Russian election meddling ‘was extensive’, says a former Moldovan prime minister

Voters in Moldova have backed proposals to forge closer ties with the European Union, but only by a tiny margin.
Moldova’s president Maia Sandu had been hoping for a thumping endorsement of her pro-EU path, but only 50.39 per cent voted “yes” in the accession referendum.
She blamed Russian interference for the narrowness of the victory.
Natalia Gavrilita: First of all, let me say, I’m so happy that Moldovans voted yes in the referendum. It is a constitutional referendum. And we’ve seen such plebiscites pass with a very narrow margin in many European states. Actually, I lived in London during Brexit. So this referendum has very clear consequences and will mean that Moldova, in its constitution, will recognise its European integration as the national objective and will also entrust the parliament to vote on any subsequent treaties.
Krishnan Guru-Murthy: You mentioned Brexit. I mean, isn’t such a small margin a very difficult mandate? You’re setting the scene for years of argument to come if you take this as a firm decision, because it’s not a very firm one, is it?
Natalia Gavrilita: You are right that, you know, we need to ask ourselves, why is the country so polarised? And there are a number of factors, not the least of which is significant disinformation from the Russian Federation. Hybrid war elements, illegal financing, bribing of voters. Journalists have made investigations and infiltrated pro-Russian candidates’ campaigns, and there was very clear payments for casting the votes in one way or another.
Krishnan Guru-Murthy: How extensive do you think the Russian meddling has been and what has been its impact?
Natalia Gavrilita: The meddling has been extensive. So what I think, what we should ask ourselves is sort of how resilient is our society to this and what are the other factors that make it more vulnerable to these type of tactics. So here, you know, we can talk about the fact that the war has had consequences on Moldova, economic consequences. So it has gone through a recession, high inflation, and people face very high uncertainty. State institutions should pay very careful attention and present this evidence, which I told you, journalists have presented, to understand the extent of Russian meddling.
Krishnan Guru-Murthy: Ultimately, do you think this vote has made your country more or less secure? Is it more secure because it’s closer to Europe or is it less secure because it becomes more of a Russian target?
Natalia Gavrilita: A country’s choice to join or not join the EU, to exit or not to exit the EU, it’s a sovereign choice. And we shouldn’t be sort of under this pressure not to provoke Russia because it does not have a claim on this neighbourhood as it thinks it does.
Krishnan Guru-Murthy: What is your view on Ukraine’s desire to use European and American weapons as long range weapons in Russia?
Natalia Gavrilita: Again, we are facing here a situation where a country has been attacked and I do believe that it’s right to protect itself in any way possible.