Analysing the disinformation about Robert Fico's government in the global media

The attempted assassination of Prime Minister Róbert Fico shocked the world media and drew international attention to the small Central European country of 5.4 million inhabitants. While the first hours of coverage provided factual information about the event and tried to communicate factually, what followed was and is a deepening of the narrative that often demonises Róbert Fico and his government and portrays my country in a negative light. Slovakia: an ungovernable peripheral semi-colony of the developed West.

I am profoundly dismayed by how quickly mainstream anglophone media shifted the narrative following the assassination, portraying the victim as a villain and vice versa within just 24 hours. It's clear to me, and I shudder to think, how different the reaction would be if this had involved a leader or member of our government's opposition. Such an event would likely plunge the government coalition, its supporters, and my country into turmoil, potentially leading to widespread chaos and condemning Slovakia on the global political stage.

In the article below, I point out a number of untruths and distorted claims from foreign media reports:

1. Reports on the assassination of Prime Minister Robert Fico stress that the attacker opposed the Fico government and cited the "disintegration of democratic institutions", such as the public broadcaster RTVS, as the reason. Although the attacker stated this, media interpretations suggest that the RTVS reforms are intended to turn the broadcaster into a mouthpiece for the government. It is important to note, however, that these reforms have considerable support within RTVS, as many argue that the institution has long exhibited systemic bias and partiality and has been a haven for staff now associated with the political party Progressive Slovakia.

Moreover, under no Fico government has there ever been widespread violation of the constitution, a ban on the media, or the systematic use of law enforcement as a tool to fight political opponents, as there was under the three previous right-wing governments. Nor has there been any banning or exclusion of opposition representatives from appearing on the public broadcaster RTVS, as was the case under the last right-wing government.

2. The accusations of "attacks on freedom of speech" under the Fico government are also completely false. There are numerous cases where individuals opposing the mainstream "progressive" media narrative have faced and are facing ostracisation, demonisation and discrimination, even personal attacks on or off the internet, simply because they have a different ("wrong") opinion. Contrary to claims, the real threat to freedom of expression in Slovakia does not come from the Fico government, but rather from its opposition, which repeatedly legitimises actions that are contrary to freedom of expression.

3. Fico is often labelled as a populist and pro-Russian politician, which simplifies and misuses the term populism, especially when it comes to left-of-centre politicians, and the very notion of populism is problematic. Its definition is: a political approach that seeks to reach out to ordinary people who feel that their interests are being ignored by established elite groups. Is there anything wrong with a politician wanting to represent the people? At the root of the problem is the original conception of the politician from history, a member of the aristocracy or elite who contributes to the running of the country and governance from a privileged position and represents the interests of the elite, which is then at odds with what a "populist" does. Populism thus receives a negative connotation as the result of elite propaganda that simply resists threats to its power.

Further, Fico's actions are better described as strategic and self-serving manipulation rather than pro-Russian. But the dominant narrative suggests to us all that unless someone is explicitly Russophobic, or at least anti-Russian, they are automatically pro-Russian. Nothing in between exists. Furthermore, it is also absurd to label Peter Pellegrini, the president-elect, as pro-Russian, something that also appears very frequently in the foreign media.

4. Linking the attempted assassination of Fico to the anti-government protests led by opposition parties suggests legitimate public discontent. What the foreign media do not do, however, is report on the opposition's intense, fear-mongering campaigns against Fico and his government, which are often based on exaggerations or outright lies and are openly aimed at 'destroying Robert Fico'. These campaigns, among other things, have contributed significantly to the extremely tense and polarised atmosphere in Slovakia.

5. Regarding the migration of young labourers from Slovakia, the narrative of a brain drain is often attributed to the Fico government. This perspective was echoed in several recent articles in the Guardian after the presidential elections, which suggested such a trend without hard evidence, and has resurfaced. The claim that Fico's policies are leading young people to leave has no substantial basis in the data and fails to take into account that these are the consequences of neoliberal reforms, privatisation/commodification of the right to housing, long-term underfunding of education, science, health, social services... all of which are the result of building a periphery within the EU where people can be asked to perform better for lower wages than in any country west of Slovakia.

This is not a complete list of untruths and attempts to mislead the foreign public and public opinion in the world and in Slovakia. I have recently expressed my dissatisfaction with the way the international media report on Slovakia. Given the political situation after the last parliamentary elections, when Robert Fico, a politician who is repeatedly labelled a populist and pro-Russian, became Prime Minister for the fourth time, the coverage is not only negative, but also propagandistic and fear-mongering both inside and outside the country. The news often demonises and harshly criticises Fico and his government for deviating even slightly from the much-vaunted pro-Western trajectory and refusing to uncritically adopt the narrative of the Western establishment.

The narrative that Fico, like Hungary's Viktor Orbán, are the EU's villains and even Putin's servants has permeated the mainstream media abroad and is spreading an atmosphere of fear of democracy in Slovakia and Europe. And it does not stop there. Comparisons have been made, even parallels have been drawn between some Slovak politicians and the Nazis (I note that when football commentator Gary Lineker criticised the British government a little over a year ago for the way they treat refugees coming to Britain and compared this action to that of Nazi Germany, the presenter had his show on the BBC cancelled). It is clear that the foreign media are extremely keen to report on Slovakia and demonise it because they feel that Slovakia, under the leadership of Robert Fico, is simply following its own path of 'sovereign foreign policy'.

But this is not just a statement, it is also a call to action. The foreign public needs to know the truth about Slovakia from the people who live here, and not just from one point of view. Personally, as an academic, activist and politician, I will always make sure that wrongs are righted and that the truth gets its deserved place under the sun (even beyond Slovakia's borders).

In this context, there is no room for hesitation. It is a struggle with the dominant coalition of the Western hegemony as to whether we will be merely their vassals or whether we will be (at least somewhat) a sovereign and self-confident Slovakia. I choose the second option.