quote:
So leave the EU and NATO.

I don't get why these pols try to play both sides and pretend like the EU/NATO are bad, yet they maintain their membership in both.

Some elected officials might try to use their position / pulpit to attempt to take a stand and change the system from within... or to speak to another perspective, or to speak to reason (if they take the stance the political body is being unreasonable), or even to maintain the voice of the electorate they represent within the political body.

Based on the info in the OP (I'm not well informed on the topic), Pellegrini appears to be critical of supporting continued funding to Ukraine. That's it. This doesn't necessarily mean that he is completely anti-NATO / anti-EU. He may even be anti-NATO expansion and believe that the push over the last 20 years to keep adding members has been a provocation of Russia... yet not be anti-NATO as NATO was before it continued its membership drive post USSR.

The cited RT article concludes with:

quote:
He has indicated that Slovakia would remain aligned with the EU and NATO under his leadership, but the country must also take a more independent position on the global stage.

I don't see anything unreasonable that suggests Pellegrini should take his ball and go home, and renounce the EU or NATO. Is it not allowed to have a dissenting opinion within the EU / NATO without them punishing you financially? ... If so, doesn't seem very democratic.

And if you take the position that Pellegrini should pull Slovakia out of the EU & NATO over a disagreement on one topic, do you think American Democrats (and especially Progressives)-- who denounce the United States, The Constitution & Bill of Rights in various contexts-- should "leave" office? I undoubtedly miss many of your posts, but don't recall you saying members of The Squad should just step down.