Facing accusations of massive interference in Moldova’s presidential elections, Russia declared the voting “undemocratic and unfair.”
The current head of state, pro-Western politician Maria Sandu, won her second term in office over a pro-Russian opponent, Alexandr Stoianoglo, in the second round of voting on November 3.
On November 5, the Kremlin’s press secretary Dmitry Peskov asserted that Moldova’s presidential elections were not democratic: “These [Moldovan presidential] elections were neither democratic nor fair. They were full of electoral manipulations.”
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that “violations during the election process were so widespread and obvious” that even the observation mission of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) “could not turn a blind eye to them in its preliminary conclusions.”
Both the Kremlin’s and the Foreign Ministry’s claims are misleading.
OSCE/ODIHR reported that Moldova’s November 3 presidential runoff was efficiently and professionally conducted, providing voters with genuine political alternatives. Additionally, candidates were able to campaign freely.
The presidential race saw increased negative rhetoric, often spread through social media, along with persistent issues of foreign interference and vote-buying, which predominantly came from Russia, the international observers noted in a “Statement of preliminary findings and conclusions.”
Election day was calm and well-organized, with observers praising the voting process and vote count, but noting procedural issues, including the unbalanced media coverage benefiting Sandu, and misuse of administrative resources that undermined equal opportunities for both candidates.
Despite these issues, “The presidential election offered voters a choice between genuine political alternatives and, as in the first-round campaign, contestants could campaign freely and fundamental freedoms of assembly and expression were respected,” OSCE/ODIHR said.
Marta Temido, head of the European Parliament delegation praised the Moldovan people “for running the presidential election professionally and with an extraordinary sense of duty and dedication, despite the continued massive interference from Russia and Russian-sponsored actors.”
The second round of Moldova’s presidential election occurred amid investigations into foreign interference and vote-buying schemes from the first round. Authorities reported extensive detentions, searches and fines, estimating that over 300,000 individuals were involved and electoral corruption exceeded hundreds of millions of dollars.
Foreign interference, primarily from Russia and pro-Russian forces, persisted, including illicit monetary incentives to influence voters, impacting the run-up to the second round, the observers said. They said the vote-buying was all for the pro-Russia candidate, Stoianoglo.
Moldovan authorities reported uncovering a vote-buying scheme allegedly orchestrated by exiled oligarch Ilan Shor, involving $39 million paid to over 130,000 voters via a sanctioned Russian bank. Shor denies the charges. Anti-corruption efforts have included hundreds of searches and the seizure of over $2.7 million in cash.
On November 2, ahead of the second round of elections, Politico reported that Moldova’s secret service had warned the government in Chisinau of “Russia’s disruptive activities” that could include “fake bomb threats targeting polling stations.”
On November 3, the Moldovan Foreign Ministry said the information had been confirmed and that polling stations for Moldovans in Frankfurt, Germany, and Liverpool and Northampton, U.K., had been subject to false bomb threats that “intended only to stop the voting process.”
A similar pattern was reported during the November 5 U.S. presidential election. The Federal Bureau of Investigations said polling sites across five states received more than 50 hoax bomb threats on Election Day, sent from emails hosted on Russian domains.
