Round One is Over, the Campaign for Round Two Begins

October 24, 2024

Welcome back to Moldova Matters. Today we’re going to do a roundup of the top stories around the election, its aftermath and the start of the campaign for the second round of the presidential election. Then, over the weekend, I’ll be back with an article in the Perspective series giving my analysis and opinion of what happened last Sunday, why the polls may have been wrong and what it all means going forward.

Results and Aftermath

The Central Election Committee CEC finished counting votes from all precincts with final results being much the same as when we wrote an update on Monday. Maia Sandu came in first in the presidential elections with 42.49% of the vote followed by Aledandr Stoianoglo with 25.95%. Renato Usatii came third with 13.79%

The referendum on enshrining European Integration into the Moldovan Constitution passed narrowly by 50.38% to 49.61%.

Due to the mechanism of amending the constitution by referendum these amendments will now be automatically included under the supervision of the Constitutional Court.

Domestic Political Reactions

Monday and Tuesday saw much of the country in a state of shock and disbelief at the twists and turns of the last days. Almost everyone in Moldova, particularly supporters of President Sandu and European Integration expected a much more decisive result. The BBC reported that on Sunday night there was a sense of disaster at the Sandu campaign headquarters where a scheduled victory party broke up leaving discarded little EU flags strewn about the room. The whiplash of people going to bed at 1 or 2 AM thinking that the referendum was lost, only to wake up and find that mass turnout in the diaspora had saved it… barely, was a lot to handle.

Deputy Prime Minister for European Integration Cristina Gerasimov was quoted by Politico saying that there was “no plan ‘B’” if the referendum failed. The sense of optimism and promise of a few days before was badly shaken.

Prime Minister Recean addressed the government at their meeting on October 23rd spoke about the results saying:

"First of all, I want to thank everyone who took part in the vote. Absolutely everyone. I noticed that, despite all the attempts to falsify the vote, conduct propaganda, and escalate the situation among the people, the citizens of Moldova said a firm "yes" in the referendum. And I would like to congratulate everyone on this decision,"

“Now we, the government, must learn a lesson. We must work even harder with those who, for whatever reason, voted ‘no’. We must explain to people what it means to create prosperity here at home, and why we should not expose ourselves to the risk of fraud and, in fact, election fraud,”

This has turned into the default line of the pro-EU movement. In brief - a win is a win, but we have some introspection to do. At the same time, people have clearly been shaken at the extent to which voter bribery and disinformation swung the outcome. Politico quotes Watchdog MD director Valeriu Pasha estimating that as much as 20% of the vote was swung by interference.¹

Speaker of Parliament Igor Grosu foreshadowed a coming government reshuffle in a TV interview saying:

"There are people for calm times, in which they are good analysts, strategists, better versed in public policy... And there are good people in times of crisis, crisis managers who act quickly, boldly. It is important to know at what point to tell a person that he is good at something else,"

He was ambiguous as to when this may happen or what form it would take.

Ilan Shor commented on the election results on Vladimir Solovyov's TV program in Russia saying that his party planned on contesting the results and organizing protests. It is worth noting that Mr. Solovyov’s program known for Kremlin war-mongering and propaganda. He regularly threatens to nuke western capitals (often London) and also regularly threatens Moldova - usually stating that the path of European integration leads to the situation Ukraine is in.

More locally, the most interesting pro-Russian voice was Vladimir Voronin who took the opportunity to castigate his longtime rival Igor Dodon. He both accused the authorities of rigging the vote (without evidence) and attacked Dodon’s strategy of boycotting the referendum saying:

"We have been let down once again, by Igor Dodon, who calls himself a great politician. He came up with the idea of ​​a referendum boycott. A boycott is neither here nor there. We have done preliminary calculations - he stole more than 50 thousand votes. Naturally, he did this at the request of Maia Sandu.

At this point it is clear that the Socialist boycott of the referendum was critical to the passage of the vote. The idea that Mr. Dodon, who’s handpicked candidate Mr. Stoianoglo is in the 2nd round, did this in support of President Sandu is less than credible.²

International Reactions

Internationally European leaders congratulated Moldova on passing the referendum in the face of serious election interference. President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen wrote on Twitter:

"Congratulations to the people of Moldova and to you, Maia Sandu. You have done it again! Despite Russia's hybrid tactics, Moldova is demonstrating independence, strength and a desire for a European future,"

Similar congratulations came from Emanuel Macron, Charles Michel and other key European leaders.

