In the Lower House there is broad support for the cabinet plan to considerably increase defense spending to achieve the new NATO standard. Some parties do demand that this should not be at the expense of the welfare state.
Almost all parties recognized the necessity of a higher defense budget during the debate on the new NATO standard. Because of the war in Ukraine and because it is uncertain whether US President Donald Trump will see the European Union as an ally for longer.
“After eighty years of peace, the threat of war is real,” said NSC MP Olger van Dijk. Only the precise interpretation were still questions. “Why so vague?” Asked Jan Paternotte (D66).
Frans Timmermans (GroenLinks-PvdA) did demand that the investments should not be at the expense of the Dutch welfare state, such as education, care and sustainability. “You don’t have to weakly weaken what you want to defend.”
The PVV had a similar wish. “If the 5 percent objective is cut on care or social security, or if the costs are weighted, the PVV will drop out,” said MP Raymond de Roon.
About 16 to 19 billion euros extra per year
Timmermans needed some time to agree to the proposal. Previous chamber motions in which it was called to increase the NATO standard were not supported. Timmermans thought that first the (outgoing) cabinet had to come up with a proposal.
That happened last Friday. The outgoing cabinet embraces the new NATO standard of 5 percent. This percentage is made up of 3.5 percent for defense expenditure and 1.5 percent for defense-related investments, such as infrastructure.
According to the latest calculations, the Netherlands spends more than 2 percent on Defense next year. So a lot of money has to be added. According to an estimate by the government, this concerns 16 to 19 billion euros extra per year. This requires seventeen to eighteen thousand extra full-time jobs at the Ministry of Defense.
‘Jojopolitics with our safety’
Parties such as SGP, VVD and CDA prefer to go one step further. Not so much in terms of amounts, but to legally record the NATO standard, instead of the much less strict effort obligation.
They are afraid that the defense spending will fall again when it will be peace again. “That is yo-yopolitics with our safety,” said VVD leader Dilan Yesilgöz. “If you reduce defense, you need years to come up again. Then you will get into the situation in which we are now. We want to get rid of that.”
In previous cabinets with different, own ministers, the VVD was closely involved in cutbacks in the Ministry of Defense. It then took years to get the martial components back to the desired level. “We, as VVD, took internal lessons from that,” said Yesilgöz.
But Timmermans does not want to record this by law, because it is still unclear how exactly that standard should be achieved and at what pace that should be done. “You deprive any flexibility to fill that in yourself.”
In addition, you don’t know what the world will look like in five or ten years, Timmermans said. “Blanco checks are not written out by my group.”
‘Law starts to look a bit like fetishism’
Coincidentally, a law was passed earlier in the day in the Senate to legally record the old NATO standard of 2 percent. Although that percentage is already outdated and the cabinet already meets it, GroenLinks-PvdA, among others, voted.
Henri Bontenbal (CDA), Chris Stoffer (SGP) and Yesilgöz do not think that is entirely strips with Timmermans’ plea in the Lower House.
“That law is starting to look a bit like fetishism,” Timmermans finally said about it. “It is a political commitment. I am surprised that a number of parties are so determined on a law, while we know that we will not fall under those 2 percent defense expenditure in the future.”
‘Money -wasteing arms race’
Only SP, Think, Party for the Animals and FVD (a total of fourteen room seats) were against. SP leader Jimmy Dijk called the investment “a money-wasting arms race”. According to him, enough money is already going to Defense if you add all the expenses of the European member states together.
In addition, Dijk, unlike Timmermans, thinks that strengthening defense is at the expense of social security. He finds it ridiculous that there never seems to be extra money for rental frozen, poverty reduction or care for the elderly, but now that so many billions extra billions are being promised for weapons.
There is Broad Support in the Dutch Parliament for the Cabinet’s plan to significant -to -go defense spending to meet the new Nato Standard. Some parties do demand that this not come at the Expense of the Welfare State.
