act with urgency, force, and determination," Carney said in a speech in Toronto. The previous Liberal governent had promised to hit the NATO target by 2032. Canada will boost pay for the armed forces and buy new submarines, aircraft, ships, armed vehicles and artillery, as well as new radar, drones and sensors to monitor the sea floor and the Arctic, Carney said. (Reporting by Wa Lone, writing by David Ljunggren, editing by Promit Mukherjee) ((Reuters Ottawa editorial; opens new tab)) Keywords: CANADA POLITICS/DEFENSE

NATO chief to call for four-fold increase in Europe's air defense spending
NATO chief to call for four-fold increase in Europe's air defense spending

NBC News

timean hour ago

  • NBC News

NATO chief to call for four-fold increase in Europe's air defense spending

LONDON — Washington's European allies must make a 'quantum leap' in military spending to deter Russia, the head of NATO is expected to say Monday, calling for a 400% increase in the continent's air and missile defense budget. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte's comments are set to be among the strongest yet from the organization as it attempts to improve the continent's insufficient defenses against Russi a while also avoiding the political ire of President Donald Trump. 'The fact is, we need a quantum leap in our collective defense,' Rutte is expected to say in a speech to the London-based think tank Chatham House, in remarks released beforehand by the alliance. 'The fact is, we must have more forces and capabilities to implement our defense plans in full. The fact is, danger will not disappear even when the war in Ukraine ends.' Trump's clear signaling that he would like to at least significantly reduce decades of American military support for Europe has sent its nations scrambling to beef up their own arms industries. The American president's suggestion that NATO allies should up their minimum defense spend from 2% to 5% of GDP was once seen as outlandish; but last month Rutte too backed this idea and said he expected it to be adopted at NATO's June 24-25 summit. On Monday he will make a similarly ambitious call, according to NATO's pre-released remarks. He will ask for a '400% increase in air and missile defense' and add that 'militaries also need thousands more armored vehicles and tanks, millions more artillery shells, and we must double our enabling capabilities, such as logistics, supply, transportation, and medical support.' 'Wishful thinking will not keep us safe,' he will say. 'We cannot dream away the danger. Hope is not a strategy. So NATO has to become a stronger, fairer and more lethal alliance.' Rutte's comments would come against the backdrop of European powers vowing to spend more on their military budgets, having relied for decades upon America's protection first against the Soviet Union and now Putin's revanchist Kremlin. NATO's constituents must also maintain a balancing act when it comes to Ukraine — which is not a member. Kyiv's allies want to support a neighbor it sees as a bulwark against Russian aggression, while keeping onside a White House increasingly sympathetic to Moscow's worldview. Trump has previously described his 'very, very good relationship' with Putin, a man considered a pariah by former President Joe Biden and other Western leaders. Many officials and analysts in Europe acknowledge that Trump is right to demand that wealthy nations such as Germany be able to look after themselves without Washington's help. However many of these same commentators have expressed their horror at the tactics used by Trump, who has suggested that the United States would not protect underpaying allies, and openly inviting Russia to 'do whatever the hell' it wants to them. That risks shattering the central premise of NATO: Article 5 of its founding charter — an 'all-for-one and one-for-all' mutual defense promise suggesting that if one ally is attacked, the rest would come to its aid. The scenario the founders had in mind was that the U.S. would join the fight if Russia decided to launch an act of aggression against a smaller European country. In practice however, the only time it has been used in the real world was the other way round, when the alliance lent Washington symbolic defensive help after 9/11. Previous American presidents have always seen this as a good trade off: America underwrites European security, and in return has a huge influence over political, diplomatic and even cultural happenings on the continent and beyond. The soft power return on investment was always seen as a profitable one. However, Trump has repeatedly questioned this logic, not only undermining the promise behind Article 5 but using hostile language against those historically considered Western brethren. The realization among European allies that Washington is no longer committed to its mutual defense has sparked a drive to push up defense budgets and revive the long-since dormant arms industry on the continent.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store