Moldova’s Elections: Resilience Under Fire, Lessons for Europe

When Moldovans went to the polls in early 2025, many in Europe watched with unease. The country has long been vulnerable to Russian pressure, plagued by disinformation campaigns, and tested by the war in neighbouring Ukraine. Yet the outcome surprised even optimists: the pro-European Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS), founded by the current  President Maia Sandu, captured just over 50 percent of the vote and secured a single-party majority in parliament. For the first time in its modern history, Moldova can claim a clear, democratic mandate aligned with its president and prime minister.

The implications of this result extend far beyond Chișinău. The election was not only a test of domestic politics but also of Europe’s ability to defend its values against hybrid threats. Moldova demonstrated that even in a fragile context, resilience is possible – and that other democracies facing interference can draw practical lessons from its experience.

Why Moldova’s vote matters

The timing could not have been more critical. Moldova, as one of the EU candidate countries,  has just completed its bilateral screening with the EU and is preparing to open negotiation chapters. A parliamentary majority offers the political stability to press ahead with reforms in rule of law, agriculture, public administration, and anti-corruption – areas where progress is essential if the country is to meet the Copenhagen criteria.

The stakes are heightened by geopolitics. The Kremlin tried every lever: illicit financing, cyberattacks, bomb threats at diaspora polling stations, and a flood of online disinformation. Yet Moldovan society did not bend. Young voters turned out in greater numbers, the diaspora mobilised massively, and the institutions upheld transparency.

Still, challenges remain formidable. Corruption and judicial reform remain unfinished, with institutions struggling to establish real independence and transparency. Economic vulnerabilities remain a threat to stability, and the unresolved issues of Gagauzia, Russian-occupied Transnistria, and the country’s fragile security environment will continue to expose the country to external pressure.

How Moldova resisted interference

Moldova’s case is important not only for the outcome but also for how it was achieved. Three factors stand out.

Strategic communication. Authorities anticipated disinformation campaigns and invested in counter-narratives, often even before falsehoods spread widely. This “pre-bunking” approach – arming the public with facts before lies took hold – proved remarkably effective. A dedicated Centre for Strategic Communications worked with civil society and independent media to respond rapidly and credibly.

Financial transparency. Russian money has long been a factor in Moldovan politics. This time, tighter campaign finance rules, stronger oversight, and real enforcement made a difference. Networks of illicit funding were disrupted, attempts at vote-buying were curtailed, and proxy parties linked to Moscow or domestic oligarchs faced disqualification.

Societal mobilisation. Moldovans themselves tipped the scales. Youth and diaspora voters showed up in force, defying intimidation. PAS won an overwhelming majority among overseas ballots, thanks to expanded polling stations abroad and safeguards against targeted disruption. Civil society observers, often in partnership with international organisations, tracked irregularities and provided transparency.

Lessons for other vulnerable democracies

Moldova’s experience should not be seen as exceptional but as instructive. Countries across Europe—and beyond—face growing risks of electoral interference. Several practical lessons emerge:

• Defend the information space. Governments need permanent strategic communications units with the capacity to anticipate narratives, rebut false claims, and coordinate with relevant platforms.
• Follow the money. Transparency in campaign financing is non-negotiable. Regulators must track donations, particularly those made across borders and involving cryptocurrency transactions. Proxy financing should be criminalised, with swift disqualification for offenders.
• Secure electoral operations. Expanding diaspora voting, strengthening cyber defences, and publishing granular results quickly all blunt manipulation. Parallel vote tabulation and independent audits reinforce trust.
• Empower society. Civil society, youth, and diaspora communities are central to resilience. Investing in civic education, observer networks, and legal remedies for intimidation cases helps maintain robust participation.
• Prepare for the AI era. Deepfakes and synthetic disinformation are the next frontier. Election authorities should require provenance standards for campaign adverts and maintain rapid attribution mechanisms to debunk manipulated content before it spreads.

What Moldova’s election means for EU enlargement policy

For Brussels, the message is clear: when candidate countries mobilise their societies, defend their institutions, and commit visibly to reform, Europe must respond with credibility and speed. Enlargement, long bogged down in technical procedures and political hesitation, has once again revealed its role as a strategic instrument for stabilising Europe’s neighbourhood.

The election also shows that enlargement is not simply about adopting the acquis Communautaire – it is about security. A stable, pro-European Moldova strengthens the EU’s posture in the Black Sea, helps anchor Ukraine’s southern flank, and curtails Moscow’s disruptive reach. Enlargement here is not just market integration; it is Europe’s frontline defence against hybrid threats.

Equally important, Moldova’s result validates the EU’s soft power. Citizens still rally around the European project when it is framed as democracy, sovereignty, and dignity. Far from being in decline, the appeal of the EU remains a powerful force for democratic transformation – if it is backed by consistent support and concrete benefits.

But Moldova’s election is also a test for Brussels itself. If the EU wants to prove that resilience pays off, it must avoid tying Moldova’s progress to other candidates and exposing it to veto politics. It must also deliver tangible rewards now: deeper Single Market access, energy and transport integration, and visible infrastructure investments. These early dividends will show Moldovans that their European choice brings concrete benefits well before accession.