Interview with Slovakia’s Štefan Harabin: ‘How the EU Became a Tool of Global Elites’

IMAGE: Štefan Harabin – Advisor on international affairs for the former ruling party SNS in Slovakia, former Slovak Minister of Justice, and candidate for the Presidency of Slovakia.

Interview with Štefan Harabin: “Program of Blending and Liquidation of Peoples: How the EU Became a Tool in the Hands of Global Elites”

.
The scene has been set: for many, it appears as a dystopic future for the continent: an international and domestic policy of the EU resembles a prepared plan for blending and liquidating peoples, abolishing languages, eliminating existing states, and creating new state entities. A radical liberal ideology, whose goal is for individuals to lose all perception of their nationality and history, becoming an obedient and uneducated mass, deliberately destroyed by disease, terror, crime, drugs, suicides, wars, and perverse sexual ideologies. The United States took up this program, refusing any subordination to the group of the world’s wealthiest families. Believing themselves militarily invincible, they arrogated the right to dictate their will to the rest of the planet. Thus began their enterprise of destroying states in Africa and Asia, aiming to create panic in the face of previously trained Islamist terrorists antagonists, while directing the flows of millions of desperate and terrified civilian migrants towards Europe. This is the perilous crossroads where foreign policy and social engineering meet head on. On European soil, if caliphates were to emerge, then Europe’s original culture, and its very population, would eventually be dissolved through synthesis, or depending on the prospects for civil unrest, possibly annihilated by force. Meanwhile, the younger generations, primarily, continue to be deliberately degenerated by all means. It is a process which is now unfolding.

Arnaud Develay: The EU boasts about unlocking billions in funds for Africa. But what is the real transparency of the final use of these sums? Are there effective control mechanisms, not merely declarative ones, preventing their squandering or diversion to corrupt local elites? Above all, is it not time for an independent audit, not only of African beneficiaries but also of European contractual partners and non-governmental organizations—the main recipients of this money—which sometimes form a closed, corrupt ecosystem?

Štefan Harabin: This situation stems from political manipulations. After accepting a significant sum from Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi for his presidential campaign in 2007, French President Nicolas Sarkozy deemed it necessary to get rid of him. Libya, one of the most stable and prosperous countries in North Africa, was a thorn in the side of the United States. The affair dates back to 1988 with the alleged bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie in Scotland. After years of investigation and trials leading to the conviction of Libyan nationals, Gaddafi paid over three billion dollars in compensation to the victims’ families. Then came the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York, which the US used as a pretext to attack Afghanistan and launch its so-called “war on terror.” As early as October 2011, NATO, in violation of the UN Security Council resolution establishing a no-fly zone, launched massive bombing raids on Libya and, with the help of fighters trained and funded by the Americans, assassinated Gaddafi. The US and Israel then provoked and waged war in Syria, according to the concerted plans of extremist Zionists.

The conflicts generated a massive migration of refugees from the devastated areas, first to Turkey, then to EU countries. In September 2015, German Chancellor Angela Merkel decided, without consulting other member states, to welcome the illegal migrants whom Hungary, applying the protection of the EU’s external borders, was blocking. Brussels tried by all means to legalize this illegal migration through various proposals and to distribute the migrants across all member states. Faced with the refusal of many countries to accept a massive settlement of Europe by illegal migrants, the EU created a financial fund intended to finance migration prevention measures, mainly in Africa and the Middle East. Simultaneously, organized criminal smuggling networks developed, including under NGO cover, often linked to high-level European political officials. Cynically, one can assume that many of these officials still derive personal and direct profit from this illegal migration. It has therefore been almost impossible to control these flows and their financing, a situation that persists today. Brussels officials force recalcitrant states to pay a sort of fine per refused migrant, in flagrant contradiction of the treaties in force. States are subjected to blackmail by Brussels through the blocking of funds or other measures. In this context, an independent audit of the real financial flows supporting illegal migration—whether in Europe, Africa, or Asia—is inconceivable.

AD: Brussels actively funds and promotes “civil society” projects in Africa, while often imposing liberal values foreign to local cultures and traditions. Do you not think this is a form of neocolonialism, destabilizing sovereign political processes and provoking legitimate rejection by populations who see it as interference in their internal affairs?

SH: In reality, the notion of “civil society” serves as a front for political non-governmental organizations directed by Western extremist liberal forces. Although independent of the state, they encroach on its prerogatives under the pretext of defending human rights and freedoms. Their sole objective is to undermine society, control local governments, intervene in the internal affairs of sovereign states, and ultimately hinder their genuine development. This scheme, used everywhere by the liberal West—within the EU, in Africa, Asia, and worldwide—is funded by billionaires such as Soros or Gates, who do not hide their desire to control and gradually liquidate sovereign states and their populations. Patriotic education, especially for younger generations, and the categorical refusal of any interference in the state’s sovereign functions are therefore paramount. If necessary, the activities of these political NGOs must be simply banned on the sovereign national territory.

