Moldova: Split Referendum Signals Uncertain Path to EU
No consensus emerges as to whether Europe offers the promising future its supporters envision.
Moldova’s much anticipated October 20 votes – when citizens effectively faced a choice between a pro-European path or closer ties with Russia – reveal a country divided, with neither option gaining significant advantage.
A referendum asked citizens whether they support amending the constitution to facilitate joining the EU. On the same day, in a presidential election, Moldovans were also presented with a choice between pro-European and pro-Russian candidates.
Both votes were taking place in a complex landscape shaped by ongoing tensions between the two political factions.
Although official results have yet to be released, preliminary figures showed a voter turnout of 51 per cent, enough to ensure the referendum was legitimate.
But the results - 51.39 per cent for joining the EU and 49.61 per cent against – was far from the expected result.
As for the presidential elections, incumbent Maia Sandu topped the list of candidates with 42.45 per cent of the vote. Her closest rival, pro-Kremlin Socialist Party politician Alexandr Stoianoglo, was second with 25.98 per cent.
Having failed to secure an outright majority, Sandu now faces Stoianoglo in a second round — an embarrassing prospect for the incumbent, who had been expected to win by a large margin.
While the vast majority of Moldovans seek higher wages and a better quality of life, opinions are divided on whether EU membership will bring the promising future its supporters envision.
Indeed, the initial referendum results showed that Moldovans in-country appeared to have had rejected plans for amending the constitution. In some parts of the country, especially in the north, up to 70 per cent of vote went against the constitutional changes and the EU path.
However, ballots from Moldovans living in and around the capital of Chisinau, as well as the sizeable diaspora vote, gave the Yes camp a last-minute push.
Lilia Zaharia, a media and disinformation expert from Moldova, noted that only Chisinau and the six nearby districts voted Yes in the referendum. She attributed this partly to the failures of local media.
“The media organisations from Chisinau prefer to produce content that focuses only on what is happening in and around the capital,” Zaharia continued. “They do not send their reporters further than the nearby districts, and those in the local press ignore the things that are happening right under their noses - corruption, malign influence, etc. Journalists must go to the north and south of Moldova to get views of the local population and understand their perspective and their problems better.”
The current minimum wage in Moldova is set at 5,000 leu (280 US dollars) a month, one of the lowest in Europe. A recent analysis showed that more than 200,000 Moldovans had left the country in the last four years, a record number. Many hoped that Moldova’s admission to the EU will be an end to stagnation and a road to prosperity.
Svetlana Ignatiuc, a Chisinau-based project assistant, said she remained optimistic about the result of the referendum, and saw potential positive change ahead.
“I hope that the forthcoming second round of elections will further demonstrate the willingness of the majority of the population to move closer to the European Union, fostering a stronger sense of unity and progress,” she concluded.
Moldova entered into official negotiations to join the 27-member bloc in June this year, accession talks which will continue. The outcome of October 20, however, was supposed to make the process irreversible. Instead, it feels a little shakier, and there are fears the results could also undermine constitutional commitments and create a perception of indecision among both Moldovan citizens and the country’s international partners.
In the absence of a clear and irreversible integration strategy, Moldova could face declining support from the EU and domestic reforms, particularly in the field of justice, could be jeopardised.
“One of the most important goals for our society now is to become more united in achieving this major objective, which is to become an EU member,” said Boris Ciobanu, an analyst from Chisinau. “Politicians will have to be smart and fair when communicating with regular people, otherwise, we will remain divided. As for the outcome of the presidential elections, our people will have to vote again in two weeks, and I hope that they will not regret their choice.”
Moldovan authorities have accused Russia and Russian-allied figures of trying to disrupt both votes with malicious propaganda in an attempt to influence public opinion.
Analysts believe that Russia used its vast hybrid warfare toolbox and proxies to push back against the deepening of ties with the EU, including through disinformation campaigns, cyber-attacks and illegal political financing.
Kremlin-backed political groups, such as the now-banned party of oligarch Ilan Shor, along with the breakaway region of Transnistria, which hosts a Russian military base, and the Russian-speaking autonomous region of Gagauzia, have been key channels for spreading propaganda and fueling instability.
Zaharia warned that the lessons needed to be learned from the October 20 votes, both in terms of building public resilience to malign influence and bolstering local journalism.
“Pro-Kremlin disinformation will destroy us, unless we come up with a good plan and conduct targeted activities in as many regions as possible, and try to make some difference there,” Zaharia said. “We may have dodged a bullet this time, but only because the votes from the diaspora saved us. But we in Moldova must do more.”
With additional reporting by Mariana Aricova.
This publication was prepared under the “Countering Disinformation in Moldova” project, implemented with the support of Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO).
