Critics warn of espionage risks as Slovakia restores military-diplomatic representation with Russia

A military attaché is a serving military officer assigned to a country’s embassy abroad. The post combines diplomacy with security work. The officer represents the sending country’s armed forces and maintains military-to-military communication with the host country.

The attaché observes the host country’s security and military-political situation. Slovakia’s military intelligence said Brigadier General Slavomir Staviarsky was expected to assess those developments and keep the Defense Ministry informed. Such reporting can help a government understand risks, policies, and military activity.

The role also creates an official channel for contact. Slovakia’s government says it restored the post to gather information and maintain diplomatic representation in Moscow. Critics respond that a Russian attaché in Bratislava could use the same official position for espionage or disinformation. The post therefore offers communication and information, but it also creates security concerns when trust is low.

Slovakia has restored military attaché contacts with Russia. That means military officers are again representing Slovakia at its embassy in Moscow, while Slovakia prepares to receive a Russian military attaché in Bratislava. The arrangement restores military-diplomatic representation between the two countries.

Two Slovak officers have been sent to Moscow. They are Brigadier General Slavomir Staviarsky and his deputy, Colonel Ivo Gahir. Staviarsky was reported to have been in Moscow since the beginning of August. Both names appear on Slovakia’s published list of military diplomats serving abroad.

The reciprocal Russian appointment was also taking shape. Opposition defense experts identified the expected officer as Maxim Verezan. He had reportedly received Slovak approval but was not yet listed among accredited military attachés. The Defense Ministry had not said when he would arrive in Bratislava.

Slovakia’s military-diplomatic representation in Russia ended after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022. The article describes the new appointments as restoring that representation for the first time since the invasion. The break therefore lasted more than four years, through most of 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025, and into 2026.

The restoration followed a meeting between Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow in May. Fico said relations should extend beyond energy supplies and announced that steps had been taken to restore military attachés at both embassies. Five months later, the arrangement was taking shape.

Slovakia sent its two officers to Moscow, while Russia prepared to appoint an officer in Bratislava. Supporters say the gap caused Slovakia to lose useful information. Critics say the circumstances that ended the contacts have not changed, because Russia’s war and hostile activities continue.

The 2021 case involved Sergei Solomasov, the Russian embassy’s deputy military attaché in Bratislava, and Bohus Garbar, a contributor to the pro-Russian website Hlavne spravy. It became a major example of the espionage fears surrounding Russian military-diplomatic activity in Slovakia.

Solomasov was filmed recruiting Garbar and handing over money to him. The incident showed how an embassy-linked military diplomat could allegedly use a local contact to obtain cooperation. The case also connected alleged intelligence activity with a pro-Russian media contributor.

Solomasov was expelled from Slovakia the following year, in 2022. Garbar was subsequently convicted of espionage and bribery. The episode now shapes opposition concerns about the planned Russian military attaché in Bratislava, including warnings that the posting could support espionage, influence operations, or disinformation.

A Slovak military attaché in Moscow is expected to collect information about Russia’s security environment and military-political developments. The purpose is to give Slovak authorities a direct, official source of information from inside Russia’s capital.

Slovak military intelligence described Brigadier General Slavomir Staviarsky’s role as assessing the security and military-political situation and keeping the Defense Ministry informed. His work could include observing developments and maintaining military contacts, although the article does not provide a detailed list of his methods or assignments.

The government argues that Slovakia lost a great deal of information when its military diplomatic presence ended. Richard Gluck said American, British, and French military diplomats remain in Moscow, and called the earlier withdrawal a mistake. Opposition experts are less confident, saying the Slovak officer will be closely watched and obtain little useful information.

If a Russian military attaché used the posting for espionage or disinformation, Slovakia could face greater security risks. The officer might seek sensitive information, cultivate local contacts, or influence public and political debate. The article presents these as warnings from opposition experts, not established actions by the incoming officer.

The earlier Solomasov case illustrates the concern. He was filmed recruiting Bohus Garbar and giving him money, and Garbar was later convicted of espionage and bribery. Opposition experts also warned that a new Russian officer could conduct influence and disinformation operations from Bratislava.

The wider damage could reach beyond one embassy. Retired Lieutenant General Pavel Macko warned that political influence over Slovak intelligence services and pro-Russian policies could harm intelligence-sharing and allied trust. He also cited continuing Russian hostile hybrid activities in Slovakia and the region. A new posting could therefore intensify existing doubts among partners.

A country can meet formal NATO commitments while losing political trust because alliance confidence depends on more than official obligations. Allies also judge whether a government protects shared information, resists hostile influence, and supports common security goals. Those political judgments can change even when military structures remain in place.

The article gives Slovakia as an example. Pavel Macko warned that political influence over Slovakia’s intelligence services and the government’s pro-Russian policies could damage intelligence-sharing and trust among allies. He also pointed to Russian hybrid activities in Slovakia and nearby countries. These concerns relate to the political environment around security institutions.

Restoring military contacts with Moscow could deepen those doubts. Opposition figures questioned the value of the arrangement and warned about espionage. NATO allies, Martin Poliacik said, should consider both the incoming officer’s activities and the environment in which he will operate. Formal commitments may continue, while cooperation becomes more cautious.