The US government put more focus on Russian interference with Secretary of State Antony Blinken stating:

Russia did everything in its power to disrupt the election and referendum to undermine Moldova’s democracy, including through illicit financing and vote buying, disinformation, and malicious cyber activities. As we look ahead to Moldova’s runoff presidential election on November 3, the United States remains concerned Russia will again attempt to prevent Moldovans from exercising their sovereign right to choose their own leaders.

“The United States will continue to support Moldova’s efforts to ensure a credible, transparent, and democratic process on November 3.”

From the Russian government Dmitry Peskov called the allegations of interference “serious” and demanded proof.

International journalists reported closely on the election results with many stories leading with President Sandu’s allegation that up to 300,000 voters had been bribed in the process. The primary theme in much of this reporting was allegations³ of Russian interference as well as analysis that President Sandu and the pro-EU political forces in the country woke up to a weakened position this week.

Enforcing Election Laws

On October 22nd police announced that they are investigating 400 cases of voter bribery stating:

"We are currently documenting over 400 cases where voters sold their votes for money. They face fines of up to 37.5 thousand lei. Most of the suspects are cooperating with the investigation and providing information that can serve as evidence. According to the law, people who cooperate with the investigation will be exempted from paying a fine,"

The next day they announced that 1 million lei in fines had already been levied with more investigations ongoing. The police continue to stress that voters who cooperate with the investigation by turning themselves in will avoid fines. Police also announced that they have made procedural steps towards using data collected from all users of the Promsvyazbank Russian bank app in Moldova.

Despite announcements about tracking 150,000, 300,000, etc voters who received transfers through the app the authorities have not yet demonstrated an ability to leverage this information to bring cases. The 400 cases mentioned above all appear to have been initiated on the basis of individual complaints made on the ground in Moldova - not via a sweeping electronic collection capability. The ability of police to go beyond case by case reports will likely to prove critical in evaluating the amount of deterrence against voter bribery that can be established before the second round. We’ll follow developments closely in the coming week.

The Campaign Continues

The sense of shock and surprise at the results quickly gave way to action as Moldova has only 9 more days of campaigning until the runoff election (including today). Moldova will vote between Maia Sandu and Alexandr Stoianoglo on November 3rd.

On Monday President Sandu called on Alexandr Stoianoglo to participate in electoral debates ahead of the second round. The format and organization of these debates consumed most of the week’s news thus far.

Some Background - Debates in the First Round

Recall that Maia Sandu chose not to compete in any of the first round debates organized by various TV channels. She did so explaining that she would not take the stage next to candidates backed by foreign interests. Stoianoglo did attend one debate but finding that President Sandu did not join it and that he was sharing the stage only with Renato Usatii he left.

This was all likely good strategy as the pre-election debates were essentially a shambles. We didn’t have time to cover all the twists and turns but the last week before the elections did not look strong for Moldova’s media - often through no fault of the journalists (but not always). Natalia Morari walked out of a TV8 debate after the power went out on stage leading TV8 journalists to file a police complaint and accuse Morari of staging the outage. She then returned the next day for a debate and responded to a question about her unexplained finances, links to Platon and how she might live on the president’s meager salary by accusing TV8 journalist Maria Rata of “stealing her greatest asset” - namely TV8. She had to be reminded that the station is a non-profit. She further went on Jurnal TV and alleged that Veaceslav Platon had secretly finance the TV station and directed its coverage - a situation denied by Journal TV.⁴

Octavian Ticu suggested that he and Renato Usatii settle their differences like people in medieval times - via single combat.⁵ Andrei Nastase threatened to sue Jurnal TV over a question to his proxy (he didn’t even go) which turned out to be true but misleading.

In a non-debate scandal, but one that is very relevant to what comes next, talk show host Gheorghe Gonța resigned from channel N4 after being reprimanded for a facebook post. In it, Gonța called on people to vote “No” or to boycott the referendum. The channel objected to the journalist’s political stance and he chose to resign - calling the whole situation a setup by Maia Sandu.

Debating Debates

Following President Sandu’s call to debates Alexandr Stoianogolo responded by accepting and proposing some conditions. Namely, he said that candidates should not debate on “media dependent on the government” but in an independent setting with 2 moderators, one chosen by each campaign.

