The EEAS Through Dutch Eyes
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Chapter 10 The glass is half full: The EEAS through Dutch eyes By Louise van Schaik 10.1 Introduction 97 10.2 The merchant and the vicar 98 10.3 The EEAS and Dutch diplomacy 99 10.4 National views on the functions of the EEAS 100 10.5 Long live Ashton! Who do you mean? 103 10.6 Conclusions 104 10.1 INTRODUCTION On 5 November 2012 a new government took office in the Netherlands. In comparison to the previous conservative right-wing government, it is expected to be slightly keener to work towards consensus on EU issues. This viewpoint is confirmed in the recently published ‘state of the Union’ document which expresses the objective to strengthen the bridge-building role of the Netherlands within the EU.82 However, it is still rather early to give an overview of specific positions on EU foreign policy, and the general public continues to follow EU affairs critically. With regard to the vote on Palestine’s membership of the UN General Assembly, the Netherlands abstained, whereas the previous government voted against Palestinian UNESCO membership last year. This indicates that the Dutch can be expected to take a somewhat more moderate position on the Middle East. In general, EU foreign policy does not receive much attention in Dutch media. The European External Action Service (EEAS) is primarily judged by the government for its potential to rationalise budgets and the tasks of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. A specific point advocated by the Netherlands is a potential takeover of consular tasks by EU Delegations. The new EU foreign policy actors are considered to be of added value and receive support from the government, but there is some ambiguity about how this is related to a (perceived) decline of Dutch influence in the world. For the last two years, the Netherlands seemed almost in a state of denial about the need to rethink EU foreign policy questions strategically, to set priorities for this agenda and to redefine the division of labour between Dutch 82 The Government of the Netherlands (2013), Staat van de Unie “Bruggen slaan in Europa” (State of the Union: building bridges within Europe), 15 February 2013. 97 and European diplomacies, and it would be good if the new minister were to devote more attention to this matter. This contribution will discuss the relationship between EU and Dutch diplomatic actors. Firstly, it gives a general overview of Dutch foreign policy orientations. Secondly, it discusses the structure of Dutch diplomacy and, in particular, budget cuts and the organisational division between the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and other external relations, such as trade, aid and neighbourhood policy. Thirdly, it gives an overview of Dutch views on specific EEAS issues, such as consular tasks and the co-location of diplomatic missions. Fourthly, it devotes attention to what the Netherlands does to promote Dutch diplomats and how the latter view their posting to the EEAS. Fifthly, it touches upon perceptions of Ashton’s performance so far and what to expect from new Dutch Foreign Minister Frans Timmermans. Finally, the sixth section draws some general conclusions. 10.2 THE MERCHANT AND THE VICAR The Netherlands has a long tradition of linking its international diplomatic presence to promoting Dutch products and values. Since the 17th Century, the notion of the ‘merchant and the vicar’ characterised the image of Dutch diplomacy. Even though since then the relative size of the Dutch economy has downsized, the Netherlands still ranks 17th in terms of the size of its economy.83 It is a large investor in third countries and has an open export-dependent economy.84 Promoting ‘Merchant Holland’ has regained importance in the current economic crisis. Nevertheless, the Netherlands is also still keen to continue with its long tradition of promoting values such as human rights and the rule of law. The Hague likes to refer to itself as the legal capital of the world and is the hometown of the Peace Palace, several tribunals, Europol, Eurojust and the International Criminal Court. Another element of the Dutch ‘vicar attitude’ is the emphasis on the need for EU conditions for enlargement to be “strict and fair”.85 More generally, the Netherlands does not see itself a small country, and has convictions and positions on a wide range of foreign policy issues. Its contribution to development cooperation and international missions, not to mention the level of ambition of its armed forces, is still relatively high, despite severe budget cuts in recent years. This has not prevented the exclusion of the Netherlands from G20 meetings. The country lacks a seat on the UN Security Council and recently decided to share its seat on the IMF Executive Board with Belgium to make room for emerging economies. The government that entered office in autumn 2012 has restated its support for European cooperation in general, and for a larger degree of EU involvement in foreign policy and defence matters in particular. This can be seen – at least partially – as a compensation for the perceived loss of Dutch international influence. On the European continent, the Netherlands is one of the most pro- transatlantic countries in its orientation. With regard to the Dutch position on European integration, the ‘no vote’ on the Constitutional Treaty in 2005 can be considered as a turning point. From then onwards, the Dutch government changed its 83 According to the Central Intelligence Agency World Factbook of 2011 and comparable lists of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. 