Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Dutch Foreign Policy
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
hypotheses, and data collection, with the purpose of making this research falsifiable and to provide a framework for potential repetition. Chapter four is a major part of this thesis, since here a descriptive chronology of the relations between the Netherlands and the People's Republic of China will be presented, including all four cases that will be analyzed. In statistical terms this could be considered the data that will be used to test our hypotheses. In Chapter five the framework of the theory will be tested according to the data from chapter five, after which the hypotheses will be verified or falsified for each case. Chapter six concludes the thesis, giving a short review of the aims and questions that were raised in the thesis and whether or not the process and the results can be considered fruitful.
We will discuss two discourses, namely the literature that forms the discourse of Dutch foreign policy, and the literature that revolves around the Dutch China policy specifically. In order to provide a comprehensive and informative review, in both cases the most distinguished works will be elaborated on, after which also other notable literature will be mentioned.
1.1 Dutch Foreign Policy
Small member states of the European Union exert little influence on the international system. Also in the tradition of realism, it is stated that the most influential countries in the international system are the ones with the biggest capacity (Waltz, 1979).
So is Dutch foreign policy significant? Does the Netherlands even need its own foreign policy? Will the Netherlands still have its own foreign policy when the integration of policy in the European Union nears completion? These are questions that are very
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
relevant today for researchers and policy-makers involved in the decision-making process of Dutch foreign policy (van Ham & van Schaik, 2012).
The Dutch government itself states that its foreign policy is based on four pillars, namely the integration of the national foreign policy with the European Union, the maintenance of the relations with neighboring countries, the security of European safety and stability and the participation in conflict management and peacekeeping missions.
These standpoints portay an image
The most important institution where the role of the Netherlands in the international system and the development of Dutch foreign policy is being researched is the Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael (Het Nederlands Instituut voor Internationale Betrekkingen Clingendael) in the Hague. This is the leading independent think tank that in cooperation with the chief Belgian think tank Egmont-Royal Institute of International Relations (Egmont-Koninklijk Instituut voor Internationale Betrekkingen) publishes the monthly academic magazine Internationale Spectator covering the most recent developments in international affairs. Also, the institute provides courses for Dutch and international diplomats. A significant amount of the domestic academic literature regarding Dutch foreign policy is either published by researchers at or related to the Clingendael Institute.
Some comprehensive works on Dutch foreign policy are The Role of the Netherlands in World Politics and The Netherlands in the World both written by D.A.
Hellema (2009, 2010). He has published extensively on Dutch foreign policy and international relations after the Second World War.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
In The Role of the Netherlands in World Politics Hellema (2009) starts the discussion by claiming that in the history of Dutch foreign policy analysis, researchers have primarily been focused on the long-term consistencies that characterize Dutch foreign policy. Boogman (1975, 1977), Heldring (1978) and Voorhoeve (1979) all hold the view that the foreign policy of the Netherlands has been determined by several constants or traditions that stem from the era of the Republic2. Although they all present their own slightly different categorizations, these 'constants' are quite similar in character and can be generally referred to as the traditions of neutrality, free trade, an aversion to continental power politics, maritime-commercialism and legalism. According to Hellema (2009) these traditions have their origin in the early seventeenth century and influenced Dutch foreign policy well up to the Second World War. He uses these theories as a reference throughout his work and often accompanies his observations with realist conclusions. He argues for example that the notion of a continuous tradition of peaceful and liberal politics cannot be maintained. He considers the pursuit of neutrality and free trade as responses to circumstances and dictated by the international system :
The Dutch economic interests were often best served by a politics of free trade and neutrality and sometimes there was no alternative. Neutrality and free trade were the goals of a state that for a great part of its history can be characterized as a small, military weak but economically important trading power. But we should guard against the idea that any kind of mentality or moral inclination, which we then proceed to dignify with such terms as neutralism or idealism. (p. 38)
2 The Dutch Republic or the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands (Republiek der Zeven Verenigde Nederlanden) was a confederation from 1581 up until 1795. It preceded the Batavian Republic, the
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Kossmann (1991) contributed to the discourse with an analysis that is based on a perspective provided by Carr (1939) －British founder of the school of realism － who explained that satisfied powers tend toward a status quo politics: they tend to foster stability, harmony and ideologies that facilitate the status quo. They are thus mainly conservative powers, Carr concludes (Carr, et al., 1939). Kossmann confirms this view.
He concludes that in as far as one can speak of any constant or tradition in Dutch foreign politics, it was conservatism (Kossmann, 1991).
These constants were, like most things that enjoyed a certain stability up until that point, irriversibly destabilized by the events of the 20th century. Hellema (2009, 2010) argues that in 1948 and 1949 a new course was embarked upon both politically and economically. The Netherlands lost its neutrality politics after the Second World War, as a consequence of being invaded by Nazi Germany. Neutrality, since the late 1940s was gradually traded for transatlantic partnership, in order to seek security against the continental European powers, and balance their interests with the Anglo-saxon or Atlantic interests. Acceptance of American leadership coincided with Dutch interests, in political, economic and military domains, even though there were still several points of conflict between the Netherlands and the US. But the crucial difference from the pre-war Dutch foreign policy was the fact that the Netherlands, after 1948, adopted a much more active stance and did this within multilateral contexts such as the OEEC, NATO and the European communities.
