As Moldova’s newly elected Parliament convenes and Prime Minister-designate Alexandru Munteanu begins forming his government, the country stands at a defining crossroads. The September 2025 parliamentary elections were more than a political contest. They were a profound test of Moldova’s democratic resilience under hybrid assault. Moscow’s interference reached unprecedented intensity, seeking to erode public trust, distort reality, and manipulate voter behaviour through fear, disinformation, cyberattacks, illicit financing of political proxies and destabilisation networks. Yet the outcome brought a renewed pro-European majority in Parliament and showing that Moldova’s democracy has not only endured but has matured and adapted in the face of external pressure, the ipre.md reports.
The anatomy of hybrid interference
Long before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the Kremlin had already launched an extensive disinformation campaign. Narratives were distorted to deny Ukraine’s sovereignty, and propaganda deliberately reversed the roles of aggressor and victim. Moldova, too, has been exposed to similar tactics of deception and coercion.
Because Chișinău chose to stand with Ukraine and Europe, the Kremlin intensified its efforts to undermine trust in institutions, divide Moldovan society, and spread fear. The threat of war became a calculated instrument of manipulation, repeatedly weaponised during Moldova’s recent elections to erode public confidence and unity.
This time, Russia’s foreign information manipulation and interference operations in Moldova were neither new nor improvised, but far more sophisticated. The Kremlin deployed a full-spectrum hybrid strategy combining disinformation, covert funding, cyberattacks, and psychological pressure. The goal was to erode institutional legitimacy, divide society, and portray Moldova as unstable and externally controlled by Western powers.
In the months before the vote, proxy networks spread false information that elections would be rigged, that Moldova was being “dragged into war,” that European integration meant economic collapse, and that neutrality had been abandoned. Fake polls, deepfakes, and paid influencers flooded social media, while covert financial flows supported political actors aligned with Moscow’s interests. Cyber incidents and bomb threats on election day sought to provoke panic, undermine confidence in the vote and suppress turnout.
This was no random noise. It was a deliberate, state-sponsored campaign to distort democratic processes in Moldova, including by exploiting differences of language, ethnicity, and geography to transform diversity into division and mistrust.
How Moldova fought back
Moldova’s response was neither accidental nor reactive. It reflected years of institutional learning and growing coordination among authorities, civil society, media, and international partners.
First, authorities and investigative journalists exposed illegal financial networks, publicly revealing evidence of foreign funding and coordinated bot farms on social media. Law-enforcement, national security and anti-corruption bodies acted jointly to identify, investigate and sanction these illegalities, proving that transparency can itself be a form of deterrence.
At the same time, state institutions and civil society worked to counter the disinformation ecosystem. Media outlets linked to sanctioned individuals were restricted, while fact-checking initiatives and investigative journalism intensified. These measures were not censorship, but acts of democratic defence being proportionate, legal and vital to safeguard the integrity of public debate and democratic elections.
Finally, awareness raising campaigns and strategic communication became the most powerful instrument. Authorities, journalists, and civic and business actors shifted from defensive rebuttals to proactive storytelling. Strategic communication and awareness campaigns promoted electoral integrity, social cohesion, and a shared European future. The message that truth itself is a matter of national security resonated widely. According to IPRE’s research, over 53 percent of Moldovans now believe the country is moving in the right direction, the highest level of confidence in a decade.
Independent media played a critical role. Investigative journalists continued to uncover troll farms, exposed illegal networks financed through cryptocurrencies and revealed how intermediaries attempted to buy influence with dirty money and lies. Their reporting helped voters better informed choices and allowed democracy to withstand one of the most aggressive hybrid offensives in Moldova’s history.
What the results revealed
The elections confirmed that Moldova’s democracy, while fragile, possesses remarkable resilience. Citizens delivered a stable pro-European majority alongside a more diverse and representative political opposition in the Parliament. Although not all pro-European parties crossed the electoral threshold, over 70 percent of voters supported political forces committed to Moldova’s European path. This outcome reaffirmed and broadened the popular mandate expressed during last year’s EU membership referendum. Ultimately, the elections were driven not by fear, but by conviction and by a collective understanding that democracy must be defended through participation and free choice.
The diaspora played a decisive role once again. Over 277,000 Moldovan citizens cast their ballots abroad across more than 300 polling stations, accounting for 17.5 percent of the 1.6 million voters who participated in the elections. This impressive turnout demonstrated that civic belonging extends far beyond national borders and remains one of Moldova’s strongest sources of democratic legitimacy.