84 Knapen, B., Arts, G., Kleistra, Y., Klem, M. and Rem, M. (2010), ‘Attached to the World: On the Anchoring and Strategy of Dutch Foreign Policy’, Scientific Council for Government Policy, The Hague, www.wrr.nl/fileadmin/en/publicaties/PDF-Rapporten/Attached_to_the_world.pdf 85 The Government of the Netherlands (2011a), ‘Staat van de Europese Unie 2011-2012’, ‘Nederland in Europa, Europa in de Wereld – Realistisch en Doelgericht’, The Hague. 98 attitude from being a frontrunner in the integration process towards a more critical and reluctant stance. Points of criticism recurring in Dutch public debates on the EU include the Netherlands paying a relatively high share of the EU budget compared to the amount of EU funds it receives, the EU institutions being overly bureaucratic and keen on generating red tape, the inefficiency of having the European Parliament travel to Strasbourg for its plenary sessions, transfers and guarantees for Southern European member states since the euro crisis, and the transfer of competences on an ever- increasing number of issues to Brussels. Dutch citizens and politicians emphasise, in particular, that health care, education and pensions are topics in which Brussels should not intervene.86 During the election campaign in August and September 2012, Europe was a leading topic. The outcome was considered pro-European, since the most Eurosceptic parties – Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party (PVV) and the Socialist Party (SP) – lost vote shares and ‘only’ received about 20% of the vote. At the same time, very outspoken pro-European parties, such as D66 and the Green-Left (Groen-Links), did not win much either. The big winners, the Conservative Liberals (VVD) and the Labour Party (PvdA), cannot be described as anti-European, but neither can they be considered ‘EU-lovers’. Their position on European integration in the last decade has followed the general trend in public opinion. Prime Minister Mark Rutte of the largest party, VVD, has, for instance, indicated his lack of interest in prospective thinking (‘vergezichten’) on European integration. Therefore, the Netherlands can be expected to stick to its slightly Eurocritical tone in policy debates, for example on the future of Europe. 10.3 THE EEAS AND DUTCH DIPLOMACY Many questions remain as to the impact of the EEAS on the size of Dutch diplomacy. Initially, the Ministry of Finance saw the establishment of the EEAS as a means of justifying the closure of embassies and of handing over consular and visa affairs to EU Delegations. In previous rounds of cuts, which amounted to a 55 million euro reduction of the budget for diplomatic representation, the number of diplomats was slashed from over 3,000 to 2,500 in 2014. Further cuts of 40 million euros are foreseen to a total budget of 760 million euros. Several diplomatic missions were closed and more closures are expected. This is commensurate with a considerable reduction in development funding, which will bring down the Dutch ODA contribution from 0.7% to 0.6% of GDP in the coming years. As a consequence, diplomatic staff in third countries will be reduced in number from 1,138 in 2012 to 885 in 2015. The number of attachés will also be reduced and they are expected to number around 285 in 2015. At the same time, it is recognised that it is still too early to rely on the EEAS and EU Delegations to take over a substantial proportion of national embassies’ tasks, and the Netherlands opposes an expansion of the EEAS budget. Nevertheless, the Netherlands still aims to explore the possibility of delegating tasks in the area of consular affairs and visa applications to EU Delegations in the years to come.87 This point is reiterated in policy documents and debates with Members of Parliament, also in the context of further budget cuts to the diplomatic network of the Netherlands.88 The option of co-locating embassies with EU Delegations is also considered as a viable one for those countries in which the Netherlands has a small diplomatic service. In cooperation with the Danish EU Presidency, a conference 86 Clingendael (2012), ‘Rijk Achter de Dijken’, ‘Magazine on EU and International Affairs for the Election Campaign, Clingendael – Netherlands Institute of International Relations, The Hague.