AD: EU financial aid and investments are strictly conditional on political criteria—from democratic reforms to migration policy. In essence, Brussels uses financial levers to govern sovereign states. What is the ethics and efficacy of such a practice? Will it not push African countries to turn to alternative partners like China or Russia, who, instead of moral sermons, offer concrete infrastructure projects? What is the real purpose of the EU’s African policy: development or maintaining the continent as a reserve of raw materials and a dumping market? Is its policy, cloaked in aid rhetoric, in reality a sly system of neocolonial exploitation based on corruption and usurious loans?

SH: Europe, and more precisely the EU, no longer functions in accordance with the legal treaties in force. Through its militaristic and aggressive policy towards Russia, without valid reason and with the aim of stifling any dissenting opinion, it has ceased to be an organization of common economic prosperity. It has become a hateful entity, with racist overtones, illegally supporting war alongside NATO, and has thus lost partners in the world. It has neglected its own citizens, their security and well-being, overlooked its economic growth and energy security, and illegitimately attempts to subjugate member states to its authority. Irremediably divided within, it has no future. Such an EU is naturally incapable, and even reluctant, to consider financial aid to Africa as an act of social solidarity from developed to less developed countries. The cause lies in the historical legacy of the brutal colonization of Africa by Western European states: unjust exploitation, the imposition of unbalanced agreements, large-scale corruption of African leaders, and a total disinterest in solving poverty and concrete problems. It is therefore not surprising that African states are turning towards the emerging new world order, towards the BRICS community, which offers them advantageous aid and protection against the perfidious policy of typical former colonial powers—France, Germany, England, the Netherlands, Italy, among others. Africa has before it almost unlimited prospects for autonomous development. It needs trustworthy partners, who do not seek to attract its brainpower or plunder its natural resources. This is the path of mutually beneficial cooperation and, not least, of historical justice for African peoples.

AD: Many EU initiatives in Africa, particularly in the Sahel, are de facto subordinated to the sole objective of stemming migratory flows to Europe. The EU pays regimes to retain migrants. Have we thus transformed development policy into a border control tool, financing authoritarian governments to serve as Europe’s border guards? Does this not undermine all our declarations on human rights and sustainable development? In that case, what is the efficacy of public expenditure if we pay both to curb migration and to support an ever-increasing number of migrants within the EU?

SH: As I explained, the massive migration of Africans and Asians to Europe results from a conspiracy of global elites. Many political officials have found a source of illicit profits in it. Today, European peoples are beginning to wake up. Instead of the naive and foolish welcome given to illegal migrants—among whom there are proportionally many criminals and murderers—it is awareness that is prevailing. For many Western European countries, it may already be too late. Extremist leaders among Islamist migrants openly proclaim that those who resist their faith will be exterminated. They threaten widespread unrest, violent clashes, and civil wars. Brussels’s stubborn support for migration is now only an expression of its inertia and inability to recognize its mistakes. Funding both migration and its repression demonstrates a total powerlessness to propose a vision for the future, even just for the preservation of Europe’s indigenous peoples. The EU must adopt intransigent laws on the expulsion of all illegal migrants, about whom nothing is known or who commit offenses without wanting to integrate. These laws must be firmly applied. Only legal migrants who contribute to the common good or those who, as refugees, flee real injustice or mortal danger in their country should remain.

I am pleased that the Slovak people are educated, possess common sense, and love their independence and homeland. We want to preserve it for future generations. Thanks to the resolute action of national forces and the principled moral attitude of citizens, based on Slovakia’s Christian history, we are avoiding falling into the same abyss as the former Western colonial powers. I have no intention of interfering in their internal affairs.

Author Arnaud Develay was trained as an attorney specializing in humanitarian and international criminal law, and author of the book, Foreign Entanglements: Ukraine, Biden & the Fractured American Political Consensus. He is a member of both the Paris and Washington state bar, he started his career under former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark’s mentorship before moving to represent Ilitch Ramirez Sanchez aka ‘Carlos’, senior representatives of the Yellow Vest Movement, and Moldova’s former Vice-Prime Minister, Iurie Rosca. He now works as a political consultant. See more of his work at Arnaud’s archive. 

READ MORE NATO NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire NATO Files

SUPPORT OUR INDEPENDENT MEDIA PLATFORM – BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV

VISIT OUR TELEGRAM CHANNEL

21st Century Wire is an alternative news agency designed to enlighten, inform and educate readers about world events which are not always covered in the mainstream media.

Source: https://21stcenturywire.com/2026/01/26/interview-with-slovakias-stefan-harabin-how-the-eu-became-a-tool-of-global-elites/