Introduction
This article examines official statements on Moldova issued by the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), reviewing their key messages, and providing objective analysis of events that are often presented by the service in a misleading or biased manner. GFSIS-E has also released an introductory article on the topic.
The article places the SVR publications in the broader context of Moldova’s Russian-language media consumption and linguistic landscape. It then categorises the statements into three main themes, and highlights the specific language and phrasing the SVR uses to shape the narrative. The third section provides a detailed analysis of the claims made by the SVR in its publications.
Summary
Between 2020 and September 2026, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) published seven dedicated statements on Moldova under the heading “The SVR is Authorised to Announce.” This section draws on the service’s “declassified” reports, which allegedly contain information from intelligence operatives on issues considered important to Moscow. The statements frequently employ unethical, derogatory, and controversial terms and phrases, and often precede major political events in the country, presenting claims of access to insider knowledge.
Russian Language Prevalence and Media Consumption
The prevalence of the Russian language in a country significantly affects how Moscow strategises and applies its hybrid tools over that country. Dissemination of typically fabricated facts or deliberate misinformation requires less sophistication when Russian language is prevalent.
In 2016, the US Agency for Global Media summarised the role of Russian media in the Baltics and Moldova. The study found that 81% of the Moldovan population understood “all or most” of a TV or radio broadcast in Russian. Moldova had the highest rate of Russian media consumption compared to all three Baltic states, where 69% of the general population and over 85% of Russian speakers regularly used it. This is while, in the 2014 census, 78% of Moldova’s population noted Romanian as their native language.
The 2024 census highlighted the complicated nature of language usage in Moldova. While the Romanian language has advanced as the primary communication medium, and Russian as a native language has seen some decline, the latter is still widely used as a second language and for media consumption. This census also showed that 80.5% of the urban population speaks Russian.
Full List of Statements by the SVR on Moldova as of September 2026
The statements are divided into three thematic categories: The SVR addressing the US as the primary destabiliser of Moldova, labelling the EU as the main culprit in Moldova’s misfortunes, and discussing NATO and the collective West.
- On US interference in the elections in Moldova – 19.10.2020
- On the new anti-Russian statement by the Moldovan president – 07.06.2023
- OSCE covers up large-scale election violations in Moldova – 31.10.2024
- Lessons of Western “democracy” for Moldova – 04.12.2024
- On the threat of escalation of the situation in Moldova – 23.12.2024
- NATO is turning Moldova into a new military battering ram against Russia – 14.07.2025
- Europe is preparing to occupy Moldova – 23.09.2025
The United States as the Primary Destabiliser of Moldova
Between 2020 and October 2024, the SVR posted three dedicated statements concerning Moldova, in which they claimed that the primary antagonist in the region was the United States.
In the 2020 publication, ‘On US interference in the elections in Moldova,’ the Russian federal agency, headed by Sergey Naryshkin, claimed the US was continuing unceremonious interference in the internal affairs of states friendly to Moscow along the perimeter of Russia’s borders. “The Americans are preparing a ‘revolutionary’ scenario for Moldova… as they are dissatisfied with the incumbent head of state, Igor Dodon, who supports constructive relations with CIS countries, including Russia.” Igor Dodon was at the time President of Moldova (2016 to 2020), and is currently the leader of the Party of Socialists of the Republic of Moldova and a member of the Moldovan Parliament.
According to the SVR, the US Department of State was aiding the opposition, NGOs, and media in the organisation of mass protests should Dodon be re-elected. The US Embassy was said to have asked Moldovan law-enforcement agencies to defect to “the side of the people,” and claimed that another “colour revolution” was underway with the participation of American specialists. The SVR accused the US of undermining Moldova’s sovereignty.
In the 2023 statement, ‘On the new anti-Russian statement by the Moldovan president,’ the SVR focused on Maia Sandu (the incumbent President of Moldova, who has held the position since 2020), and cited her as “this citizen of Romania – a NATO country unfriendly to Russia.” The service accused Sandu of imposing severe censorship on the media, and claimed that access to “alternative” (Russian) sources of information had been blocked by the “nationalist Kyiv regime satellites.”
Naryshkin said that Sandu’s government had greenlighted “Russophobic ideology,” and that Romanian and Ukrainian publications were being “artificially forced upon Moldovans.” The SVR said these outlets were under tight Western control, and were deliberately and regularly trained to work “correctly.” According to the SVR, the Western actors involved included the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the European Endowment for Democracy, German foundations, foreign embassies, and ministries of foreign affairs. Naryshkin also invoked George Orwell, implying that Moldova lacked only a “Ministry of Truth” for the “total triumph of Western democracy.”