Kieviet (2011) provides an analysis of the role of the Netherlands within the multilateral context of the United Nations Security Council from 1946 to 2000, using
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Holsti's theory of national role conceptions (Holsti, 1970). His conclusion basically confirms the observations of Hellema (2001, 2009, 2010), namely that after the Second World War, the Netherlands left their neutrality politics behind and fulfilled the role of a trustworthy ally of the United States and the role of a defender of international institutions and human rights.
If we look back at the 'constants' that colored Dutch foreign policy before the Second World War, we can see that in contrast to neutrality, the tradition of free trade and the pursuit of liberalization of international trade continued after the Second World War. The contemporary implementation of this aspiration can be found in the unyielding Dutch support towards the creation of a common market as part of European integration.
Especially true for smaller states, foreign policy often comes down to adaptation, based on the assumption that states normally pursue a rational defense and promotion of their national interests. According to the tradition of power realism, those national interests consist of economic interests and the optimizing of military security and political influence. At the same time, Hellema (2001, 2009, 2010) and others (e.g.
Kieviet, 2011; Baehr, 1989) recognize that foreign policy can sometimes deviate from such rational meanings. In the early 1950s there was what Hellema describes as a regressive deviation, and in the 1970s a progressive deviation from rational materialism.
In both phases, it was concluded in the circles of trade and industry that some aspects of foreign policy were not trumped by the national interest and were threatening to damage Dutch economic interests.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
In the early 1950s this pertains to the fact that the conflict between the Netherlands and the Republic of Indonesia3 became a matter of principle and prestige instead of national interest. The police action of December 1948 was motivated by obsolete conceptions and sentiments and no longer served any actual interests. This police action led to the total isolation of the Netherlands in the international community.
Patijn wrote, "The Netherlands had the honor of being one of the first states to be condemned by the UN Security Council" (1970, p. 14). The period that followed was characterized by confusion, uncertainty and frustration over the loss of empire and the new role and status of the Netherlands in the post-war world. It took the Dutch government five years to submit to the new post-war reality of being a small state. For over five years there was no sign of new foreign policy, while so many urged to adapt already immediately after the war (Hellema, 2011, p. 123).
In the 1970s, the progressive deviation from rational materialism pertains to the internal, domestic democratic influence on foreign policy. During this period the radical foreign policy of development aid, which was aimed at internationally sharing prosperity and wealth and the emancipation of the poor, conducted under the Den Uyl government, can be seen as an idealistic product of domestic political influence, and in conflict with what realists would argue to be national interests. It was an example of 'internalization' of foreign policy, according to Van Staden (1991). A Ministry of Development Aid was established, and during this period, the expenses of Dutch development aid increased from a total amount of 1150 to almost 3000 million guilders, almost a threefold increase.
3 The Republic of Indonesia was a federal state of the United States of Indonesia, established on 27 December 1949. The territory of the state included parts of Java and most of Sumatra. The republic already
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Finally Hellema (2011) argues that towards the end of the millennium there appears to have been a growing uncertainty in Dutch foreign policy, which partly translates to arguments for short-term (or even short-sighted) pragmatism and self-interest.
Next to these comprehensive books on Dutch foreign policy, there are quite some issue-oriented analyses of the foreign policy of the Netherlands. A structural analysis of the role of human rights in Dutch foreign policy during the last quarter century can be found in the book Human Rights in the Foreign Policy of the Netherlands by Baehr, Castermans-Holleman, and Grünfeld (2002). This proved to be very useful for the narrative on the Tiananmen crisis in 1989, since it meticulously treats the Dutch reaction to the human rights violations at that time, and discusses fundamental questions regarding the contradictions between moralism, practical selectivism and national interest.
Also, an incredibly detailed evaluation of the influence of domestic factors on Dutch foreign policy can be found in the book Controversies at Home: Domestic Factors in the Foreign Policy of the Netherlands written by P.P. Everts (1985). Here, foreign policy issues are systematically analysed with special regard to policy intentions, actions and effects. The relevance of this book for this thesis are the chapters regarding the trade of Dutch submarines with Taiwan during the early 1980s.
Other works that shed light on Dutch foreign policy in English are Peace, profits and principles: a study of Dutch foreign policy (M. Nijhoff, 1979), The Foreign Policy of the Netherlands by Leurdijk (1978), International Law in the Netherlands: Vol. III' by Van Panhuys (1964), Aloofness and Neutrality: Studies on Dutch Foreign Relations and Policy-Making Institutions by Wels (1982), The Economy and Politics of the Netherlands
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Since 1945 by Griffiths (1980) and the more recently published work Dutch Foreign Policy Since 1815: A Study in Small Power Politics by A. Vandenbosch (2012).
