Valeria Nikolova, BNR, 21 October 2024
Valeria Nikolova: Now we go to the Republic of Moldova and the first results of the presidential election there, seen as a test of Russia’s influence, as well as the referendum on EU membership. We bring in our colleague Vladimir Mitev from the Romanian edition of Radio Bulgaria, who has been following the issue. Good afternoon, Vladimir!
Good day!
What are the latest figures? Is there a twist in the figures being reported from Moldova?
Yes. Perhaps I should start with the referendum, because the announcement last night was that it was a ‘no’ vote on the question of whether to introduce constitutional changes to allow the country to join the European Union. However, as the night progressed and the diaspora vote was counted, it became clear that the supporters of these constitutional reforms were prevailing by a little bit, but the margin gets bigger over time..
We are talking about a very small victory. As of 10 o’clock and 20 minutes this morning (21 October 2024), the ‘yes’ option for the constitutional changes had 5300 votes advance in comparison to the “no” option. This means that 50.18% at this point in the count are in favour, very slightly less are against. (The final results show a margin of 13596 votes – 50.46% in favour – 49.54% – ed.)
This is a close margin of difference in the results so far. To what extent does this mean that the referendum response is in the balance?
It means that Moldovan society is still divided on the question of its geopolitical future. And any attempts to move closer to the European Union will be difficult. Perhaps we should say that this is also somewhat evident in the vote for the presidential candidates.
The incumbent president, Maia Sandu, who is to some extent the embodiment of this pro-European possibility, is getting 42.07% according to the partial results so far. But the votes have largely been counted.
While the second candidate, the gagauz Alexander Stoianoglo, a former prosecutor general, gets 26.27%. It may seem that the difference is big – 15% or more, but the preliminary opinion polls gave a much smaller result for this candidate. This means that there could be a contested second round in two weeks’ time, as almost all of Maia Sandu’s counter-candidates in this election were Russophile-leaning in one form or another. Maia Sandu was almost the only candidate who positioned himself as pro-European. That is to say, in the second round, we will have to see whether she will be able to attract votes from those who voted for her opponents who have some openness to the Russian option in Moldova.
It might also be interesting to say something more about the votes of Bulgarians in Moldova, because in their constituency of Taraclia they have had a custom in recent years of voting differently from the national vote.
According to the preliminary results in Taraclia, the winner is Alexander Stoyanoglo with 41.74%. Another 29.9% were cast for the independent candidate Victoria Fortuna. In third place is Irina Vlah, the former Bashkan of the autonomous region of Gagauzia. Maia Sandu received only 4.4% in the Taraclia region.
According to the preliminary data, 68.85% are against the constitutional changes (late in the evening it became clear that with 100% of the Taraclia ballots counted, 92% of voters are against the constitutional changes – ed.).
Quite significant data. Have the allegations of Russian interference in the elections been confirmed?
There was a lot of talk about such by the government before the elections and immediately after them, as evidence of vote-buying in huge quantities was announced. It was announced that influence had been exerted through the oligarch Ilan Șor. Many disinformation campaigns were countered. But the people I speak to from Moldova, and who will have the opportunity to be heard in the next Horizon broadcasts, say that the reasons for these unexpected results are not just to do with alleged Russian interference. There are somewhat objective reasons related to the fact that Moldova has suffered quite seriously from the war in Ukraine, for example in economic terms.
In addition, judicial reform, which Maia Sandu brought to the fore in her governance programme, is not going the way it should be going. That is to say, a combination of factors is leading to the fact that the expected greater support for constitutional changes is actually lower. It also gives the impression that the Russophile option in Moldovan politics has unexpectedly increased in recent times.
Let us conclude with the data coming from Moldovan citizens voting abroad.
In fact, these citizens are contributing to the success of the referendum, because within the Republic of Moldova itself, the opinion against the constitutional changes prevails. However, we must bear in mind that more than a quarter (some say a third – ed.) of the Moldovan population lives abroad. Many Moldovans have foreign citizenship.
There is information that in 2030 more Moldovans will be born abroad than in the Republic of Moldova itself. That is, the diaspora vote will become increasingly influential. In this case, the diaspora largely supported the referendum, and this leads to its very modest success (13.500 more votes in support of the constitutional changes – note of the editor).
Many thanks to my colleague Vladimir Mitev from the Romanian edition of Radio Bulgaria with the first results from the Moldovan presidential elections and the EU membership referendum and his own commentary. The topic continues today on 12+.
Photo: The flag of the Republic of Moldova (source: Pixabay, CC0)
Subscribe to the channel of the blog “The Bridge of Friendship” in YouTube, where a number of video and audio interviews are published! The blog can also be followed in Facebook and Twitter. Its Telegram channel is here. And here is its Substack account.
About Author
Discover more from The Bridge of Friendship
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
