Political Situation Polarized And Unstable In Moldova After Presidential Election

Click to see the full-size image

Written by Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Associations, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert

In Moldova, the anti-Russian wing of local politics won the election, ensuring the country’s continued alignment with the Collective West. Maia Sandu, leader of the pro-EU coalition, was re-elected for a new term, despite a clear decline in her popularity. In addition to alleged frauds and electoral crimes, the lack of a strong and unified opposition and clear projects to stop the Westernization of the country are the main factors responsible for the victory of the pro-Western movement.

Sandu received a total of 55% of the vote, while her opponent, former Prosecutor General Aleksandr Stoianoglo, obtained just around 44%. The data indicate that the country is deeply polarized, with a large part of the population opposing the current government. However, it is possible to say that, despite the disapproval of Sandu, many voters did not see Stoianoglo as a strong enough alternative to lead the government, given that the opposition is divided into many different factions and does not seem to have a unified project for the country.

It is also worth mentioning that many Moldovans are simply disappointed with national politics, choosing not to participate in the electoral process. Only 54% of registered voters voted in the second round of the presidential race. This number is enough to elect a president, since Moldovan law establishes a minimum of 20% popular participation to validate the elections. However, despite the validity, it is clear that there is insufficient trust on the part of the people in both candidates, which results in a practical lack of interest in politics.

Furthermore, the electoral process was not peaceful. The Moldovan police reported at least 225 cases of violations of electoral rules in different regions of the country. Illegal political disturbance, bribery of voters, damage to ballot papers and many other crimes were committed. Clearly, there was no peaceful and truly democratic electoral process in Moldova. On the contrary, the elections were conducted in a turbulent and violent way – in a manner that is reprehensible by all democratic political standards.

The political turmoil in the country seems far from over. As a result of the violent and contested elections, the opposition is refusing to recognize Sandu’s victory. Stoianoglo’s supporters consider him the true winner of the electoral process, which means that there will be division in domestic politics and many Moldovans will no longer recognize the legitimacy of official institutions. This is a disaster for Moldova, as countries with polarized politics become unstable and tend to suffer from various social problems.

In an official statement, Stoianoglo’s supporters stated that they do not recognize the results of the country’s elections due to the lack of basic democratic conditions for a fair electoral process. In addition, they promise to develop a strategy to “depoliticize” the country’s institutions and try to establish truly free elections in the future.

“Recent presidential elections … cannot be considered a free and democratic expression of the will of the people (…) (We are going to) strategy to depoliticize state institutions and ensure equal conditions in electoral campaigns,” the statement reads.

It is possible that the elections in Moldova were manipulated. In the first round, several violations were reported, both in the presidential elections and in the referendum led by Sandu on Moldova’s accession to the EU. The Moldovan government used several maneuvers to prevent anti-EU Moldovans from voting. For example, the Moldovan diaspora in the Russian Federation was not allowed to vote, which clearly had a strong impact, ensuring the narrow victory of Sandu’s wing.

The Sandu government is clearly known for promoting illegal and fraudulent actions, appearing willing to do anything to guarantee its pro-Western interests. Moldovan law does not seem to be an obstacle for Sandu, who violates democratic standards to ensure political advantage whenever possible. This should not be seen as a “praise” to the opposition.

Despite the possible fraud, the opposition is partially to blame for its defeat, as it was unable to present a unified political program strong enough to please the Moldovan people. However, Sandu and her Western supporters have repeatedly shown that they are willing to do anything to obtain any form of electoral advantage.

In her new term, Sandu will deepen the serious process of “Ukrainization” of Moldova. The forced policies of Westernization and anti-Russian brainwashing will expand even further. The West is pressuring Moldova to open a new flank against Russia, promoting a “military solution” to the frozen conflict in Transnistria, as well as spreading hostile sentiments against regions with a non-Moldovan ethnic majority, such as Gagauzia. For now, despite Sandu’s alignment with the West, the country has resisted taking such a step. However, it is not possible to know how long this objection will last.

The West has made it clear many times that it does not accept any kind of negotiation, demanding full alignment. Any position other than full alignment is enough to consider a country an “enemy”. In this sense, with Sandu, Moldova is close to suffering the biggest political pressure in its history.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Questions Of Rigged Referendum Arise After Moldovans Choose EU Path
• Moldova On The Brink Of A Major Social Crisis
• Is NATO Testing Russia’s Reaction With Possible Basing Of F-16s In Moldova?