Moldova’s referendum on whether to amend its constitution and commit to joining the European Union has come down to a razor-thin margin, with results showing the No vote slightly ahead of the Yes vote—50.1% to 49.9%—with 97% of the ballots counted. The unexpectedly close result has raised concerns, as pre-referendum polls had predicted a comfortable victory for the Yes vote.

Moldova’s pro-EU president, Maia Sandu, has responded by accusing foreign actors of interfering in the democratic process, specifically pointing fingers at Russia. Sandu claimed that Russia was behind a significant effort to influence the vote, using propaganda, lies, and financial incentives. She characterized the close result as an “unprecedented assault on democracy,” alleging that 300,000 votes had been fraudulently bought, although Moscow denies any involvement.

The referendum, though not legally binding, was meant to signal an irreversible step towards EU membership, but the close result now casts doubt on the country’s future direction. Alongside the referendum, Moldovans also cast ballots in the first round of the presidential election. Sandu emerged as the frontrunner, securing 41% of the vote, but this was a much narrower margin than expected. This means she will face a more challenging second round in early November, where her opponents are expected to unite against her.

Aleksandr Stoianoglo, who is backed by the pro-Russian Party of Socialists, finished second with 27% of the vote, far exceeding initial projections. If other opposition candidates rally behind him, Sandu could face significant challenges in the run-off. Populist candidate Renato Usatii and former Gagauzia governor Irina Vlah also performed well, but their lower percentages suggest their influence will be critical in deciding the final outcome.

The atmosphere at Sandu’s election headquarters was notably subdued on election night, with the initial results catching her team off-guard. Many of her supporters had been anticipating a clear victory, especially in the referendum, which she had heavily campaigned for as a key milestone in Moldova’s future alignment with Europe. Sandu’s team initially believed the No vote’s lead was due to early results coming from rural areas, which traditionally lean more conservative. However, as results from urban areas came in, narrowing the gap, it became clear that the referendum’s outcome was still too close to call.

Sandu, who has positioned herself as a strong advocate for European integration, expressed her disappointment at the narrow lead for the No vote. She believes that the unexpected performance by the opposition is tied to foreign meddling. Specifically, she pointed to widespread allegations of vote-buying, a claim her government asserts is backed by clear evidence. These claims are bolstered by reports from local and international observers, including a BBC producer who overheard a voter at a polling station in Transnistria asking where she would be paid after casting her ballot.

Transnistria, a breakaway region in Moldova that is closely aligned with Russia, has been a focal point in the country’s political dynamics. Although economically and militarily supported by Russia, many of its residents were still eligible to vote in the referendum. Reports of vote-buying in this region further fueled allegations of foreign interference.

In the run-up to the election, Ilan Shor, a fugitive Moldovan businessman accused of funneling Russian money into the country, was linked to efforts to sway the referendum result. Shor had previously offered financial rewards to Moldovans willing to vote No or abstain from voting in the EU referendum. In a video statement released just days before the election, Shor urged Moldovans to vote for “anyone but Sandu” in the presidential race.

While Sandu has focused her campaign on Moldova’s European future, many of her opponents, including Stoianoglo, have taken a more cautious stance. Although Stoianoglo himself expressed support for Moldova’s “European aspirations,” he did not back the idea of constitutional changes to solidify this path, which made him a central figure for those who are wary of rapid EU accession.

At the heart of the election and referendum is Moldova’s struggle over its geopolitical alignment. For decades, the country has been caught between European aspirations and historical ties to Russia, dating back to the Soviet era. Many voters in urban centers, particularly younger citizens, have been vocal about their desire to join the EU, viewing it as a means of securing a better economic future and greater opportunities for their generation. One young voter, Oksana, told the BBC that her vote was for “a European future for our country, for our children,” adding that she wanted Moldova to break free from Russian influence.

On the other hand, rural voters, especially those with strong ties to Russia, have expressed concerns about severing long-standing connections with Moscow. Despite this divide, voter turnout was strong, exceeding 50%, ensuring the referendum’s validity.

The tight race has not only thrown the future of Moldova’s EU aspirations into doubt but also complicated the presidential election. The next few weeks will see intense campaigning leading up to the run-off on 3 November, with Sandu’s future and Moldova’s geopolitical direction at stake.

As results trickled in on election night, Sandu’s headquarters emptied out as her supporters, many of whom had been holding EU flags, began to lose hope for a definitive victory. The flags were left behind, symbolizing the uncertainty now surrounding Moldova’s European path.

In the days ahead, much will depend on the alliances formed before the run-off election. If Stoianoglo can unite the opposition, Sandu may struggle to secure the presidency for another term. This would mark a significant setback not just for her but also for Moldova’s EU ambitions. However, Sandu remains confident, citing the support of young voters and urban areas as key to her potential comeback.

As Moldova navigates these electoral challenges, the broader issue of foreign influence continues to loom large. Sandu’s government will need to address the allegations of vote-buying head-on, especially if she hopes to maintain legitimacy in the eyes of the international community. Meanwhile, Moldova’s talks with the EU will continue, but the referendum result—regardless of the final outcome—has left the country’s future a little less certain.

In summary, Moldova’s EU referendum and presidential election have exposed deep divisions within the country over its future direction. With both votes neck and neck, President Sandu faces a tough road ahead, particularly with the added pressure of foreign interference allegations and a strong challenge from pro-Russian forces. The next few weeks will be crucial in determining not just Moldova’s leadership but its place on the European or Russian geopolitical map.