Moldova has temporarily shut down its airspace after two Russian drones crossed into the nation’s airspace overnight, ultimately forcing diversions and briefly disrupting operations at Chișinău International Airport (RMO) in the nation’s capital. Officials said that the objects in question posed a direct threat to overall flight safety, and they transited through Moldovan territory before they continued into Ukraine, where the war remains ongoing.

The airspace closure lasted approximately 70 minutes, ultimately demonstrating how spillover from Russia’s ongoing campaign can rapidly escalate into an incident for neighboring nations. The latest breach here is also political. The Moldovan government argues that these repeated violations undermine the nation’s sovereignty and public safety, all while operators are forced to treat these events like real-time hazards, not distant noise on the battlefield.

This Incident Has Been Confirmed By The Moldovan Government

The Moldovan Ministry of the Interior said that a pair of drones identified as of Russian origin entered the nation’s sovereign airspace late on November 28. They indicated that this triggered an emergency closure ordered by the civil aviation authority (CAA) from approximately 10:43 PM to 11:53 PM, with officials later saying that the drones exited into Ukraine, according to details published by Reuters.

Two inbound commercial flights, as a result, quickly diverted to Romania and an outbound aircraft was held in Chișinău. The northern sector remained restricted up until authorities confirmed that the drones themselves had left. President Maia Sandu condemned the breach and framed it as part of a wider Russian strike campaign against Ukraine. This incident follows earlier violations this month that prompted Moldova to summon the Russian ambassador and protest what it called an illegal and dangerous incursion that could have endangered civilian lives.

A Classic Response To An Airborne Threat

This brief airspace closure was a traditional response to an uncertain airborne threat by the nation’s air traffic management systems. According to Moldovan authorities, national military surveillance detected these drones and thus prompted an emergency response that halted movements throughout Moldovan-controlled airspace across the board.

A pair of arriving flights were thus rerouted into Romania, and at least one departing aircraft was held at the airport in the nation’s capital. This highlighted a relatively measured response that resulted in only limited operational disruption. The flying objects were identified as Gerbera-type Russian drones and then tracked across Moldovan skies until they left the country. Restrictions over Moldovan airspace remained in place until officials could confirm that both drones had exited the nation.

Even when drones are unarmed or intended to serve as decoys, the unpredictable nature of their routes and low altitude profiles could unfortunately increase collision risks. They also result in increased workloads for crews that are forced to try and mitigate this kind of risk in real time. Air traffic controllers also need time to coordinate aircraft crossings and ensure that all kinds of search-and-rescue (SAR) teams are available nearby in the event that debris falls near populated areas.

Why Do These Incursions Keep Happening?

This shutdown itself also helps underline a widening regional issue, with airspace violations that are no longer unique incidents but rather the recurring byproducts of Russia’s long-range drone campaign over Ukraine. This is the third Moldovan airspace breach to be recorded in the last nine days, after earlier incidents included drones landing on Moldovan soil and prompting the government to summon the Russian ambassador.

Romania has also reported repeated intrusions, with NATO air-policing assets scrambled to monitor or intercept drones that could cross deeper into Romanian territory. For Moldova, which has a small military and is politically pro-EU while bordering both Ukraine and a NATO member nation, the country has to strike a careful balance when it comes to managing additional risk.

For the local aviation industry, the implications are undoubtedly large. More frequent tactical closures will be required, alongside diversions to neighboring airports, higher contingency fuel planning, and potentially a reputational hit for a market that continues to try and attract both customers and airlines. If incidents persist, these kinds of concerns will only continue to magnify.