Empty Containers and the Fall of Balkenende IV

Tonight the Dutch government coalition of Social Democrats, Christian Democrats and Christian Union broke up, seemingly over the continuation of the Dutch military contribution in the Afghan Uruzgan province. I have been too long away from the Netherlands to comment and analyse this break-up in detail. I would too easily refer to too general features like 'a lack of trust', the favorability of the broader 'political climate' and I could refer to a long list of political crises that has challenged this government.

However, this is not how I want to address this item. I think that politicians and media are too quick to reframe the Dutch involvement in Uruzgan into a broader frame of political crisis and crisis of legitimacy. I am well aware that I could easily be judged for being too naive for not considering the submerged motivations impinging on the decision-making on Uruzgan. Of course, one should not lose political positions out of sight, but let me observe that politicians who are most cynical about this crisis, are the very ones who most fervently feed distrust in politics. Without substantially weighing the pros and cons of the Dutch involvement in Uruzgan, the fall of the government cabinet has been applauded as the end of the 'worst cabinet in history', liars have been exposed, en statements have been made about the low level of trust within the governing coalition. This way a broad coalition of politicians and media work together to reduce a substantial political issue to an empty container, to be deployed as a diversion to any substantial political question.
That Uruzgan turned out to be a political hurdle was no surprise. Christian Union Minister of Defense, Eimert van Middelkoop , prematurely brought up the question in September last year. Social Democratic Minster of Finance and deputy PM, Wouter Bos, again took this issue up in a television interview, stating that he and his party will not allow for a continuation of the Dutch Afghanistan mission. Minister Bos’declaration after tonight’s break-up, seemed be very substantian, about the Social Democrat’s abide by the government’s installation memorandum in 2007. However, Minister Bos heated up the discussion and decision-making process, by addressing his position on Uruzgan in the media instead the government cabinet. (Christian Democratic leader in the lower house, Pieter Geel, calls this an unnecessary 'politicizing', which is kind of awkward considering the fact that everything a government does is political.) By addressing the issue of Uruzgan in public, Bos has purposefully tread the field of competence of Van Middelkoop, the question who is to blame for this I will leave open. The Christian Democrats, by wording of MP Balkenende, do not seem to think the current crisis has much to do with the Uruzgan mission, rather: without trust in the governing coalition, no unified government is possible. To me this sounds too general and too much of a truism, but it does not make me less cinical; are we in Uruzgan to show mutual trust within the Dutch governing coalition? I expect that the discussion will continue a bit about breaking promises made in the 2007 installation memorandum of, but since when is a that document a blueprint for goverment; it is usually only referred to if it happens to suit a political stance. Or maybe the discussion will be about the wrong- or rightness of the followed procedure, as if the decision-making procedure to follow about Uruzgan is more of a shame than the way an earlier Balkenende led government decided to support the Iraq invasion. The issue of Uruzgan itself does not seem to be a greater reason for the break-up of this coalition than other issues.
That the coalition still broke up without a more concrete discussion about the pros and the cons of the Dutch mission in Afghanistan is most unfortunate from the perspective of international stability, security and rule of law. Wat is the role that the Netherlands sees for itself in international relations? Should a continue Uruzgan mission be a confirmation of an enduring alliance with the US? Does a Dutch mission facilitate the transition to a more secure and stable Afghanistan? Should we spent funds and manpower more effectively and legitimately elsewhere? Al these questions seem to be ignored, especially in the Dutch parliament, by drawing them into a sphere of so-called political chaos and the empty container of political opportunism. Would-be candidates during the next parliamentary elections do not have to bother about substantial issues.Political content is absent. Or rather, chaos is the content for professional brokers of political distrust and cynism.