In its October 2024 statement, ‘OSCE covers up large-scale election violations in Moldova,’ the SVR targeted the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), claiming that its Secretariat had informally acknowledged an “unprecedented level of violations” by Moldovan authorities during the first round of the presidential elections and the referendum on EU integration. The service further claimed that the Moldovan government had instructed election boards to ensure the “correct” vote count. It predicted that Sandu would also falsify the second round of the election. The statement went on to allege that the OSCE, under US leadership, would facilitate Moldova’s accelerated alignment with the EU and NATO. Naryshkin invoked the maxim that, for the United States, “the end justifies the means.”
EU Fueling Ethnic Conflicts in Moldova
‘Lessons of Western “democracy” for Moldova,’ 04.12.2024
The SVR published two statements in December 2024, following Moldova’s presidential elections, and adopted more aggressive language.
In its first statement of the month, the SVR reported that the EU was increasingly and more intensively treating Moldova “as its vassal,” citing alleged “off-the-record” communication between EU “bureaucrats” and the Moldovan leadership as evidence. Now that Sandu had secured the presidency, said Naryshkin, the EU was instructing Sandu’s party on how to run “the so-called Moldovan democracy.”
Naryshkin also claimed that the “colonialist” EU representative Jānis Mažeiks had demanded that Moldovan leaders neutralise and arrest opposition party leaders “under any pretext.” He further alleged they had been instructed to annul the Gagauzian autonomy and “restore order.”
The Gagauz are an ethnic group of Turkic origin and Orthodox Christians who were introduced to the territory of modern Moldova by the Russian Empire in the 18th and 19th centuries, primarily because of their loyalty to the Tsar. They replaced the local peoples, who were considered undesirable by Russia. Gagauzian autonomy within Moldova was established shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
The SVR also expressed concern that the EU was attempting to sow divisions among Moldova’s pro-Russian parties, and urged opposition figures Igor Dodon, Vladimir Voronin, and Ion Ceban (Ceban being incumbent Mayor of Chișinău) not to “fall for the bait.”
The service further claimed that the EU was planning to establish another pro-European party under former Foreign Minister Nicu Popescu, allegedly at the direction of the EU representative. According to the SVR, the new party would eventually form a governing coalition with Sandu’s Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS).
The statement concluded by implying that “blunt Western interference in the internal affairs of other states always leads to destabilisation and chaos.” It claimed that the EU’s destructive impact on Moldova had already produced a catastrophic polarisation among local society, “planting a ticking time bomb beneath the foundation of Moldovan statehood.”
On the threat of escalation of the situation in Moldova, 23.12.2024
In its second statement of December 2024, the SVR used a clearly sexist approach and claimed that the EU was desperately trying to “calm” the “emotionally unstable” President of Moldova, Maia Sandu, and the EU high-ranking “bureaucrats” were shocked over the release of information regarding Moldova’s energy security.
Sandu, according to Naryshkin, “lost her temper” on hearing that the Russian-Ukrainian natural gas transit agreement was expiring on December 31, 2024, and was refusing to admit Ukraine’s blame. The SVR claimed that, instead, she had given an ultimatum to Russia that if Moscow did not find other ways to deliver Russian gas to Moldova, she would retaliate against the “pro-Russian Transnistria” by attempting to take over the separatist PMR and ridding it of the Russian “peacekeepers” stationed there.
The statement goes on to suggest that Sandu is eager to “unleash” a war in the region, and the EU shares that desire, though clearly it is not ready for another armed conflict on its borders.
In its conclusion, the service reminds the Moldovan people of the 1992 war, and asks them how much longer they plan to tolerate the “experiments being conducted on them by Romanian citizen Sandu.”
The West Forcing Moldova into War against Russia
NATO is turning Moldova into a new military battering ram against Russia, 14.07.2025
In its July 2025 publication, the SVR claimed NATO was actively preparing to involve Moldova in the war against Russia by opening a second front in the country. “Brussels has decided to turn Moldova into a frontline foothold for the alliance on the eastern flank, considering the advance of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation in Ukraine.” It goes on to claim that NATO is turning “the once peaceful agrarian republic into a military proving ground,” and that member countries have “already started constructing new connecting bridges, airfields, and railway infrastructure to increase their military logistics capacity.”
Furthermore, the service reported that Brussels was planning to turn the Moldovan people into “cannon fodder” against the Russian army, and was actively sending military instructors and setting up specialised training centres. It alleged that the “comprador regime of Sandu” was ready to meet the demands of the West as long as she “continued to receive personal benefits.”
