Janša over the President of the Republic: "Yugoslavia is no more, it's about Slovenia"

Premier Janez Janša has responded publicly to criticism from President of the Republic Nataşa Pirc Musar regarding Slovenia’s decision not to support a European Union statement condemning Israel's plan to build 1,200 homes for Jewish settlers on the West Bank within the controversial E1 project. In a post on social media platform X, Janša asserted, “Yugoslavia is no more, it is Slovenia,” emphasizing the country’s sovereignty and its role as an equal member of the EU. His remarks followed a direct challenge from the president, who had called for a unified European response to Israeli settlement expansion and urged Slovenia to endorse the EU’s stance. The dispute centers around Slovenia’s refusal to back the proposed EU statement, which would have condemned Israel’s actions on the West Bank. The EU’s position, according to Pirc Musar, was based on the principle that international law should not be subject to political choices and must apply equally to all nations. She argued that Slovenia, with its historical understanding of sovereignty and territorial integrity, should be especially consistent in defending these principles. She further stated that Slovenia must stand among countries that clearly advocate for such values, particularly when they are violated. In his response, Janša accused Pirc Musar of making a “political choice of a special kind” by suggesting that calling out violations of international law, such as alleged genocide in Gaza or the West Bank, is itself a political act. He stressed that Slovenia is a sovereign state and an equal member of the EU, and that without its consent, there can be no European external policy that Slovenia should support. He reiterated that the government is clear in its priorities, focused on improving the well-being of Slovenian citizens, and will lead a pragmatic foreign policy across all areas under its constitutional jurisdiction. Janša also emphasized that he expects other public officials, who have sworn to serve the interests of Slovenia, to align with this approach. He framed the government’s stance as necessary to avoid being trapped in a cycle of losing credibility through disproportionate responses to Israeli actions. This sentiment reflects broader concerns within the government about maintaining Slovenia’s standing in international affairs while balancing its commitments to both EU policies and national interests. At the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, officials defended the decision not to support the EU statement, stating that, in their assessment, the new declaration would not bring additional value at this time. They pointed to previous statements by the European Council in June and an August 20th declaration from a group of European leaders, which outlined similar positions. Minister Tone Kajzer, speaking at a meeting with diplomats in Kranj, emphasized that peace on the Middle East will not be achieved through declarations alone. Instead, he advocated for quiet diplomacy, stressing that Slovenia’s position remains unchanged. The ministry reaffirmed Slovenia’s commitment to respecting international law and supporting a two-state solution that respects the legitimate interests of both Israelis and Palestinians. These assurances were intended to reassure domestic and international audiences that Slovenia’s foreign policy continues to uphold core democratic values and legal principles. Meanwhile, Pirc Musar addressed diplomats in her daily address, warning that she would not remain silent if Slovenia’s foreign policy deviates from the constitutional values of the republic. She listed freedom, democracy, equality, rule of law, and human rights as fundamental principles that must guide the country’s actions abroad. While she praised Slovenia’s diplomatic achievements, she also expressed some criticisms, primarily concerning recent government actions. This exchange highlights the growing tension between the executive and legislative branches over how Slovenia should navigate its complex relationship with the EU and its neighbors. It also underscores the internal debate over whether Slovenia should prioritize alignment with EU-wide positions or maintain a more independent stance in its foreign policy. As the situation develops, the focus will likely shift toward how these differences are resolved in future discussions and decisions affecting Slovenia’s international standing.