Dutch withdrawal from Afghanistan: a vacuum for peace-building?
Nathan Andrews
Issue date: 3/2/10 Section: News
Although international peace and security seems to be paramount on the agenda of most developed countries, it gets to a time when domestic politics takes precedence.
The governing Dutch coalition collapsed Feb. 20 over disputes about the date for the withdrawal of their soldiers Afghanistan. In October 2009, the Dutch parliament voted that the deployment must end by August 2010. But Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende's government gave no endorsement to the vote.
After not being able to reach a compromise during the marathon talks that ran until early Feb. 19, the Labor Party (the second largest party in the coalition government) decided to pull out of the coalition.
This leaves Balkenende's government with a minority in parliament. As there is no common ground, Balkenende has offered his cabinet's resignation to Queen Beatrix.
While most of the 150 members of the legislature oppose keeping the troops in Afghanistan, NATO has asked the Netherlands to extend its commitment for a year past the August withdrawal date. NATO is under the litmus test. The way in which it handles these developments will prove its efficacy.
"The 'Afghanistan surge' will put NATO to an even greater test," said Dr. Hans-Martin Jaeger, a political science professor at Carleton University. "I don't see it as a make-or-break situation for NATO, but […] the reluctance of America's European allies to increase their troop levels could further diminish NATO's international standing. From the US perspective, it is a test of intra-Western solidarity; from the European perspective, a test of the viability of US leadership."
Since Aug. 1, 2006, the Netherlands has been the lead nation in the province of Uruzgan with a contribution of between 1,650 and 2,000 troops - 21 Dutch soldiers have been killed so far.
Their mission in the Uruzgan province is of a military-civilian nature, an approach widely known as "3-D" (Defense, Development and Diplomacy), with the focus on reconstruction, and military action only when necessary.
The governing Dutch coalition collapsed Feb. 20 over disputes about the date for the withdrawal of their soldiers Afghanistan. In October 2009, the Dutch parliament voted that the deployment must end by August 2010. But Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende's government gave no endorsement to the vote.
After not being able to reach a compromise during the marathon talks that ran until early Feb. 19, the Labor Party (the second largest party in the coalition government) decided to pull out of the coalition.
This leaves Balkenende's government with a minority in parliament. As there is no common ground, Balkenende has offered his cabinet's resignation to Queen Beatrix.
While most of the 150 members of the legislature oppose keeping the troops in Afghanistan, NATO has asked the Netherlands to extend its commitment for a year past the August withdrawal date. NATO is under the litmus test. The way in which it handles these developments will prove its efficacy.
"The 'Afghanistan surge' will put NATO to an even greater test," said Dr. Hans-Martin Jaeger, a political science professor at Carleton University. "I don't see it as a make-or-break situation for NATO, but […] the reluctance of America's European allies to increase their troop levels could further diminish NATO's international standing. From the US perspective, it is a test of intra-Western solidarity; from the European perspective, a test of the viability of US leadership."
Since Aug. 1, 2006, the Netherlands has been the lead nation in the province of Uruzgan with a contribution of between 1,650 and 2,000 troops - 21 Dutch soldiers have been killed so far.
Their mission in the Uruzgan province is of a military-civilian nature, an approach widely known as "3-D" (Defense, Development and Diplomacy), with the focus on reconstruction, and military action only when necessary.
Be the first to comment on this story