Presidential Chief of Staff Adrian Balutel responded by stating that the Sandu campaign had previously suggested a debate on national media (aka state TV) moderated by an independent expert but that they agreed to Stoianogolo’s proposal. Mr. Stoianogolo’s campaign initially proposed a journalist from Realitatea TV and the Sandu campaign agreed. Then the Stoianogolo campaign countered (their own proposal) and decided they wanted one moderator - Gheorghe Gonța. The Sandu campaign agreed.

Gheorghe Gonța…

This news created a media firestorm in Moldova’s independent press. Journalists from major TV networks were outraged that Mr. Gonța, who has been employed by Renato Usatii for a year (on his second online show) and has a long history of political bias (bordering on hate) for President Sandu, was chosen. Alexandru Cozer of Journal TV noted that the night before the first round of the election, Gonța posted a picture of the Presidential Administration building on his instagram captioned “this is Stoiano's new house.” He also previously wrote that President Sandu had really lost the first round and could only win the second round of the elections via fraud.

Lorena Bogza of ProTV stated that

“it is unacceptable to talk about "my" and "your" moderator, initially creating the impression that independent journalists do not exist. They do exist, and they should be valued. … I believe that citizens have the right to watch honest debates, which I am also looking forward to,"

The national Press Council also called on candidates to reconsider.

Following this outpouring of anger, President Sandu responded saying:

"We proposed holding the debates this Thursday. In the end, we reached a compromise and agreed on Sunday. They proposed Gheorghe Gonța to moderate the debates. We, like other people and journalists, believe that the moderator should be independent. However, if they insist, we are ready to debate with any moderator they feel comfortable with. It is important for us to hold these debates so that people can hear our answers to questions,"

The improbable consensus between the candidates finally broke down when Jurnal TV and TV8 announced that they would not air a debate moderated by Mr. Gonța. This led the Sandu campaign to suggest that the national Press Council nominate a moderator, a suggestion that was refused by Stoianoglo who insisted on Gonța but returned to the idea of having 2 moderators. He also decried what he called "a smear campaign and a lynching of a journalist" against Gonța.

The logjam was finally broken (maybe) when President Sandu put out a direct to camera message to Stoianoglo challenging him to an unmoderated debate. She stated:

"Mr. Stoianoglo, I was expecting a debate about Moldova and the country's destiny. But you turned it into a discussion with a moderator. This is not what Moldovans expect. People want to see my and your plan for Moldova. Let's exclude the moderator from this discussion. You are a candidate in the elections, and it is you who must address the people. So, on Sunday, at 10 a.m., I am waiting for you at the Palace of the Republic, where we will discuss the future of Moldova one-on-one, without a moderator. I will ask you ten questions, and you will ask me ten questions. People are wise enough to decide for themselves what kind of president they want. Do not be afraid,"

President Sandu calls Alexandr Stoianoglo to one on one debates. Source facebook screenshot.

Stoianoglo quickly accepted, only noting that the whole debate about moderators was really President Sandu’s fault after all.

The debate is tentatively scheduled for Sunday. After this agreement on the format Mr. Stoianoglo’s team put forward a new condition that 50% of the answers be given in Russian. There is currently no word from the President’s campaign as to language requirements in the debate.

What is Going On?

At face value we see 2 distinct approaches to the debate by the candidates. President Sandu is eager to debate - prepared to accept almost any conditions in order to get a debate as soon as possible. She initially proposed debating today, October 24th which Stoianoglo countered with a suggestion of October 31st, right before the election. They settled on Sunday the 27th as a compromise, but it appears that the Sandu campaign was willing to make concessions on moderators and other format elements to move the debate up (potentially leaving time for a second debate).

Conversely, Mr. Stoianoglo’s team has chosen to continuously move the goal post.

This could indicate that President Sandu is confident, or maybe desperate to debate, while Mr. Stoianoglo is either trying to foil the prospect or reading Sandu’s insistence as leverage to get his own perfect conditions.

Whatever case, the choice for candidates to debate one on one, without a moderator is fairly stunning.

In terms of language, Mr. Stoianoglo is likely pushing for more Russian both because he is more comfortable in the language and as indicative of his broader political positions - a fact that may not play well to the broader public.

The stakes of this debate are very high. First round results indicate that this election could be extremely close and there are many voters up for grabs in the second round. Critically, Mr. Stoianoglo is a poorly defined candidate. His main base of support seems to be the Socialist Party which nominated him. Beyond that, he is not known for his charisma and if he is known at all it is for the various corruption cases against him (which we wrote about in the past). President Sandu meanwhile is about as well defined as a politician can be. She will likely raise the geopolitical stakes of the election in the debate and try to defend her domestic record to the many voters who are dissatisfied with her first term. But the real stakes of the debate are on defining who Alexandr Stoianoglo is.

