Investing more in defense is currently “a necessary evil,” according to a majority of the members of the Party for the Animals. Members will further discuss the controversial new position of the pacifist party at a later time.
Yes, investments in defense are necessary, party leader Esther Ouwehand said on Saturday to the approximately seven hundred attendees at the members’ congress. But the NATO standard is not the solution, according to her. With that, the Netherlands is led by a “Trump standard.”
However, the Party for the Animals will not vote against more investments in defense if there are well-substantiated plans on the table and this is not at the expense of nature. That is quite a turn, which the PvdD parliamentary group already made during a debate at the beginning of March.
PvdD was always against more investments in the defense industry from an anti-war ideology. But the current unrest in the world forces Europe to cooperate more, including in the field of defense, according to the party. And that requires more investment.
That turn of the parliamentary group caused a lot within the PvdD. According to co-founder and former party leader Marianne Thieme, the party is turning against its own ideals, she wrote in Trouw.
The Rotterdam faction resigned, partly due to dissatisfaction with this course. Youth branch PINK! called on the PvdD to reverse this: “Peace through weapons is like eating meat for animal welfare,” the young people said. And the Senate faction felt that the parliamentary group should not have done this without first consulting the members.
Later still in discussion about ‘necessary evil’
That criticism was also heard a lot during the members’ congress on Saturday. That was also evident from the crowds at the microphone, where critics in particular made themselves heard. “Further investments in defense do not fit in with the party’s positions at all,” one member said, for example.
But many members were mainly able to find themselves in the criticism of the Senate faction: first discuss this kind of controversial change of position with the members.
MP Christine Teunissen pointed out to the attending members that the desired member participation could also take place during this congress and hoped that people would vote for a motion in which investing more in defense is presented as a “necessary evil.” Because war is now causing a lot of suffering, she emphasized. “If the US falls away, then we will have to fill the gap in some way.”
A small majority of the members present could agree with that. The motion was adopted with 331 votes in favor, 246 votes against and 75 abstentions.
That does not mean that the PvdD’s turn is definitive, because the much-requested member consultation on the defense position will still take place before the new elections. That conversation will determine the defense position with which the PvdD will enter the elections.