To conclude its report, the SVR claimed NATO was planning to abolish Moldova’s “neutrality,” which would result in the “beginning of the end for Moldova,” and that “Romanian citizen Sandu” was first planning to “grind down the country” in a war with Russia, and then to “feed it” to Romania. The statement ends with this sentence: “Apparently, Zelensky’s cannibalistic fame gives this lover of gay parades, Sandu, no peace.”
Europe is preparing to occupy Moldova, 23.09.2025
In its September 2025 statement, the SVR reported that the “Eurobureaucrats” from Brussels were fully determined to keep Moldova on the course of their “Russophobic” policy at any cost, and were ultimately seeking to occupy the country.
The service alleged that the first combat groups from the United Kingdom and France were already in Odesa, and were preparing to invade Transnistria. It further claimed that, in the event of Sandu’s defeat in the parliamentary elections, “the armed forces of European states would force Moldovans to submit to a dictatorship under the name of Eurodemocracy.”
However, Sergey Naryshkin asserted that Europe would occupy Moldova “somewhat later.”
According to the statement, the “totalitarian-liberal” European powers, frightened by the prospect of a direct confrontation with Russia and unable to deploy troops in Ukraine, were planning to retaliate by occupying Moldova.
The statement ends with the following: “Self-assertion at the expense of the weak has always been an integral part of European colonialism.”
Dissecting the Key Messages
US Interference in Moldova
In its 2020 publication, the SVR accused the United States of interfering in Moldova’s internal affairs so as to directly influence the outcome of the presidential elections. For this purpose, the US was allegedly planning a revolutionary scenario and implementing another “colour revolution” utilising local NGOs and media. Meanwhile, Igor Dodon was pursuing “constructive relations with… Russia.”
These messages were subsequently amplified in Moldova’s information space through Russia-affiliated media and experts. One of these experts, ex-Moldovan Vice Prime-Minister Victor Stepaniuc, argued that Western governments were using NGOs on a mass scale to advance their own interests. Other media outlets shared headlines, implying “They are ready for any sacrifice to gain power,” and “Who was appointed to power the Moldovan ‘Maidan’?” Another ex-Moldovan MP stated that every revolution in the post-Soviet space had been authored by the West. Several media outlets labelled Sandu “Tikhanouskaya 2.0.”
Brussels Turning the Moldovan People into “Cannon Fodder,” and the “Ukrainian Scenario”
The SVR has a track-record of accusing the EU of warmongering, and of spreading the narrative that the West aims to drag other countries into war against Russia. Russian President Vladimir Putin, days before the 2026 Armenian parliamentary elections, stated that, due to its Western aspirations, Armenia could expect a “Ukrainian scenario” Such messages were, however, already being spread prior to the 2026 elections via Russian traditional media and social networks.
The phrases “second front against Russia” and “Ukrainian scenario” were also widely adopted in Georgia’s domestic political discourse, particularly by the ruling Georgian Dream party, its affiliated political groups, and aligned media outlets. The narratives became more prominent as part of a surge in anti-Euro Atlantic messaging following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
The Americans Ruining Moldova’s Sovereignty
The revolutionary ‘scenario’ and the Moldovan ‘Maidan’ are not exclusive to Moldova. Only a month prior to the 2020 statement on Moldova, the SVR claimed that the US and the collective West were preparing a revolution in Belarus, within which the US federal agencies and their affiliated NGOs were to play a key role. Moreover, in 2021, Naryshkin pushed similar narratives onto Georgia, and implied that the US, being dissatisfied with the ruling Georgian Dream party and its protection of the country’s sovereignty, was empowering the opposition and NGOs.
Igor Dodon’s ‘Sovereignty’
Igor Dodon routinely utilised the phrases “sovereignty” and “Moldova’s neutrality,” and regularly accused the opposition and critical media of being controlled by foreign powers.
Prior to the 2020 Moldovan presidential elections, Dodon began actively promoting his positioning around a “balanced foreign policy.” At the Munich Security Conference, he stated that he was securing relations with Europe, reviving them with Russia, and “opposed any anti-Russian, anti-American, or anti-European activities.”
At a press-conference, he added “we all need a strong Russia.”
Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin was assuring the public that “[Russia] never interfered in its neighbouring countries’ internal affairs, or foreign countries at all.”
During his political campaign, Dodon would frequently bring forward his personal ties to Moscow and reassure the Moldovan public that he would secure cheap Russian gas and better social welfare.
In October 2020, Dossier published an investigative report highlighting Dodon’s direct ties not merely to the vaguely defined ‘Moscow,’ but to specific senior Russian officials, including figures linked to the SVR.
