Moldova recently endorsed the ideas of its pro-EU President Maia Sandu and her party during recent votes in October. However, it is unclear if this will prove to be the end of Chisinau’s political uncertainty regarding foreign affairs. While one round of voting is over, the country now looks to new elections next year.
December 3, 2024 –
Dan Nicorici
–
Articles and Commentary
Pro-European really in Chisinau May 2023. Photo: Shutterstock
On October 20th, Moldovans voted in presidential elections and a constitutional referendum on EU integration, which were initiated by the pro-EU President Maia Sandu. People went to sleep with more than two-thirds of ballots counted and with the “Yes” option being below half of the votes. However, they woke up the next day with the referendum narrowly passing with 50.38 per cent. The battle ebbed and flowed overall. The pro-EU votes from the diaspora, which came late into the count, helped to secure the EU strategic path of Moldova. The diaspora also massively contributed to the win, with 56 per cent voting for Sandu in the following second round of elections from November 3rd. During this round she faced Aleksandr Stoianoglo, a moderate candidate backed by the pro-Russian Socialists party.
However, the results showed deep polarization and a low level of cohesion within the society regarding foreign policy choices. The people in the diaspora voted massively for EU integration, while Sandu lost within the country. The elections were also affected by external Russian interference, which used a well-tested playbook with disinformation; illicit flows of money followed by intense voter corruption; and hybrid warfare all causing tensions in society. The results set the scene for the upcoming and more important parliamentary elections in 2025. They have left more uncertainties and questions about the political future of Moldova.
EU referendum results: a win is a win
Over the last decade, pro-European figures in the national and international arenas promoted the choice of the Moldovan people to join the EU, while pro-Russian politicians usually challenged these ideas. Each side has its own instruments. The political uncertainty sets the country at the crossroads between East and West. To show that there is a strong consensus on the EU path and foreign policy choices within the society, the current President Maia Sandu, backed by the parliament, initiated a constitutional referendum, raising the stakes of the game. People were asked on October 20th if they wanted to enshrine EU integration as a goal in the constitution. This was done to ensure that EU reforms and investments have continuity, regardless of the future political trajectory after the upcoming parliament elections in 2025. The referendum was held on the same day as the first round of the presidential elections, where Sandu was also the main pro-EU candidate. This was done to bring more people to the polling stations. As aforementioned, the referendum narrowly passed with 50.38 per cent of voters choosing the EU. This showed a high level of polarization and a lack of cohesion within the society on matters of strategic direction regarding foreign policy and the objectives of Moldova. EU integration was supported more in the European and North American diaspora, as well as in Chisinau and other central regions of the country. On the other side, anti-EU forces won in all other municipalities in the north and south in the Transnistrian region, and generally within the country as well. In Gagauzia, home to the Gagauz Turkic minority and where Russian influence is strong and government engagement is low, EU integration support reached only five per cent.
The results are far less positive than the pro-EU political forces expected and leave questions about whether the country was ready now for this democratic exercise. However, the results also show that building a consensus in society means the need to promote EU values and benefits and engage the authorities, civil society and citizens in a continuous dialogue and public participation process. There are no shortcuts for EU integration, and if it is done in a rushed way, the idea and chosen path might backfire. Taking into account the level of disinformation and foreign interference, the results of the referendum can be considered as a positive sign. The difference of only 0.8 per cent is not a reason to question the legitimacy of a future within the EU family. We have seen it in other current EU member states too. For example, Sweden held a referendum on EU integration in 1994, with 52.3 per cent voting “Yes”. Now, it is one of the most active members.
Sandu is the first president of Moldova who was re-elected
The second round of the elections had the same level of tensions and Maia Sandu won this time decisively against Stoianoglo, with 55.35 per cent of the vote. The diaspora, again, showed substantial support for a pro-EU president and changed the situation. However, Sandu lost the elections within the country, unlike four years ago, when she won against the pro-Russian candidate and former President Igor Dodon. This narrative is promoted now by her opponents from the Socialists party, who do not recognize her win and are challenging her power.
