By: Dr Dimitrij Rupel
The former president of the Slovenian parliament assumed that Slovenia could (by writing its own constitution) quietly slip out of Yugoslavia. At the founding assembly of the Slovenian Democratic Union, Hubert Požarnik announced that he would one day tell his grandchildren: “I was there!” Today, Slovenia is once again facing the problem of visibility, recognisability, and being taken into account.
Ban Natlačen in 1941 unsuccessfully asked German generals to take over (and take under protection) the whole of Slovenia. Hitler decided that the area north of Ljubljana would belong to the German Reich, while he handed Primorska over to Mussolini. Mussolini then established the Province of Ljubljana. What actually happened at that time? In Hitler’s eyes, Slovenia was invisible. It was absent and unnoticed, even though Ivo Andrić, in reference to the Serbian military coup, cites Hitler’s statement that he had nothing against Croats and Slovenes, but would punish the Serbs, which indeed happened on 6 April 1941. Natlačen failed to achieve recognition for the Slovenes. This – with enormous sacrifices – was achieved by the Liberation Front and Tito, even though Stalin did not support them regarding the strategic importance of Trieste. Slovenia’s insufficient visibility continued in socialist Yugoslavia, though Germany corrected its “short‑sightedness” at independence and compensated the Slovenes. On the tenth anniversary of independence, German Chancellor Schröder – to the dissatisfaction of Milan Kučan – even apologised to the Slovenes on Republic Square. The bolder interpreters of Ban Natlačen’s actions would say that the Germans, after 60 years, admitted he had been right. Was this the reason for the Slovenian president’s dissatisfaction?
Slovenia’s recognisability and visibility worsened after 2008. Golob and Fajon made wrong moves, the least harmful of which was membership in the UN Security Council, where Slovenia has no chance for visibility; the worst were the moves regarding Israel, Palestine, and Ukraine. While Janša was among the first to visit Kyiv after the start of the war, Golob’s government avoids such gestures. Its visibility and recognisability have been steadily declining in recent years.
At the POP TV debate, Janša was the only one who credibly assessed the international situation, and he was, of course, critical of Golob’s policies. Essentially, four major players compete and negotiate (the USA, the EU, China, and Russia). The problem is China’s support for Russia.
AI summarises Janez Janša’s positions as follows: “At the pre‑election debate on POP TV, held on 23 February 2026, Janez Janša made several notable statements about Slovenia’s foreign‑policy orientation and global powers:
- China and Russia: Janša highlighted the direct connection between the two powers and said that ‘the Russian attack on Ukraine would not have happened without China.’ With this, he emphasised his sceptical stance toward China’s role in global security architecture.
- European Union: In discussing Slovenia’s strength on the international stage, he stressed that ‘our strength lies in the European Council,’ where key strategic decisions are made. He advocated a more active and confident role for Slovenia within EU institutions.
- United States: Although Janša has in the past strongly supported close alliance with the USA, in this debate he focused primarily on European security and the need for Slovenia to take on its share of responsibility within alliances (including NATO).”
I believe that confrontations are still being prepared, because Golob agreed at the NATO meeting to allocate 5% of GDP for defence, and then everyone swore that they would certainly not give 5%, maybe 3%, and this year only 2%. In this way, Slovenia becomes visible and notable for its unreliable policy.
Small Slovenia naturally has a fundamental problem with visibility. Physical and numerical strength can be compensated with credible and original policy, but above all we need allies or protectors. It is no coincidence that Slovenia was never a state before 1989. We were part of Austria and Austria‑Hungary, then taken over by France with the Illyrian Provinces, and finally Yugoslavia – in the name of the Soviet Union. Today we are an independent state, but also a non‑negligible, respectable part of the EU and NATO. The problem will arise if the EU and NATO collapse; even now Slovenia is becoming negligible and dispensable within these organisations, in which it cannot find its footing. Who will take our government and our diplomacy seriously when they are full of third‑rate people? Which serious foreign statesman will rely on Slovenia, which chooses its representatives based on party loyalty rather than experience and knowledge?
