In the 2024-2025 elections, a pro-Russian populist almost became the president of Romania. And this happened twice, because the results of one of the rounds of the presidential competition were annulled by the Constitutional Court, which led to a loud international scandal.
From TikTok to the president’s chair
For 35 years, politicians from the Social Democrats (SDP) and the National Liberals (NLP) competed for the post of president in the country, two long-established political forces that alternately succeeded each other in positions of power. But in 2024, despite the assessment of experts and previous polls, an unexpected candidate – the pro-Russian populist Kelin Georgescu – won the largest number of votes.
His election campaign went almost unnoticed by competitors, because it took place mostly on TikTok. In short videos, Georgescu said that politicians are to blame for all the Romanians’ problems, that external forces — the EU and NATO — threaten Romania and that helping Ukraine is dangerous and undesirable.
The campaign promoted the idea that a vote for Georgescu was a defense of Romanian sovereignty against an alleged threat from Western powers.
Giorgescu’s speech had an emotional meaning for disenfranchised Romanians — in terms of their sense of identity, their sense of loss of dignity before the state, and their desire to take revenge on the system,” says Romanian journalist Ioana Pelehatai.
Playing on these feelings, Celin Georgescu won 23% of the vote and went to the second round. But this tour did not take place.
Shortly after the elections, the Romanian special services installed, that the sharp rise in Georgescu’s popularity was caused by information campaigns in social networks organized by Russia. This was classified as interference by the Russian Federation in the presidential elections, so the Constitutional Court of Romania admitted the results of the first round are invalid.
In the short term, this, of course, stopped the situation, when the instruments of influence had already started to the extent that they undermined the principle of free expression of will. But in the long run, the annulment does not remove the social triggers that fueled all these dynamics,” he notes. Marianne Prysiazhniuk, analyst of the Ilko Kucheriv Foundation “Democratic Initiatives”..
Second attempt
Extraordinary elections were scheduled for May 2025. Kelin Georgescu was not allowed to join them. But his place was taken by another, but similar politician, George Simion. The key theses of Simeon’s campaign mostly echoed the rhetoric of the ousted Georgescu:
— appeals to the threat to traditional values,
— the accusation of Europe,
— statements hostile to Ukrainians (even to Simeon banned entry to Ukraine).
In addition, the previous annulment of the voting results served as an additional reason to accuse the authorities of “stealing votes.
In the end, Simion made it to the second round with the highest number of votes. This time the results were not canceled. In the second round, Simion’s opponent was the mayor of Bucharest Nikushor Dan, a doctor of mathematical sciences who earned the reputation of a fighter against corruption in the field of urban development.
In the first round, Nikushor Dan received half as many votes as George Simion. However, in the second round, he rallied voters from Bucharest and other big cities, as well as Romanian citizens abroad. This allowed him to win.
How Russia influenced the elections
Among the whole disinformation campaign, one of the most emotional moments was the possibility of sending Romanian soldiers to war in Ukraine. The populists tried as hard as possible to present themselves as a “neutral side” that would help Romania avoid the Russian threat.
It should be understood here that the perception of this threat for Romanians is specific.
In Romania, the attitude towards Russia is generally rather negative, but it has a different nature and a different historical memory. It is less existential, more historically mediated and more strongly tied to Moldova, Transnistria and the symbolism of borders,” says Marianna Prysiazhnyuk.
The expansion of the Russian Empire and later the USSR posed a threat to Romania: Bessarabia came under the rule of the Russian Empire as early as the 19th century, and Northern Bukovina and Bessarabia were annexed by the USSR in 1940. Today, these lands are part of Moldova and Ukraine. Although these losses are widely recognized as a historical trauma in Romania, they are most actively politicized by radical nationalist forces, for whom this issue remains particularly painful.
What is most interesting: the details of Russian interference in the last Romanian presidential election are still a mystery. The Romanian government has been preparing a public report on this for more than a month, but it has not been made public yet.
As Ioana Pelekhatai points out, Russian influence on the elections is “not so much a magical special operation, but years of propaganda, monetization and local reinforcement of narratives that can be “turned on” during elections.” Romania has no border with the Russian Federation, no significant Russian minority or significant business contacts with Russia. So Moscow’s influence is more limited here.
I think external players like Russia really do best when they exploit real internal divisions, and there are plenty of them in Romania: the aforementioned mistrust of public authorities, corruption fatigue, economic instability, fuzzy identity politics and fear of war,” says Ms. Pelehatai.
Marianna Prysiazhniuk, in general, shares this assessment of the situation and adds:
“In 2024, the gap between second and third place in the first round was only 2,740 votes. This is precisely the scale where any additional informational pressure can change the outcome, even if it does not change the mood of the majority.
Having chosen the points on which to press, Georgescu, Simion and their teams started the election campaign. The methods were extremely diverse. “It is interesting that both Georgescu and Simion actively focused on the Romanian diaspora, one of the largest in Europe. Their main target audience was first and second generation economic migrants. These people share the opinion that their homeland is declining due to corruption, and at the same time have minimal inclination to integrate into the societies where they currently live,” says Ioana Pelekhatai.
The diaspora in Moldova, on the other hand, voted for pro-European candidates.
Oleksiy Prymak, a media analyst and researcher of information threats, says about another narrative picked up by the Russians: that Georgeska is allegedly supported by the American TV host, supporter of various conspiracy theories and at the time one of the closest associates of President Trump, Tucker Carlson. On the day he was supposed to come to Romania to support Georgescu, he was not allowed. According to Oleksiy, the Russians began to pick up on this topic, they say, they did not let him in because the European Union wants to keep control over the electoral process in Romania.
They choose a certain fact and reinterpret it for themselves. A person hears about some globalists and imposes his own fears about pedophilia on it. The story about alleged pedophiles from the UN, whom Georgescu will expose, was instrumentalized in the campaign. You may be concerned about other things, for example, economic security. Then, in Georgescu’s campaign, there are thousands of Tik-Toks about the fact that the European Union is fed by Romania, that the private Romanian economy supposedly does not exist,” says Oleksiy Pryimak.
The themes of Russia’s war against Ukraine and Ukrainian refugees also took their place in this story.
For example, a common theme of misinformation during the presidential election campaign was the false claim that Ukrainian refugee children in Romania receive about 410 euros per month per person. In fact, they receive the same state aid as Romanian children, which is about 57 euros per month per person between the ages of 2 and 18,” says Ioana Pelehatai.
How can Ukraine not repeat this experience
Disinformation campaigns do not operate in a vacuum. They try to hit on sore points — fears and traumas that society feels. On those things that cause strong emotions. In order to avoid propaganda, it would be most effective to address the problems that concern people the most, through real action, communication and explanation. But when it is impossible to do this unilaterally, one should at least respond clearly and promptly to the spread of lies.