It appears that Maia Sandu is eager for this opportunity while Mr. Stoianoglo is not.

Other Election News

In addition to the debates there were a few other campaign stories of the week:

• Everyone is courting Usatii’s voters. Previously Maia Sandu made a public appeal to those who voted for Renato Usatii to look past their differences and vote in the good of the nation. Mr. Stoianoglo promised to meet with Mr. Usatii as “independent” candidates to discuss the election. It is not clear if President Sandu will do the same.

• PAS activists promote xenophobic statements. In a video message 2 local PAS activists made xenophobic statements calling out Mr. Stoianoglo’s ethnicity as Gagauz. They said "A real Moldovan will never vote for a Gagauz. A Gagauz is a traitor to the country." PAS representatives stated that the party “strongly condemns any xenophobic attacks and incitement to interethnic hatred.” President Sandu followed up with a public appeal to unity saying:

"Dear citizens, we have won so many difficult and unfair battles only because we stuck together. We have proven many times that evil can be defeated - with love for the people and faith. Faith in each other. I beg you to take care of our unity. Let's not divide people by ethnicity, let's not blame citizens who voted one way or another. We are all part of Moldova. We all live here and want it to be good here. Enmity between people only helps those who want to return the thieves to power. Our people knew how to live in peace, together, even in the most difficult times, to build a home, a village, a country. Humanity unites us, and we want the same thing - peace and prosperity at home"

Mr. Stoianoglo responded by condemning the statements and saying that the only way forward as a country is to respect national minorities. He stated that as part of his program all students should be able to speak “Moldovan and Romanian” as well as Russian in Moldova.

• Stoianoglo meets with Mayor Ceban. The Mayor stated that he conveyed his various proposals to the candidate including mass redirection of tax revenues to Chisinau, getting his own police force, constructing a bypass road and the need for someone to come up with a parking plan for the city⁶. He stated that he is equally open to talking with President Sandu. Mr. Ceban had previously stated that his MAN party was instrumental in passing the “Yes” vote for the EU referendum despite a serious lack of evidence in that area.⁷

1. We will take a closer look at these claims in the coming days as more information comes in.

2. If there’s any silver lining in this week’s news it is that the pro-Russian forces split on a key strategy and it cost them. I’ll return to this in my retrospective analysis of the vote.

3. Author’s Note (or short rant): While it is totally reasonable to question numbers such as 300,000 voters bribed, or whether or not Russian interference was decisive, it is not reasonable to question the existence of such interference. Many news outlets reported President Sandu’s remarks as having been made “without evidence.” The BBC stumbled onto some evidence themselves when a voter from Transnistria literally asked a poll worker for her promised payment after voting (much to the confusion of the poll worker). What there hasn’t been is a good indication that these international publications have taken seriously the work of independent Moldovan journalists who have done in-depth investigations on the topic of voter bribery for months. Without the work of ZdG, Newsmaker, Cu-Sens and others we’d have nothing at all to say about this at Moldova Matters. It’s time international media took their work seriously when reporting on these topics.

4. Let’s not forget that Morari, as a TV8 journalist moderated a debate in a past election with Veaceslav Platon, father of her son, without disclosing the personal relationship.

5. Ticu was an olympic boxer and Usatii… isn’t.

6. Chisinau city parking is a massive problem and is very much the Mayor’s remit. This is not remotely in the realm of presidential powers.

7. The Mayor’s claim holds very little water here not because he isn’t influential but because he and his party did not campaign in the referendum. They registered to campaign for a “Yes” vote and Mayor Ceban stated that he voted “Yes” but that’s about it. The party made 3 facebook posts during the campaign that even obliquely referenced the EU. The first was when they registered to campaign. The second is when they sent a proxy to a debate about the referendum. In it, they supported EU integration but primarily focused on all the good work being done by the mayor in Chisinau. Finally, they had another post showing a press conference where the mayor complained about how EU integration needed “professional” managers and then went on to talk about his accomplishments. The many suspicions about the former Socialist turned MAN mayor and his former Socialist team have not much been alleviated by this phony campaign.

*Update* the MAN party in fact participated in 5 debates about the referendum in support of EU Integration even though they only promoted 1 on their facebook page.