Moldova: what does Maia Sandu's victory mean?

Kirill Martynov, editor-in-chief of Novaya Gazeta Europe, points to the special role Romania plays for Moldova:

“With Romania, Moldova has a strong historical partner in Europe. ... Talks about the unification of the two countries are a long-standing factor in Chișinău's policy, with the prospect of unification being pitched as a threat by pro-Russian politicians and representatives of ethnic minorities. With EU accession, this factor would no longer apply – Moldova would remain an independent state but be able to pursue joint projects with Romania. Other countries that the Kremlin wants to bring back into its sphere of influence do not have such an obvious counterweight as Moldova does with Bucharest.”

The ball is now in the EU's court, La Repubblica observes:

“The events in Moldova and Georgia are a reminder of the two minimum requirements for successful EU accession: the determination of the governments of the member states and the support of their parliament and public opinion. ... For its part the EU must ensure that further enlargements do not further complicate the already complex and inefficient internal decision-making processes. This means that the process of reforming the European institutions, which are essential for the success of new enlargements, urgently needs to be set in motion. ... The EU cannot afford the luxury of continuing to make promises that it cannot keep.”

Promising Moldova EU membership now would be a mistake, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung argues:

“The EU is not ready for further expansion in the foreseeable future. Its decision-making processes would not be able to cope with another full member with veto rights, whether that member is large or small. What's more, pro-Russian sentiment remains strong in Moldova, as demonstrated by the near failure of the EU referendum there two weeks ago. What the country does need is realistic, sustainable support. This could be provided, for example, through large-scale expansion of the transport links with Romania, with which it historically formed a single entity.”

The differences in voting behaviour within the country are worrying, writes Florin Negruțiu in republica.ro: Russia's biggest victory in the Republic of Moldova is to have conveyed an image of a divided country and created the impression that there is a civil war. There are districts in Moldova where people voted just like in Russia. In Moscow all I saw was a caricature of an election, with Soviet dances, songs and Moldavians dreaming of living in the USSR. Within the Republic of Moldova, the contrast between areas like Gagauzia (where Stoianoglo won with 97 percent), Taraclia (94 percent for Stoianoglo), Ocnița (74 percent), Briceni (71 percent) and Edineț (67 percent), and the capital Chișinău and the diaspora, where people voted in favour of Maia Sandu and Europe, is shocking.

Writing on agora.md, commentator Laurențiu Pleșca stresses the important economic and political role that Moldovans living abroad play for their country:

“With the money they send back to the country and their investments in local businesses, the diaspora plays a central role in Moldova's development. Although they live far away, Moldovans in the diaspora maintain contact with their country and actively contribute to the democratic process with their vote. And unlike votes at home, their votes cannot be bought. The diaspora has often swayed election results in favour of pro-European reforms, because they want Moldova to belong to the European community. ... That is why the majority vote pro-European: they want to bring Europe to their home with their vote.”

The narrow victories of the pro-EU parties should give the EU pause for thought, La Croix warns:

“This vote shows how easily the hopes raised by the prospect of joining the EU can be dashed by the reality of a difficult daily life and by the manipulation of information from Moscow. ... European support for Kyiv remains strong, but it is not enough to secure a victory. Two years after the huge wave of solidarity that swept across the continent from west to east, doubt and fatigue prevail. ... But the EU must not give in to resignation. ... The future of our democracies continues to be decided in these far-flung border regions that are facing Russian imperialism. The resistance must be both firm and stubborn.”

Sandu should have made her position much clearer in the election campaign, the Romanian service of Deutsche Welle remarks:

“Those who accuse the head of state's election team of failing to do enough to counter the Russian narrative that 'Maia Sandu means war' are right. Because Sandu did not explain to voters that it is the other way round. Nor did they sufficiently explain the current government's efforts to maintain peace in the Republic of Moldova. We were relieved not to have [the pro-Russian former president Igor] Dodon as leader of the state in such difficult times, as he would have allowed Russian troops to rotate and consolidate in Transnistria for an attack from the rear on Ukraine.”