Almost All Parties Acknowled the Necessity of A Higher Defense Budget Duration Duration on the New Nato Standard, Due to the War in Ukraine and Uncertainty about Whether us President Donald Trump will Continue to see the European Union as an Ally.
“After Eighty Years of Peace, The Threat Of War is Real,” Said NSC Member of Parliament Olger van Dijk. Only the precise implementation was still Questioned. “Why So Vague?” Asked Jan Paternotte (D66).
Frans Timmermans (GroenLinks-Pvda) Did Demand That The Investments Not Come At The Expense Of The Dutch Welfare State, Such As Education, Healthcare, and Sustainability. “You should you weigh what you want to defend.”
The PVV had A Similar Wish. “If the 5 percent target is Achieved by Cutting Healthcare or Social Security, or IF The Burden is Increased, The PVV Will Withdraw,” Said MP Raymond de Roon.
Concerns an Additional 16 to 19 Billion euros per year
Timmermans Needed some time to agree to the proposal. Previous Parliamentary Motions Calling for An Increase in the Nato Standard Were not supported. Timmermans Believed that the (Caretaker) Cabinet should first come with a proposal.
That happened last Friday. The Caretaker Cabinet Embraces the New Nato Standard or 5 percent. This percentage is made up of 3.5 percent for defense spending and 1.5 percent for defense-related investments, such as infrastructure.
Accordance to the latest calculations, the Netherlands will spend more than 2 percent on defense next year. So a lot of money needs to be added. Accordance to an estimate by the cabinet, this groups an additional 16 to 19 Billion euros per year. This requests seventeen to Eighteneen Thousand Additional Full-time jobs in Defense.
‘Stop-Go Politics with Our Safety’
Parties Such As SGP, VVD, and CDA would prefer to go one step further. Not so much in Terms of Amounts, But to Legally Enshrine The Nato Standard, Instead of the Much Less Stringent Commitment.
They fear that defense spending will fall again when peace returns. “That is stop-go politics with our safety,” Said VVD Leader Dilan Yesilgöz. “If you dismantle defense, it takes years to regain strength. then you end up in the situation we are in now. We want to get rid of that.”
In Previous Cabinets, The VVD, with Various Ministers of Its Own, Closely Involved in Cuts to Defense was. It then went to get the armed forces back to the desired level. “We as the vvd have learned lessons from this internally,” Said Yesilgöz.
But Timmermans does not want to legal enhrine this, because it is still unclear how that standard should be achieved exactly and at what pace. “You take away all flexibility to fill that in Yourself.”
In Addition, You Don’t Know What the World Will Look Like in Five Or Ten Years, Timmermans Said. “Blank checks are not signed by my group.”
‘Law is starting to look a bit like fetishism’
Coincidentally, Earlier in the Day the Senate Passed A Law to Legally Enshrine the Old Nato Standard of 2 percent. Although That percentage is Already Outdataed and the Cabinet Already Complies with It, GroenLinks-Pvda Voted Against It, Among Others.
Henri Bontenbal (CDA), Chris Stoffer (SGP) and Yesilgöz do not think that this is entirely in Line with Timmermans’ plea in the house of representatives.
“That law is starting to look a bit like fetishism,” Timmermans said about it in the end. “It is a political commitment. I was surprised that a number of parties are so determined to have a law when we know that we will not fall below that 2 percent defense spending in the future.”
‘Money-Wasting Arms Race’
Only SP, think, Party for the Animals and FvD (A Total of Fourteen Seats in Parliament) Were Against. SP Leader Jimmy Dijk Called the Investment “A Money-Wasting Arms Race”. Accordance to him, Enough Money Already Goes to Defense If you add all the Expenses of the European Member States.
In Addition, Dijk Believe, in contrast to Timmermans, That Strengthening Defense Will Come at the Expense of Social Security. He thinks it is ridiculous that there never seems to be extra Money for the Rent Freeze, Poverty Reduction, or Elderly Care, But Now So Many Billions Extra Are Easily Promised for Weapons.