Do you feel lucky, punk? [source here]

Quite a week. With Paars Plus buried on Tuesday evening, all eyes returned once more to Palace Noordeinde. Normal practice meant that the party leaders from parliament would once again troupe past the Queen to offer shreds of wisdom and hints of some way forward. Not so. A trio of trusted advisors came and went that evening: First Chamber chairperson Rene van der Linden, Second Chamber chairperson Gerdi Verbeet, and State Council vice-chair Herman Tjeenk Willink. Then at 10 o’clock former minister president Ruud Lubbers arrived as advisor, and left as informateur. Informateur? Lubbers? Time for a new round of comment on the role of the monarchy in the Dutch political system.

The NRC led off today with a piece on Lubbers’ wish that the leaders of the VVD, CDA, and PVV start talking, seriously. He left the door open for a VVD-CDA minority cabinet supported by the PVV from the parliament. Even though this is officially not within his brief. Pragmatism, desperation, take your pick.

Next came Mark Kranenburg and Pieter van Os on p. 3, doing the rounds of the constitution experts to check out if the Queen’s decision was legit. Huib Pellikaan pointed out that it is precisely in times of serious political division that the monarchy’s role is strongest, since the lack of a clear message from the party leaders allows the monarch to choose the path forward. We’ve seen that more than ever since June 9. Lodewijk Rogier added that this is really the last vestige of royal power within the Dutch political system, and therefore it is precisely during these periods that all (critical) attention turns to the Queen’s role. He has a point. Opening supermarkets and launching ships one day, setting the course for the future of Dutch politics the next. For some, it kinda grates.

Rogier then dropped a mega-hint that this problem can only grow. While he (and many) have faith in the qualities of the current monarch, “if this situation occurs with another head of state in the future, then you’ll see that the discussion will turn out differently.” A tough call for Willem Alexander.

But its one thing to focus on the monarchy, and another to consider for a moment that maybe the parliament is quite happy if she takes on this role and saves them from the headache. This point was rammed home, lastly, by the NRC editorial on p. 7. The monarchy maintains this influential role by cabinet formation because the parliament has allowed it to do so. There have been attempts to disrupt it. In 1971 parliament voted in favour of a motion to take over the appointment of the informateur. The legal basis for a democratic, ‘republican’ system exists – but is never used. Earlier this year the parliament once again agreed to discuss the naming of an informateur following the elections. Once again, this option was avoided when the chips were down. Moves to open up debate on a ‘modernisation’ of the monarchy (i.e. complete removal of the monarchy from politics) – as attempted by former D66 leader Thom de Graaf in 2000 – have so far led nowhere. The monarchy clearly still plays a crucial role, because the politicians are not willing to fill the space that would be vacated. Maybe royalty still is at the heart of Dutch national identity and political process. But by default. And if its based on personality not position – for how long?

So where is it all going? The day before the Paars Plus talks collapsed, Geert Wilders popped up with an op-ed – in the NRC ! – that was a translation of his response to the Muslims Debate site that wanted to know ’why he became anti-Islam’. The piece obviously caught a lot of media attention elsewhere – the original English version is available here. Wilders’ big statement before cabinet responsibility? Maybe.

Some trenchant details:

1) the inevitable quote from Churchill (all these right-wing Western civilisation types bring out Churchill, guaranteed every time);

2) Israel is clean and well-run while all Arab states are dirty, poor and chaotic (maybe divide US civil + military aid – $3 to 4bn a year, unconditional – by the Israeli population – 7.5m – and you’ll find out why, Geert).

But the big message of course is that Islam – and the all-powerful but unknowable Allah – takes away individual freedom, to the detriment of all:

“The Arab, Turkish, Iranian, Indian, Indonesian peoples have tremendous potential. It they were not captives of Islam, if they could liberate themselves from the yoke of Islam, if they would cease to take Muhammad as a role model and if they got rid of the evil Koran, they would be able to achieve great things which would benefit not only them but the entire world.”