The first and second rounds were different. Within the first round, Sandu used the same tactics that ensured her win four years ago. She did not participate in electoral debates, although civil society and the population demanded it, and talked directly with citizens through her communications channels and meetings. However, the first round, when she got 42.49 per cent, served as a cold shower for her and her team because her upcoming win was not that obvious. Sandu wanted to challenge Stoianoglo through debates but it seemed that he wanted them less. The only debate that happened was without a moderator and showed a clear win for Sandu. She knew better the numbers, the policies and how to make the lives of citizens better. Stoianoglo talked more about laws, regulations and procedures, coming across rather as a lawyer and prosecutor than a future president. He was a moderate candidate and supporting Ukraine in the war. He also declared himself pro-European while boycotting the referendum, saying that it was rather a move by Sandu and the ruling party to capitalize on the issue of EU integration. The pro-EU team feared that he would be able to attract voters from the other candidates from the centre such as Ustatii, who gained 13.79 per cent, and other smaller pro-Russian candidates who gained together 13.63 per cent. These groups declared their support for Stoianoglo, while attracting as well those people who did not want to vote for the Socialists party and Dodon himself. Sandu understood the issue and during the second round prepared targeted messages for the Ustatii pool of voters and the supporters of Sor, a pro-Russian public figure who has been accused of corruption in Moldova. The strategy worked and Sandu secured the win, even in the Orhei district, where most of Sor’s supporters are based and where his parties win local elections. Sandu also met with Ion Ceban, the mayor of Chisinau, who was formerly one of the leaders of the pro-Russian Socialists party and now leader of the MAN (Alternative National Movement) party, which has declared itself to be pro-EU. The president managed to secure wins in four out of five districts in Chisinau, as well as in the suburbs.
Although pro-EU forces secured a win in the referendum and presidential elections, the disappointment level in Sandu’s party is rising. Overall, it is less likely to win a majority in the next parliamentary elections and will need to form coalitions. Sandu already announced that some changes in the government would happen. This was followed by the departure of Andrei Spinu, the minister for infrastructure on November 11th. Further changes announced by Prime Minister Dorin Recean concerned the minister of interior and the minister of agriculture. The reshuffle in the government is seen by the society as some cosmetic measure, as more serious changes had been expected.
Foreign interference and voter corruption
Both the referendum and presidential elections were a playground for foreign interference. However, issues concerning EU integration scrutiny saw more attention. This all showed deep long-lasting divisions within the society as different groups tried to antagonize parts of society against others in an attempt to achieve fragmentation within the nation.
There was an intense flow of illegal funds coming from sources from Russia, followed by an unprecedented vote-buying process. The Moldovan authorities have already found 35 million US dollars smuggled into the country by cash and through the MIR payment system, the Russian alternative to SWIFT. This was done through a Russian bank under international sanctions. The whole network of people who received the payments is estimated to be 138,000 in number. Law enforcement agencies already applied more than 250 000 euros in fines for voting corruption for more than 500 people, a number that is rising every day. They also took into custody several people, while national television and other free media are promoting investigation materials about voter corruption. Taken together, the consequences of the Russian interference are still yet to be investigated by the authorities and fully understood.
The questions that arise are simple – why do people sell their votes and what do authorities need to do about it? If we put the issue of disinformation aside, the answers lie somewhere between a low level of civic education and low participation because wages and funds in rural areas are low. While the authorities are investigating the issue to bring to justice those who sold their votes, the politicians who are buying them exist off the radar. The “stick” method is not working as planned, and the solution requires better policies and actions. The government needs to think about how to raise the level of prosperity within the society. Authorities will manage to eradicate voter corruption not only through the fear caused by fines but also through providing a good level of life, decent wages and good pensions, the usual promises during campaigns.
The issue of raising inequalities within Moldovan society is an important matter and it is not only about being for or against EU integration. The country is divided into groups with many layers that have less contact with each other, except during election times. On the one hand, there are people in the rural areas who struggle financially and face the whole spectrum of consequences from the inequalities. The data is not encouraging, showing that 15 per cent of Moldovans live below the poverty line, while half of the country is at risk of poverty. On the other hand, those from urban areas and the diaspora support the EU because they see its benefits daily. However, they find it challenging to explain these benefits to less privileged segments of the population. The focus of the authorities should be to raise the quality of life and prosperity among those who face poverty. The authorities are ensuring growth by deepening relations with the EU, which is the biggest trade partner and investor of Moldova.
The country is rebounding from the post-war energy and economic crisis, which raised inflation to 30 per cent with only 0.7 per cent economic growth in 2023. Now, the inflation level has gone back to normal and economic growth is set to be 2.4 per cent in 2024. The authorities are conducting reforms and policies aimed at investing in rural areas, strengthening social welfare, and opening new jobs all while adjusting Moldova to EU standards. However, we have yet to see the results of these reforms. The authorities need to engage immediately in a continuous dialogue with all levels of society and invest in education and human capital development, especially with those who do not necessarily see the benefits of the EU within their backyard.
