Opinion: New Dutch government installed, as a gentle pro-European breeze blows over The Hague

On 13 December 2021, after months of backroom negotiations, the then outgoing Prime Minister Mark Rutte of the liberal People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD), dressed in jeans, a shirt, and a blue bodywarmer, announced an agreement on the formation of a new government coalition to run the country from 2021-2024. In the new coalition, four political parties will work together: VVD, D66, CDA, and ChristenUnie. One important feature of the coalition agreement is its positive and optimistic approach towards the European Union. Is this then the end of Euroscepticism in the Netherlands? Maximiliaan van Lange analyses in this article for commonspace.eu the background to the formation of the fourth Rutte Cabinet (Rutte IV) and examines how the Netherlands will now pursue its objectives within the European Union.

In the post-World War II period, the Netherlands was well-known to be a strong supporter of European cooperation, and the so called “European project”. Nonetheless, Euroscepticism has gained a firm foothold in the country in recent years, although it remains a minority view. In 2021, 56% of Dutch people said the EU evokes a positive impression, compared to 13% with a negative perception, and 31% with a neutral view.

Up to World War II, the Netherlands was globally recognised as a neutral player, but since 1949, the country has been a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and has been aiming for collective cooperation, especially in the areas of security and peace. Dutch foreign policy since that period has been called Atlanticist, but there have been important nuances. Dutch society took a more critical view of NATO due to the Vietnam War (1955-1975) and the national demonstrations against the placement of American cruise missiles and nuclear weapons (1981 and 1983) on its territory. It is an open secret that nuclear weapons are still kept in the Netherlands. It resulted in the politicisation of society.

 The Atlanticist approach prioritised bilateral relations with the United Kingdom (UK), United States (US) and Canada. This is sometimes called anti-continentalism. The Netherlands was traditionally more focused on the ocean than on mainland Europe. However, on 31 January 2021, the UK officially left the EU and the Netherlands lost one of its most important trading partners. In addition, the focus of US presidents shifted from Europe to the Pacific, mainly because of the geopolitical threat from China.

This new situation is impacting the Netherlands hard, and the country is paying the price for having had its back turned to Europe too much. The country is forced to find new allies and trade partners within the EU. In 2020, Minister of Finance, Wopke Hoekstra (CDA), engaged in unseemly arguments with counterparts from southern Europe about financial support to these countries and establishing Eurobonds to mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic and its economic impact, causing a loss of face for the Netherlands. Earlier, Dutch foreign policy had caused much animosity in the Eastern member states when the then foreign minister Frans Timmermans insisted on highlighting rule of law issues. Some say it eventually cost him the presidency of the European Commission. Wopke Hoekstra has just been sworn in by the Dutch King, Willem-Alexander, as the new Minister of Foreign Affairs. Can Hoekstra get rid of his past baggage and help build a new role for the Netherlands within the EU?

Despite the disagreement with Southern European countries and some Eastern European countries, Hoekstra has a wide experience abroad and speaks several European languages, including Italian. The irony is that although he has had his differences of opinion on some issues in the past, he believes that relations with his colleagues in European countries are "excellent". However, Hoekstra realises that Europe is a relatively small and vulnerable continent with half a billion people, a continent that is barely able to defend itself. Hoekstra therefore sees cooperation as a necessity.

In the coalition agreement, the parties are committed to strengthening military cooperation in the EU through joint missions and military exercises. The parties also agreed to explore the possibility of creating a European Security Council (in which the UK is at the table, but small European countries are not), to strengthen European foreign policy, and want to present concrete proposals on the subject. To the surprise of some, this debate has now been reflected in the new coalition agreement of the incoming Dutch government.

On its part, the Netherlands also aims to establish a National Security Council as a tool to counter foreign interference. There will be a structural increase in the defence budget of 3 billion euros. The current military expenditure is 12 billion euros, with an expected increase to 1,85% of GDP in 2024. Official Development Assistance will also increase by 500 million euros, All these measures send a signal that the new cabinet wants to invest in security and stability in Europe and its neighbourhood.

With this multi-year agenda for cabinet policy, the Rutte IV government wants to ensure that the EU acquires more influence on the world stage. The previous Rutte III Cabinet already supported abolishing the right of veto by EU member states in the European Council on decisions to impose sanctions on countries for weakening democracy and the rule of law. However, imposing sanctions is often difficult because of the historical and economic ties that member states, with for example, China or Russia. Rutte IV wants to examine whether the veto right in other foreign policy decisions should be modified to become more efficient.

Finally, the traditionally trade-oriented and liberal Netherlands advocates the EU's open strategic autonomy, innovative strength, and smart industrial policies - a development that has been visible in Europe for some time. The country is also aligning itself even more strongly with ambitious European energy and climate plans, thus opening the door to a more robust collective European foreign policy.

For now, no European flag flies inside the Dutch Parliament and the flag is rarely visible in Rutte's office, the Torentje (Little Tower). After reading the coalition agreement of Rutte IV, this seems only a matter of time. A pro-European wind is now blowing in The Hague. Or maybe it is just a breeze, and in any case will it last?

source: This analysis was prepared by Maximiliaan van Lange, Research Associate at LINKS Europe and part of the research team of commonspace.eu.
photo: Flag of the Netherlands and European Union. Hollandse Hoogte

 

The views expressed in opinion pieces and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the position of commonspace.eu or its partners.

 

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).
Editor's choice
News
Ukraine Peace Talks Set to Expand as Russia and Europe Clash Over Post-war Security

Ukraine Peace Talks Set to Expand as Russia and Europe Clash Over Post-war Security

Ukraine and Russia could see European countries join the next round of peace negotiations, following talks between US special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Thursday (November 12). However, conflicting positions over European military involvement, Ukraine’s territorial future and the continent’s security arrangements highlight the difficulties facing the diplomatic process. Speaking after the meeting, Witkoff said European participation would be an important development, describing the countries concerned as key partners. Kushner also indicated that Washington had noticed a shift in European attitudes and believed their involvement would not obstruct progress. In a statement published on X, he said the expanded discussions would address broader European security arrangements alongside territorial disputes between Russia and Ukraine. The US envoys subsequently travelled to Dublin, where they met Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during a European summit. Zelenskyy welcomed the possibility of European participation and expressed hope that the negotiations would include measures to reduce tensions and establish ceasefires. He also reiterated the importance of European representation in decisions concerning the continent’s security. Moscow, however, has offered a more cautious interpretation of the proposed expansion. Putin's aide, Yuri Ushakov, suggested that European countries should first reconsider their military assistance to Kyiv, arguing that their current actions demonstrated an unwillingness to pursue peace. Putin similarly called on Washington to work with its European allies to establish whether they genuinely wanted peace or continued confrontation with Russia. The Russian president also rejected the prospect of European peacekeeping troops being deployed to Ukraine following a potential agreement, describing such a presence as a continuation of the war. His position reflects wider disagreements over the future European security architecture, with Moscow seeking discussions on the continent's broader security arrangements, while European leaders insist that such negotiations cannot replace a settlement of the war. Simultaneously, Zelenskyy raised concerns about disruptions to Starshield, the US-made satellite communications service used by Ukrainian forces. He described Washington’s discussions with Moscow about Europe's future security as unusual and warned against decisions that could undermine Ukraine's sovereignty. Despite the diplomatic activity, fighting continued. Russian drone attacks killed two people in Ukraine's Sumy region and injured five in Rivne, while a separate attack in Russia's Belgorod region killed one person and injured four. Ukrainian agricultural company Kernel Holding also suspended operations at all its oilseed extraction facilities following repeated Russian attacks.

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)