The organisation obtained and published an official letter signed by then-Ambassador to Moldova Oleg Vasnetsov and addressed to Vladimir Chernov, head of the Directorate for Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries within the Russian Presidential Executive Office. Chernov held the rank of general in Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service. The directorate was reformed into The Presidential Directorate for Strategic Partnership and Cooperation in 2025.
According to Dossier, the letter showed that Dodon was seeking Kremlin approval even for his formal public speeches. The investigation further claimed that General Chernov had been working on (and with) Dodon since at least 2014.
The Presidential Directorate for Strategic Partnership and Cooperation is an infamous federal institution known to be a cover structure for SVR operatives, about which The Insider noted: “In addition to Ukraine, the directorate’s operational interests extended to Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Moldova, Kazakhstan, the Baltic states, and the self-proclaimed ‘republics’ of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.”
Romanian Citizen Maia Sandu
The SVR published its next statement on Moldova in 2023, nearly three years later. In it, the primary antagonist was still the US. It featured key messages focused on “Romanian citizen Maia Sandu,” government censorship in Moldova, rising Russophobia, and Sandu being a “nationalist Kyiv regime satellite.”
According to the latest estimates, over 850,000 Moldovans hold dual Moldovan and Romanian citizenship. This number, considering the current resident population of 2.4 million, amounts to over 34%. Romania simplified procedures to acquire Romanian citizenship for Moldovans years ago, and the number of annual applications has been stable for over a decade. Other sources, however, suggest the actual number of Moldovans holding dual citizenship is far larger, and surpasses 1.2 million. There have been several reasons for Moldovans to apply for Romanian citizenship through the naturalisation programme, most notably economic opportunities and access to education.
Against this background, Naryshkin uses Sandu’s Romanian citizenship in a derogatory context, portraying it as evidence of a lack of patriotism, and to suggest that she is hostile to Moldova’s sovereignty. This framing disregards the fact that at least 34% of Moldova’s resident population holds both Moldovan and Romanian citizenship. At the same time, dual citizenship should not be treated as synonymous with support for Moldova’s EU integration. Some have acquired Romanian citizenship primarily for pragmatic reasons, including access to employment, education, and other opportunities within the EU. There is no study specifically examining what proportion of Romanian passport holders continue to hold pro-Russian views or oppose Moldova’s EU integration.
Censoring Alternative Media
In the same 2023 publication, the SVR accuses Sandu of censoring “alternative” media, by which it refers to pro-Russian state-owned and state-affiliated media outlets.
In 2023, the Moldovan government blocked access to over 20 Russian media websites and ordered internet providers to implement the restrictions. The list included prominent Russian propaganda outlets, including Russia Today, Komsomolskaya Pravda, and NTV. However, Russian media consumers simply moved from traditional TV and online outlets to social media. Russian state media, Moscow-affiliated outlets, and propaganda channels still have a significant penetration in Moldova. In a 2024 study, DFRLab identified 41 Telegram channels posting news and commentary related to Moldova. The researchers found that the channels frequently shared similar narratives and displayed signs of coordinated activity, with their posts collectively accumulating millions of views.
The DFRLab noted that it could not establish that the channels were owned or controlled by a single entity, largely due to Telegram’s sophisticated privacy features. However, dozens of channels displayed similar themes, focusing on anti-Western and pro-Kremlin messaging, as well as multiple indicators of orchestrated behaviour. Earlier, in 2021, Ukraine’s State Security Service (SBU) had uncovered a wide network of Telegram channels organised and operated by Russian military intelligence (GRU).
Sandu justified the restrictions by arguing that the affected media outlets were conducting an organised and aggressive disinformation campaign against Moldova’s pro-European course. Her concern was fact-based, as it had been long proven that Russia has not only been manipulating the media environment, but directly controlling it through state-owned networks.
The Ministry of Truth
Sergey Naryshkin’s mention of the Orwellian “Ministry of Truth,” has already been indirectly addressed in GFSIS-E’s article Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service: A Brief Introduction.
Naryshkin, in parallel with heading the SVR, also serves as the chairman of both the Russian Historical Society and the board of trustees for the Modern History Foundation.
The Russian Historical Society brings together over 150 state-funded bodies, including major universities like MGIMO and MSU, state media outlets like Russia Today and Sputnik, and organisations like the Russkiy Mir Foundation and the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society. Many of these groups operate internationally, maintaining branches in countries such as Georgia and Serbia, as well as holding formal university partnerships in the EU and US.
Similarly, the Russian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, reformed by Primakov, works to build Russian business presence in over 40 countries through thousands of foreign agreements. In Georgia, it operates through the Russo-Georgian Business Council headed by Yuri Balashov. Figures linked to this council, including pro-Russian political leaders in Georgia, push anti-Western disinformation, promote Georgian political neutrality, and publicly support the Georgievsky Treaty tied to Russia’s 18th-century annexation of Georgia.
