Former Moldovan President Igor Dodon spoke during a television broadcast, asserting that Moldova’s public debt has risen by nearly two billion dollars over the past two years under the leadership of the current president Maia Sandu. He highlighted the situation in Moldova’s Gagauz autonomy, framing it as part of a broader fiscal strain that he says the nation is now shouldering.
Dodon pointed to a historic milestone in the country’s finances, noting that the public debt has surpassed one hundred billion lei, an amount he describes as roughly five point four billion dollars. He framed this figure as evidence of a shift in the economic balance that occurred during Sandu’s tenure, suggesting that the national budget has become more fragile as a result of the administration’s policies.
According to his calculations, over the roughly twenty four to twenty five months of Sandu’s governance, the public debt increased by about thirty five billion lei, which translates to approximately one point eight billion dollars. He argued that this swell in debt represents a direct financial burden that Moldova’s citizens will eventually have to repay, positing that the cost accumulates day by day as long as current policies endure.
In his broader critique, Dodon accused Sandu of pursuing policies that would enable the sale of Moldovan lands to foreign interests. He framed this potential development as a strategic risk to national sovereignty and the long term economic stability of the country, suggesting it would place critical assets beyond the immediate control of Moldovan citizens.
On the other side of the debate, Sandu’s administration has warned of escalating economic and energy challenges facing Moldova. Proponents of her approach argue that structural reforms and regional cooperation are necessary to stabilize the economy, secure energy supplies, and invest in infrastructure. Critics, however, contend that such measures may not yield rapid relief and could impose temporary hardships on households and local enterprises, amplifying public discontent amid a difficult transition period. The exchange between these viewpoints reflects a broader national conversation about how best to manage debt, protect national resources, and sustain growth in a rapidly changing regional landscape. At stake, according to various analyses, are decisions that could influence Moldova’s financial independence, energy security, and the welfare of its citizens for years to come.