In English, as I imagine in Slovak, the word "interesting" has many meanings. Therefore no one should automatically feel pleased when I pronounce the political situation here in Slovakia far more interesting than that in my own England. A doctor might just as easily use the word to describe a terminal illness.

I do not, however, believe that Slovakia is interesting to that degree. I happen to believe that, given five years of even moderately decent government, it can become one of the most prosperous and stable of all the former Soviet satellite states. For the moment, however, it is neither stable nor prosperous; and its politics reflect this unhappy fact.

Just over a year ago, the Christian Democratic Movement [KDH] and Public Against Violence [ODU/VPN], which are the two main democratic parties, had between them exactly 40% of the popular support. By the February of 1992, their combined popularity had fallen to 17%, and had been in almost consistent decline throughout the intervening months.

Of these two, the greatest loser has been the ODU/VPN. The January before last, its support stood at 24%. Today, it has only 2%. In England, any party to suffer a decline so rapid and extreme can safely be described as dead. Between the middle and the late 1980s, the Social Democratic Party, led by Dr David Owen, suffered an almost exactly similar decline, and now no longer exists. It failed because it represented no permanent or important interest in English politics. Perhaps the same can be said of the ODU/VPN. Its often radically free market economic doctrines may be out of place here in Central Europe. Perhaps to propose a "social market economy" of the German or Austrian type might be more appropriate.

Though to a lesser extent, the KDH also has lost support. Unlike its main coalition partner, it does represent a permanent and important interest in Slovak national life. But, unlike in Germany or Austria, it has failed to do more than consolidate its hold over this interest, and to gain extensive support from the rest of the electorate.

Since the last comprehensive opinion poll, the Movement has split - into a larger part, led by Prime Minister Carnogursky and advocating a continuation of the common state and economic reform; and a smaller part led by Jan Klepac and opposing both. It is possible that both parts can gain more support than the whole could, and that they will be able to work together in a new coalition government to be formed after the elections in June. On the other hand, they might grow to hate each other with all the ferocity of a divorced couple. Again, they might both lose far more support as separate entities than they had as a combined unit. On this question only time can tell.

One thing, however, is certain. The chief gainers so far have been the extremists. Despite a past that ought to disqualify them from gaining even the 5% needed to gain a single deputy in Parliament, the Communists [SDL] are now the third largest party in the country, and have often been the second. Their support may be five percentage points down on the end of 1990, but has shown no tendency to fall with any consistency.

Then there is the Movement for a Democratic Slovakia [HZDS]. This did not exist a year ago. Since its foundation in the middle of 1991, however, its support has not fallen below a quarter, and this stands now at 38%. Of course, not every member of the party is an extremist, or an anti-democrat. It contains, indeed, many fine people whose only interest is the creation of a stable and prosperous Slovakia. But the party's current leadership is of so doubtful and opportunist a nature, that it cannot be regarded as part of the democratic bloc in Slovak politics.

If this combined popular support were translated into seats in Parliament at the June general election, it would give a combined extremist bloc of 52%. To gain the two thirds majority needed to change the Constitution it would need only the support of the Slovak National Party (SNS) - which has tended on many questions in the Slovak Parliament to vote with the HZDS and SDL. And then Slovakia might become the first of the former Soviet satellite states to retreat from democracy.

This is, I grant, an alarming prospect. Against it, I can only say that I am an optimist. Slovakia is a very young democracy. Its voting patterns are nowhere so fixed as those in England, or any other country in the West. Between now and June, they could change as easily for the better as they have changed since last summer for the worse.

This will, I am sure, be the case. Slovakia has throughout its history suffered constantly at the hands of its more powerful neighbours. I refuse to believe that it will now insist on suffering at its own.