In a David versus Goliath scenario, the European future of the Republic of Moldova is being fiercely fought over these days. After a nerve-wracking election in which every vote counted, Moldova has successfully passed the test of the EU membership referendum.
The 20 October referendum sought to amend the Moldovan Constitution to include a reference to the strategic goal of membership of the European Union. Moldovan citizens chose the “yes” option by a slim majority of 50.39%, a margin of around 11,600 votes.
The razor-thin margin reveals a nation grappling with intense hybrid warfare from Russia. In recent weeks, Moscow has intensified its efforts to undermine the pro-European movement in Moldova by funnelling illicit funds to pro-Russian parties, engaging in vote-buying, and deploying disinformation campaigns to sway the referendum towards a ‘no’ vote.
A Toxic Electoral Campaign
The referendum campaign and the simultaneous campaign for Moldova’s presidential election were characterised by massive flows of Kremlin money earmarked for electoral corruption. Two weeks before the vote, the Moldovan police announced the identification of a network of 130,000 citizens who had received around $15 million from Russia to support certain candidates and the “no” vote in the referendum. Behind this network is Ilan Shor, a fugitive Moldovan kleptocrat, sentenced in absentia to 15 years in prison and currently living in Russia.
Moreover, significant resources have been invested by Russia’s proxies in disinformation campaigns and the promotion of anti-EU narratives. Several social media companies, including Meta, TikTok and Telegram, removed dozens of accounts, pages and channels that were actively involved in spreading fake news. In recent weeks, the number and scale of sponsored online ads and posts aimed at exploiting citizens’ stereotypes and fears about the EU has become widespread. For example, by associating the EU with NATO, the Russian propaganda portrays European integration as a violation of Moldova’s neutrality, implying that closer European integration would inevitably trigger an open confrontation with Russia.
Another operation carried out by the Kremlin was the “pilgrimage” to Russia of more than 100 priests from the metropolis of Chișinău and all of Moldova, which is canonically subordinate to Moscow. In a highly religious country, these priests have acted as vectors of influence for Russia’s anti-EU narrative. At least 20 of them are currently under investigation for receiving monthly payments from Russia.
These malign examples of foreign interference compromised the referendum campaign, leaving little room for genuine political debate. The aim of the anti-EU side was to discredit the importance of the referendum for Moldovan society, increase divisions between different social and ethnic groups, and capitalise on people’s dissatisfaction with President Sandu, who initiated the referendum. Although the pro-Russian camp didn’t achieve its goal, it did deepen social polarisation and divisions in a country already struggling with the worst security situation brought about by the Kremlin’s full-scale hybrid warfare.
How did Moldovans Vote?
At the national level, a majority of voters in 23 out of 32 districts voted against the referendum, while only 9 districts had a majority of votes in favour. In Chișinău, a traditional pro-European epicentre, almost 56% of the vote was in favour of the constitutional amendment. In contrast, the lowest levels of support were registered in the Russian-speaking region of Găgăuzia, where only 5% of voters backed the ‘Yes’ option. Remarkably, an unpredictable level of support came from citizens residing in the Transnistrian region, 31% of whom voted in favour of including the European path in the Constitution. Moreover, the Moldovan diaspora, which accounted for almost 16% of the total number of votes, embraced the referendum with 77% support.
Although the constitutional referendum was legitimate and representative, the 50% turnout was lower than expected. Apart from traditional pro-Russian supporters, vote-buying, and disinformation practices, another explanation exists for how close the result was. The large pro-Russian opposition camp succeeded in politicising the referendum and linking it to a protest vote against Sandu and the current government. For part of the electorate, the referendum was perceived as being strongly linked to Sandu’s electoral platform, not as a national issue. Therefore, some “No” votes were directed against her rather than against the EU integration process. Furthermore, a lack of understanding of the expected impact of the referendum and its relevance to Moldova’s EU aspirations led to greater reluctance among certain voters, especially the undecided. What’s more, in the coming weeks, Russian disinformation will play on the referendum results to create a false narrative that Moldovans don’t want European integration. In this way, the Kremlin hopes to reduce European support for Moldova.
Looking Back, Thinking Ahead
Moldova’s narrow results are a stark reminder of the real dangers posed by Russian foreign information manipulation and interference (FIMI) campaigns. Strengthening civil preparedness should be high on the European agenda as Moldova moves towards its crucial 2025 parliamentary elections. As such, the European Union should step up its support for Moldova to strengthen its resilience against Russian interference through increased investment in public awareness campaigns aimed at exposing foreign interference.
The European Union should also step up its support for Moldova’s rule-of-law authorities in order to combat the phenomenon of vote-buying in Moldova. Active measures are urgently needed both to punish the leaders of this corruption scheme and to discourage everyday citizens from participating. Police, prosecutors, and intelligence services should improve their cooperation and preparedness in this area, while know-how from countries such as Finland on strengthening civilian resilience is more than needed.
A major highlight of the information and communication campaign for the referendum was the massive mobilisation of different stakeholders as part of the process. Civil society, mass media, artists and opinion leaders combined their efforts to increase the reach and awareness of the benefits of Moldova’s accession to the EU. A citizens’ initiative called “Citizens for Europe” was set up to coordinate fieldwork and door-to-door interaction with Moldovan citizens. In a few months, this network of volunteers from different professional backgrounds managed to meet and discuss face-to-face with people from more than 10% of Moldovan villages. This enriching practice of peer-to-peer dialogue should continue in the coming months and be further strengthened with human, logistical and financial support.
European leaders’ message “Moldova is Europe, Europe is Moldova” should be swiftly translated into action. A key starting point should be the urgent examination and approval by the European Parliament and the Council of the EU’s €1.8 billion Growth Plan for Moldova, recently announced by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. These pre-accession funds should also aim to strengthen rule of law institutions, complementing the assistance to Moldovan businesses, health care, public infrastructure, and the energy system.
Moldova has successfully crossed a major milestone by passing its referendum on EU membership, but this is just one battle in Russia’s ongoing hybrid war aimed at changing the country’s pro-Western orientation and obstructing its European integration. In the coming weeks and months, the Kremlin will intensify its foreign interference as Chișinău prepares for two critical elections. On 3 November, the presidential run-off election will place incumbent pro-European President Maia Sandu against Alexandr Stoianoglo, the candidate endorsed by the pro-Russian Socialist Party (PSRM). Then, in July 2025, parliamentary elections will play a pivotal role in shaping Moldova’s future for years to come. That is why the European Union should stand by Moldova’s side to protect and support its European path, as the country faces the most crucial test since its independence.
This commentary was first published by the Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies at this link