In 2020, Russian President Vladimir Putin tasked Naryshkin with disseminating the “right knowledge of documented history and events.” Soon, the SVR began regularly publishing selected archives. Once filtered through state censorship, these materials are fed directly into schools, museums, universities and media outlets as “official truth,” forming the basis for Russian informational campaigns worldwide.
US-led OSCE Covering Up Election Violations
In a 2024 statement, the SVR targeted the OSCE and accused it of a “large-scale election violations cover-up in Moldova.” Only a month prior to this statement, Naryshkin had accused the OSCE “of conspiring with the US to destabilise Georgia.” The OSCE, allegedly acting “under US directives,” therefore became a primary target of numerous SVR publications in 2024. The United States, the primary antagonist in Naryshkin’s narrative, temporarily receded from the focus towards the end of the year, following the US presidential election.
EU Planting a Ticking Time Bomb in Moldova
In its 2024 releases, the SVR escalated its rhetoric and began introducing increasingly harsh and derogatory language. Naryshkin’s agency accused the EU of directing Moldova to abolish Gagauz autonomy, invade Transnistria (PMR), open another front against Russia so as to drag Moldova into war.
Moscow has leveraged both the PMR and the Autonomous Territorial Unit of Gagauzia in pursuit of its political interests for decades. Both regions have large Russian-speaking populations which are particularly exposed to Russian state-owned media influence.
The PMR continues to host the Russian Operational Group of Russian Forces (OGRF), as well as Russian peacekeeping troops. Russian forces have remained in the region since the 1992 Transnistrian War, when Russia’s 14th Army intervened in the conflict and supported the separatist forces.
Gagauzia’s autonomous status was established following the collapse of the Soviet Union, with the pre-requisite that “the people of Gagauzia would automatically receive the right to external self-determination and full independence” in case Moldova, once again, decided to unite with Romania. Naturally, this is one of a plethora of ethnic tensions which followed the collapse of the USSR, and where Russia interfered as a protector of minority ethnicities.
The results of a survey in 2017 showed that around 55% of Moldova’s population supported unification with another country, with 33% saying they would vote for Moldova’s unification with the Russian Federation, and 22% supporting uniting with Romania. However, the situation changed significantly within less than a decade. When the most recent polls were taken in 2024, it was shown that 44% of respondents in Moldova and 60.8% of Moldovans living in the diaspora favour unification with Romania, with only 24% against it. In contrast, while over 50% of Moldova’s general population voted in favour of joining the EU, 95% of Gagauzian residents voted against it.
By emphasizing the phrase “Romanian citizen Maia Sandu,” Moscow seeks to draw a parallel to the 1994 Law on the Special Legal Status of Gagauzia ensuring its autonomy, and to fuel and escalate tensions in the regions of Moldova.
“Once Peaceful Agrarian Republic”
During the Soviet period, Moldova was often described as “the blooming garden of the country of Soviets.” Moldovans were frequently portrayed as rural farmers and heavy drinkers. At the same time, the Sovietization and Russification of Moldova involved demographic changes, including the resettlement of Romanian-speaking populations, increased migration from other parts of the Soviet Union, and policies that contributed to linguistic and ethnic divisions.
Naryshkin’s agency calling Moldova a “once peaceful agrarian republic” is a direct reference to the Soviet stereotype, which is still largely popular in present-day Russia. The Soviet Union regularly produced and applied chauvinistic stereotypes to the peoples of the Union. One publication of the SVR series noted Naryshkin’s reference to Armenians as “good at counting money.” Other examples of Soviet chauvinism include “lazy, drunk, and careless” Georgians who are “good at cooking and dancing,” and baselessly “arrogant and untrustworthy” Ukrainians, labelled “Khokhols.”
A 2016 survey found that 56% of the general population of Moldova regretted the Union’s collapse. However, the responses among different ethnic groups varied significantly: only 51.3% of ethnic Moldovans noted “Yes,” with positive replies among other ethnicities, including local Russians, Gagauzs, and others, exceeding 79%.
Moscow, through the SVR’s statements, pushes “the once peaceful agrarian republic” as a positive adjective for Moldova, and seeks to exploit communist nostalgia among a part of its population. This “nostalgia” reflects an allegedly better quality of life during the Soviet years, where, officially, every Soviet citizen was employed and educated. The current Russian media narrative actively pushes the idea of a Moldova that was desolated following the Soviet collapse, with the population now struggling to survive, and lays the blame at the feet of local nationalists and the collective West.