Still, vulnerabilities remain. Citizens in Moldova’s southern and northern regions, as well as many Russian-speaking communities, remain more exposed to pro-Kremlin narratives that exploit Soviet nostalgia and economic insecurity. Resilience must therefore be not only institutional but, even more importantly, social one, addressing inequality, improving education, and strengthening local empowerment.
The path ahead for the new government
The new government inherits both an opportunity and a challenge. The opportunity is to consolidate Moldova’s democratic momentum by turning resilience into tangible progress through better governance, economic growth, and an unwavering path toward EU membership. The challenge is to prevent fatigue, complacency, and the erosion of trust.
The post-election phase is when hybrid threats mutate, from overt interference to corrosion from within. Russia’s influence networks will adapt, exploiting governance gaps, social inequalities and frustration. For the Kremlin, a stolen election is not an end in itself, but a divided society is.
Strategic communication should be further institutionalised as a whole-of-government and whole-of-society effort. Political financing must become fully transparent to eliminate channels of external interference. Justice reform remains central to national security — only consistent, fair, and visible accountability can dispel narratives of selective or externally imposed justice.
Public trust remains key. Confidence in the Moldovan President and local administrations is high, but trust in the judiciary and civil society remains limited, even if slightly improved in recent years. Bridging this divide requires leadership, results, and inclusion. The most trusted local voices in particular teachers, mayors, and community leaders should be further empowered to communicate reforms and counter manipulation.
Lessons for Europe
Moldova’s experience offers valuable lessons for the entire continent. The 2025 elections became a real-time laboratory of democratic resilience under hybrid siege and Europe should pay close attention to it.
First, transparency is deterrence. Exposing illicit funding, disinformation networks, and malign actors in real time prevents them from taking root. Public sunlight remains the most effective disinfectant. When hidden influence is brought into the open, propaganda loses its power. Transparency should therefore become a structural pillar of democratic security, embedded in rules on campaign finance, media ownership, and digital regulation.
Second, prevention must replace reaction. Resilience cannot rely on ad-hoc responses every election cycle. It requires permanent early-warning systems, inter-agency coordination, and foresight mechanisms capable of anticipating hybrid tactics before they unfold.
Third, communication is security. Strategic communication must not be treated as an afterthought but as a core policy tool, equal in importance as counterintelligence. Countering disinformation is not only about debunking. It is about building trust and coherence. Democracies must communicate with the same strategic discipline that autocracies use to manipulate. Moldova’s case shows that proactive, factual, and empathetic communication can outperform narratives of fear, division mistrust. This means explaining reforms clearly, addressing people’s concerns, and connecting citizens to a shared sense of purpose.
Fourth, resilience starts with education. Media literacy, civic participation, and critical thinking must become integral parts of national education systems. The next generation must learn to recognise manipulation, verify facts, and protect the democratic conversation.
Fifth, freedom of expression must not become freedom for deception. Democracies must regulate online spaces according to the same principles applied offline in particular transparency, accountability, and legality. Platform responsibility, including disclosure of paid content, algorithmic transparency, and independent auditing, is essential to safeguard the integrity of elections.
Finally – stronger together – resilience requires allies. No country can withstand hybrid interference alone. Moldova’s ability to resist was grounded in coordination between institutions, civil society, media, and international partners. Europe must draw from this model, by making democratic defence a collective responsibility that links national preparedness, EU support, and platform accountability.
A broader European imperative
The hybrid war against truth will not end with one election. Across Europe, Russia continues to weaponize fear and division, aiming to make citizens doubt their institutions, their allies, and even one another. Moldova’s experience shows that defending sovereignty today means defending the integrity of information and those who safeguard it: journalists, civil servants, educators, civic actors and citizens.
Europe must stay united. The rules that apply offline must also apply online. Digital platforms should operate in full transparency, granting real data access, revealing who finances content promotion, and rejecting money from sanctioned entities and non-transparent sources. No democracy should entrust its information security to opaque algorithms or foreign powers.
Defending democracy cannot wait for the next crisis. By helping Moldova consolidate its institutions, independent media, and civic resilience, Europe strengthens its own democratic shield. Moldova’s experience proves that when truth is defended collectively, freedom endures and democracy, even under siege, can prevail.