Under “assault,” they’re still standing. On Sunday, Moldovans narrowly voted to enshrine the goal of joining the European Union (EU) in the country’s constitution. Meanwhile, Moldova’s pro-Western president, Maia Sandu, did not clear 50 percent of the vote and thus will compete in a runoff election on November 3. The pivotal elections were hit by an extensive influence operation from Russia, which Sandu on Sunday called an “unprecedented assault” on Moldova’s democracy. Below, our experts address five burning questions about how to interpret the results and what comes next.
1. What is the significance of the referendum vote?
The Moldovan pro-EU referendum passed, amending the constitution and making EU accession a constitutional goal. However, it’s not an inspiring victory, as many wished.
The narrow result is significant, but it doesn’t necessarily signal a decline in support for European integration. For more than fifteen years, polls have consistently shown a strong majority of Moldovans favor EU membership, making this narrow outcome unexpected.
The result was shaped by several factors, including the pro-European government’s performance, intense disinformation campaigns, and strategic voter manipulation. Pro-Russian forces used tactics such as promoting a “no” vote, encouraging a boycott, and pushing the “not now” narrative to confuse and discourage moderate pro-EU voters. Therefore, the referendum result isn’t an accurate barometer of support for EU integration; it’s more a consequence of disinformation and targeted strategies that exploited existing societal fears.
The narrow referendum result, however, is a setback for Sandu’s supporters, potentially weakening her position. She could face a tough runoff against a united pro-Moscow opposition.
—Victoria Olari, research associate for Moldova with the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab
2. Were Russia’s meddling efforts a success for Moscow?
Russia’s meddling efforts made a significant impact in the Moldovan election, but ultimately did not bring the Kremlin success. As Moldovans narrowly chose “yes” on the EU referendum, Russian leaders should be disappointed in their failed investment—they put millions of dollars into hybrid attacks on Moldova’s democracy and efforts to buy hundreds of thousands of votes against the referendum, but the referendum managed to pass.
It did so by an extremely narrow margin. The outcome came down to a difference of less than twelve thousand votes, so Russia may exploit this and the role the diaspora played in voting “yes” to challenge the results’ legitimacy. In fact, a Kremlin spokesman already hinted at this strategy on Monday. While Moscow was ultimately unsuccessful in swaying the vote against the referendum, the tight race for both the referendum and for Sandu heading into the runoff shows that the influence efforts likely did make an impact.
—Shelby Magid, deputy director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center
3. With Sandu heading to a runoff, what do we know about her opponent, Alexandr Stoianoglo?
Stoianoglo is a former prosecutor general of Moldova, now backed by the pro-Russian Party of Socialists (PSRM). Originally from the autonomous territory of Gagauzia, Stoianoglo has a background in law and politics, with roles in prosecution and as a member of parliament. His time as prosecutor general (2019-2021) was marked by controversy, notably the release of businessman Veaceslav Platon, accused of major banking fraud, which led to public backlash and his dismissal by Sandu.
Although he presents himself as pro-European, Stoianoglo offers a pro-Russian alternative, backed by the PSRM, and promotes a traditionalist agenda centered on protecting Moldova’s sovereignty from Western influences. His candidacy has been strategically supported by the US-sanctioned pro-Russian oligarch Ilan Shor’s electoral bloc, which played cat-and-mouse with the authorities, deploying so-called “satellite” candidates to create confusion regarding its real intentions. This approach, previously tested in local elections, helped boost Stoianoglo’s unexpected performance in the first round, in which he earned about 26 percent of the vote to Sandu’s 42 percent, making him a significant challenger to Sandu in the runoff.
—Victoria Olari
4. What can we expect from Russia in the coming weeks?
In this weekend’s vote, the main focus of Russian meddling was on the referendum. Going into the runoff race for the presidential election, we can expect Russian efforts to consolidate its influence and disinformation efforts against Sandu and to back Stoianoglo. Russian information operations have played on Moldovans’ fears of facing Russian attacks like that against Ukraine, so Moscow may push the narrative that Sandu is leading Moldova in a dangerous direction, whereas Stoianoglo wants to balance foreign relations in a safer way. In addition to pushing this narrative, Russia could go so far as to target some of its kinetic attacks against Ukraine near the Ukraine-Moldova border to further stoke Moldovan fears of a Russian threat. We can also expect Moscow to use the network it has built through vote-buying to rally against Sandu in the coming weeks.
Russian malign efforts will not stop after the presidential runoff. As Moldova faces parliamentary elections next year, further Russian hybrid attacks and attempts to destabilize the country should be expected. In a speech on Monday, Sandu pointed to this future threat, saying that the parliamentary elections would be “one last battle” to fight along the road to EU membership.
In addition to massive disinformation efforts, Russia has tested other hybrid tactics that Moldova needs to continue to watch for and strengthen itself against. These tactics include Russian sabotage efforts, as Moldovan police recently announced they found hundreds of people were trained in Russia and the Balkans to create mass disorder and stage riots in Moldova, including through tactics to provoke law enforcement. While the plot was foiled ahead of this election, these tactics could still be employed later.
—Shelby Magid
5. What can and should Washington do right now?
Washington has been very active, along with the EU, in supporting Moldova’s democratic resilience and institutions in the lead-up to this critical election. Washington has been careful with messaging in support of Moldova’s democracy and in condemning Russian meddling. While the United States should continue to state its support for Moldovan democracy and Euro-Atlantic aspirations, this messaging must be handled delicately to avoid appearing to throw support behind a specific candidate and tip the scales in the election.
Washington should stay aligned with the EU in messaging about the election and should put out a strong high-level statement about the significant level of Russian interference and hybrid attacks to raise further awareness of Moscow’s malign influence.
In response to Sunday’s vote, White House national security spokesman John Kirby stated: “The United States remains a proud partner of Moldova, and we will continue to stand with them as they endeavor to continue to support to protect their democracy, and quite frankly, to reach the aspirations of the Moldovan people.” This is the right sentiment and approach, and the support for strengthening Moldova’s institutions and democracy must continue through the next year ahead of the parliamentary elections, with the full expectation Russia will meddle again with many of the same tactics it tested out on this election.
—Shelby Magid
Further reading
Image: Moldova’s incumbent President and presidential candidate Maia Sandu attends a press conference in Chisinau, Moldova October 21, 2024. REUTERS/Vladislav Culiomza