Foreign interference: disinformation
During the campaign, there was an intense disinformation campaign targeting the EU and Maia Sandu. Although the polls portrayed a higher victory for the pro-EU choice at more than 53 per cent, the unprecedented level of disinformation left its marks. The campaign was focused on encouraging fear within the society, encompassing the same old tactics and showing wrong and irrelevant facts in public debates. This campaign overall supported the political choice of moving towards Russia and the Customs Union of the Eurasian Economic Union, a Moscow-backed international union which is seen as an unsuccessful attempt to respond to the EU and aims only to feed the regional ambitions of the country. Opting for fewer ties with the EU, the campaigns presented Brussels as the wrong choice for Moldovan people and businesses.
For the Moldovan citizens, the main narratives were focused on human rights issues, such as the fact that migrants will “flood the country” and the EU will promote same-sex marriages. The narratives also focused on the wrong idea that religion will be under threat. The question of war and peace suggested that deeper integration with the EU will bring war, presenting the Russian war in Ukraine as an example. They also argued that peace brought by forces friendly to Russia is more important than uncertainty with the EU.
There were also arguments related to the economy, exploiting the Russian gas dependence of Moldova, as well as inflating the importance of economic relations and trade with Russia, which is in reality only 3.7 per cent.
For business, there are messages targeting farmers, a large group of the Moldovan labour force. The disinformation is linked with the economic arguments that farmers “will perish” once Moldova joins the EU, and that land will be sold to “foreigners”. However, these arguments do not resemble the real situation.
EU integration campaign
On the other side, the main promoters of the pro-EU option for the referendum were those who paved the country’s way towards opening the negotiations, namely Maia Sandu and her ruling Action and Solidarity party, together with NGOs and extra-parliamentary parties. The focus was on promoting the benefits of a deeper integration with the EU Single Market and economic opportunities, such as exports with no tariffs, capital, people’s mobility and investments. However, on the human rights and EU values side, the campaign was done in a hectic way and was more focused on combating disinformation about religion, migration and LGBTQ issues, rather than promoting EU diversity and inclusivity principles. The campaign focused on the fact that the EU cannot impose more LGTBQ rights or push issues concerning migration or religion. The campaign focused more on what the EU cannot do and preserving national sovereignty, rather than portraying the Union as a place where no one is left behind.
Law enforcement and security agencies have banned and blocked several pro-Russian websites and Telegram channels that promoted disinformation, but without presenting facts and analysis. This brings the dilemma of the legal and ethical procedures of restricting information and media, while authorities try to balance between securing the informational space and people from disinformation while preserving high standards of freedom of speech. To support this, other Russian-speaking media groups or even pro-Russian websites that are not breaking the rules are still available. The referendum campaign was also done in both languages.
Polarization a challenge for the future
The referendum on EU integration, passing with 50.38 per cent, and the presidential elections won by the pro-EU President Maia Sandu has secured the strategic EU path of Moldova. However, this might change in the long term. The existing societal divides within the population need to be addressed and considered by the authorities. There is a need to build trust and broader consensus in society and to promote EU values and benefits daily, not only during elections. The EU integration choice is clear but Moldova is still at the crossroads between Russia and the West. The upcoming parliamentary elections next year, when Sandu’s Action and Solidarity party will face pro-Russian forces, will define the road that Moldova will take for the next few years, as well as the pace of the current EU reforms. The Russian interference in the last elections was a test for the authorities. To tackle the consequences of this hybrid warfare, the authorities have less than one year to come up with efficient solutions against disinformation and voter corruption. President Sandu and the ruling party should engage in public debates and a broader dialogue with civil society and citizens, and not only bring the usual suspects to the table.
Dan Nicorici is a programme analyst at the Center for Policies and Reforms from Moldova and he holds a Master’s degree in European Public Affairs and Policies from the College of Europe.
Please support New Eastern Europe’s crowdfunding campaign. Donate by clicking on the button below.
EU-Moldovan relations, Maia Sandu, Moldova, Moldovan politics, referendum
Author :
Publish date : 2024-12-03 07:36:00
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.
The post Moldova has secured its EU path but new challenges arise first appeared on Love Europe.
—-
Author : love-europe
Publish date : 2024-12-03 15:51:49
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.