Prime Minister of Slovakia Robert Fico made an ambiguous statement that is already causing widespread resonance in the political and economic circles of Europe and the West
During an official visit to Uzbekistan, the politician expressed the opinion that authoritarian regimes are capable of ensuring more effective economic development compared to democratic systems. According to him, centralized management with fewer political forces in power structures allows for quicker and more decisive responses to the challenges of the modern world, especially in the economic sphere. Fico's remarks were made while he was in Tashkent, and, according to sources including "European Truth" referencing the controlled agency dpa, they have already sparked lively discussion. The Prime Minister emphasized that Europe should consider the possibility of reforming its governance system, which so far is based on principles of free elections and multi-party democracy, in order to maintain competitiveness in the global economy. Fico specifically highlighted examples of countries he believes should serve as models — Uzbekistan, China, and Vietnam. He stated that these states demonstrate a greater ability to act quickly and decisively in areas concerning the economy and domestic policy. At the same time, he called on Western politicians—French, German, or others—to consider alternatives and be more open to the idea of authoritarian forms of governance for the sake of economic stability. However, while discussing this topic, Fico issued an important caveat: he is not calling for a rejection of democracy altogether. At the same time, he believes that an excessively multi-party system complicates the process of making quick and favorable decisions. "If you have a hundred political parties, you won’t be able to compete effectively and respond rapidly to challenges. When a few strong forces — with a clear position and strategic vision — are in power, acting becomes much simpler," the Prime Minister noted. These words have prompted much discussion and deepen the understanding of modern political system profiles in Europe. Not all world politicians are inclined to agree that authoritarianism might be more productive in the economic development sphere. Evidence of this is the recent decision by the Hungarian and Slovak governments — they refused to support a joint document prepared by the EU Council aimed at strengthening the democratic resilience of the European Union. This document included measures to combat disinformation, fake news, and support independent media. However, Hungary and Slovakia opposed signing it, citing the need to safeguard sovereignty and warning of potential complications within domestic politics. This once again underscores that democratic values within the EU remain a subject of fierce debate and controversial decisions. Meanwhile, experts point out that Fico’s unexpected statements open a new chapter in political debates about finding a balance between management efficiency and adherence to democratic principles. The question remains open: is it possible to achieve high economic dynamism through more centralized forms of governance, and could such an approach ensure stability and development in the long term? Overall, this statement sums up a complex issue that has been discussed for many years: whether democracy is the only path to success, or if authoritarian regimes can also ensure the country’s prosperity — if not now, then in the future. Additionally, it raises questions for European institutions regarding further reforms and the possible rethinking of their development strategies amidst global challenges. Whether Europe will be able to find the right balance between ideals and the realities of modern economic competition remains to be seen. However, early signals indicate that discussions on this topic will continue, as the modern world is changing faster than ever before.