A call to freedom! Enough to clear the air and lever his way into the government? Its not a million miles away from Maxime Verhagen’s human rights mantra, after all. Except for some minor details that the CDA might struggle with. Such as Mohammed being referred to as “a mass murderer, a tyrant and a pedophile.”

So the question is – will Maxime swallow this, for the good of the nation? Or will he spit it out – for the good of the nation?

The ‘informateur’ Uri Rosenthal announced Friday that the first round of negoations for forming a cabinet were over and he had therefore completed his initial task. The expectation – and the advise of Rosenthal himself – was that two informateurs would be chosen, one representing the VVD and one the PvdA, to enable two-track negoations to continue next week. This would equitably reflect the stand-off between the two largest parties. It also indicated a long second round of talks in the offing.

Today however the Queen, whose task it is (having taken advice) to announce the informateur, pulled a surprise by declaring that there would be only one, and he is from the PvdA – Herman Tjeenk Willink, vice-president of the Raad van Staat (Council of State), the main political advisory body for the monarchy. This is quite a surprise, as it puts the emphasis squarely on a centre-left cabinet or at least a centrist cabinet involving both left and right. Significantly, Tjeenk Willink was informateur once before – in 1994, when Paars I (PvdA-VVD-D66) under Wim Kok came into being. Looks like we could be heading in the same direction.

The party leaders now identified to play a role in the second round – representing VVD, CDA, PvdA, D 66, and GroenLinks – have been invited today to speak with the Queen to discuss the state of play. So no Wilders, who reacted, predictably, that this was a scandal and a total rejection of ‘his’ voters. Since yesterday Maxime Verhagen of the CDA has suddenly shown an interest in taking part in cabinet discussions, after two weeks of holier-than-though sitting on the fence. The entire first round now takes on a sharper image – it was no more than manouevering to ensure that the PVV and Wilders could be shut out. By not including a VVD informateur and therefore not inviting Wilders to discuss matters at the palace, the message of the Queen today was crystal clear. This man Wilders is not ‘one of us’.

Wilders has denounced this ‘cordon sanitaire’, as well he might. What is so weak about this particular exclusionary tactic is that it has been accomplished with no single attempt to attack the PVV’s programme. This is a stupid mistake, mainly on the part of the VVD and the CDA. A head-on declaration of why they do not want to share a cabinet with the PVV on policy grounds would have given a clear message of principal and show where they stand. It would be pretty easy to do so – one really does wonder how many of the PVV voters have read the party’s programme, because its quite an unbelievable document. Instead both VVD and CDA pretended as if they might cooperate, passing the buck back and forth until the first round was over and Uri Rosenthal could report that there was no possibility for a cabinet that included Wilders. This simply gives Wilders all the ammunition he needs to tell his supporters that he’s being unjustly treated.

What makes the politically-tinted decision by the Queen today all the more interesting is the fact that Wilders has already spoken out against the existing political system in the Netherlands which continues to give the Queen an influential role behind the scenes. He favours the Swedish model that would keep the ceremonial aspect of the monarchy but remove them from the serious political scene. I suspect right now he might be thinking more along the lines of outright abolition.

The choice of informateur today, for instance, was not taken by her alone but on advice of others – however, the fact that she went against the advice of the first informateur, Uri Rosenthal, indicates already that something or other was being said and done in the last 24 hours that led to a different outcome. A PvdA informateur in current circumstances is truly a remarkable political decision. The intention of course is that this will narrow down the possibilities for a cabinet and get the job done. But the fear now is that its going to lead to a compromise cabinet either fudging things or being blocked by internal divisions. This is exactly what happened to Paars the fist time round, which led to the dramatic rise of Pim Fortuyn. Paars II could see the same happening with Wilders.   

And if it does, the already shaky ground for the monarchy could take a further jolt.