Afghanistan and Dutch Cabinet

Did the Dutch Social Democrats opportunistically bring down the Dutch cabinet at the expense of their country's reputation within NATO, NATO's mission in Afghanistan, and the people of the Uruzgan region where Dutch troops have operated fairly successfully since 2006? How did it happen, and what does it really mean? I've seen two papers so far today, de Volkskrant and Trouw, and two pieces in particular stood out for me: first, the interview with the leader of the PvdA, the Social Democrats, Wouter Bos in de Volkskrant. Pushed on his party's role in the government's sollicitation of a formal NATO request earlier this month for some kind of extension to the Dutch mission in Uruzgan, he uses the convenient but ultimately, shall we say, unconvincing term "misunderstandings" to explain what happened. He also hides behind his man in the foreign ministry: development minister Koenders, who, he implies, handled this matter on behalf of the Social Democratic ministers. Maybe foreign minister Verhagen thought concrete discussions in the cabinet about an extension would only be possible if there was a formal NATO request, Bos says, maybe he had gotten the impression somehow that this was the PvdA position. But if he did, he was wrong. There certainly could not have been any doubt about where the Social Democrats stood on Uruzgan, he says. Or was there? Everyone knows that NATO doesn't submit these kinds of formal requests if it's not clear there will some kind of positive response. It is unlikely that the foreign minister would have asked NATO for a formal request had he been under the impression that the Social Democrats would categorically reject any kind of extension for the Uruzgan mission (although the Volkskrant criticizes the foreign minister for probably misrepresenting the Dutch political situation to NATO).

We won't know for sure until we get to read the files, for example of the cabinet meetings at the beginning of February, but for now, I'm with Johan ten Hove, long-time writer for Trouw this morning. He describes a fictious discussion two weeks ago between three officials, all named Wouter Bos: the political leader of the PvdA, the minister of finance, and the vice-prime minister. The political leader is in charge: we'll bring down this cabinet by standing "on principle" i.e. the initial decision in 2007 to make the current Uruzgan mission the last round because that's politically useful for us right now. The ministers Bos protest a little: we've just asked NATO for a letter; it would be irresponsible in times of financial and economic crisis to bring down a government this way--but the political leader wins out. Final question from one of the ministers Bos: what will become of the people in Uruzgan? Uruzgan? Those people don't vote in our elections, do they?

This gets us to the bigger question of what really happened here. It seems obvious: narrow domestic political considerations won out over all other relevant questions in this matter. It does not matter for the PvdA that Dutch troops have worked, and fought, really hard for years in Uruzgan at great personal sacrifice and that they've been fairly successful given the circumstances. (Other piece in today's Volkskrant: the local population will hate to see the Dutch go: "the Taliban may come back.") The fact that the work and sacrifice of years may be wasted by a complete withdrawal--as opposed to, say a more gradual draw-down during which another alliance member and local Afghan forces could be prepared to take over--doesn't matter to the Social Democrats. It does not matter to them either, professions of sympathy and friendship notwithstanding, that a new U.S. president has decided to make a new, hard push to turn things around in Afghanistan in preparation for a draw-down, and that he has asked America's allies to stand by him. We're your friend, sure, just don't ask us for anything. The Social Democrats apparently do not care either about what a withdrawal as a lead-nation in an important sector of Afghanistan will do to the willingness of other member countries to stick this out.

The really sad thing is that in the first opinion poll since the fall of the cabinet, the Social Democrats have gained some ground. Ultimately, therefore, this is about more than the PvdA's decision to pursue its own perceived narrow self-interest. This whole affair may also be a reflection of a growing scepticism among the population at large toward the Afghanistan mission, NATO, and the alliance with the U.S. With the leadership they've been getting lately, that may still be disappointing, but it can't really be a surprise.