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
1.2 Dutch Foreign Policy towards ChinaThe bilateral relations between China and the Netherlands has primarily been documented in a descriptive fashion. The most prominent works describing the relations between the Netherlands and China are De Dans van de Leeuw en de Draak by Van der Heijden (2009) and China en de Nederlanders by Blussé and van Luyn (2008). These works are fairly recently published, and provide a comprehensive historical account between the interactions of the Netherlands and China. Tribuut aan China, Vier eeuwen Nederlands-Chinese betrekkingen by L. Blussé (1989) is a contribution that describes the historical development of Sino-Dutch relations, with specific attention for the Chinese diaspora in Indonesia. The book was assigned by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in preparation for the visit of Queen Beatrix and Prince Claus to China in 1989, a trip that would later be cancelled due to the political instability.
Beside these comprehensive historical accounts on Sino-Dutch relations, theses in English are plentiful: e.g. the doctoral thesis of Van der Putten (2001) Corporate Behaviour and Political Risk, Dutch Companies in China 1903-1941, A critical Survey of Studies on Dutch Colonial History by Coolhaas (2013) and Nederland en de opkomst van het moderne imperialisme, kolonien en buitenlandse politiek by M. Kuitenbrouwer (1985). The book already mentioned earlier, Controversies at home: Domestic factors in the foreign policy of the Netherlands (Everts, 1985) contains very detailed information about the submarine crisis of 1981 between the Netherlands and China.
The relationship between China and the Netherlands and Dutch foreign policy in general also started to become a widely discussed topic among the general public since the 1970s. NGO's, newspapers, magazines, journalist, writers, columnists, artists and
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
civilians have produced large amount of opinion articles that usually offer a critique towards China's human rights violations and the seemingly incongruent passive reaction of the Netherlands. One of the recurring arguments here is that the Netherlands does not emphasize its position on human rights enough towards China. Several analyses of Dutch foreign policy towards China with regard to human rights violations in China have concluded that Dutch foreign policy is inconsistent with the role that it portrays to play in the international community (e.g. van der Heijden, 2009; Baehr, 1989; Kieviet, 2011).
According to Castermans and Baehr (2002) the Netherlands ought to stand on the front line of defending human rights in the international system, given its reputation. They reckon that in a time of new international coalitions and an alliance against terrorism where also China is siding with the Americans, the attention for human rights violations seems to fade away. This, however, is unacceptable for the Netherlands, that should continue to initiate plans and pressure to battle human rights violations in China, they argue (p. 199-205). Especially since China seems to be resistant against multilateral initiatives coming from the United Nations, the ministries of the Netherlands should synchronize their policy to bilaterally emphasize human rights violations.
Also Verweij (2014) concludes that Dutch decision-making towards China has mostly been decided by the wallet, instead of moral imperatives. This leads researchers to conclude that realism is applicable for the analysis of Dutch foreign policy towards China, because the economic national interests trump human rights (Verweij, 2014;
Castermans & Baerh, 2002). Not referring to realism, but offering a critique on the matter, Van der Heijden (2009) writes in her final verdict on Sino-Dutch relations that
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
four centuries of trading contact have led to the realization that pressure and force doesn't lead to a balanced relationship (p. 149).
This aggregate of literature on Dutch foreign policy and Dutch China policy forms the backbone of the data that will be laid out in chapter five. Here the historical development of the relation between the Netherlands and the People's Republic of China will be explored, including the four cases that will be under scrutiny. These four cases, namely the Submarine Crisis (1981-1984); the June Fourth Incident (1989-1991);
China's Negligence (1991-1992); and Van Mierlo's Moralism (1997-1998) together form the most important destabilizing events in the relationship between the Netherlands and the People's Republic of China.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y Chapter 2
Reconsidering Mainstream Theories & Beyond
2.1 Neorealism
A prince… cannot observe all those things for which men are considered good, for in order to maintain the state he is often obliged to act against his promise, against charity, against humanity, and against religion. And therefore, it is necessary that he have a mind ready to turn itself according to the way the winds of fortune and the changeability of [political] affairs require… as long as it is possible, he should not stray from the good, but he should know how to enter into evil when necessity commands. (Machiavelli, 1984, p. 59-60)
Realism is still considered to be the most dominant and influential theory in international relations. The theory is generally characterized by the pessimistic view that every state has to rely on itself in order to secure its own survival in an anarchic world of selfish actors. States are the main actors, and in order to survive they try to maximize their national security. Realism did not appear as a discipline of international relations before the Second World War, but the fundamental assumptions that form the bases of the theory can be found in early political and philosophical texts. Bellum omnium contra omnes, the war of all against all, as Thomas Hobbes described it in his thought
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
experiment of the state of nature, which became one of the foundational principles of realism (Hobbes, 1651). 4
Central to the Hobbesian state of nature stands that the cause of action for humans is fear. Consequently realism appropriates this characteristic to states. States base their actions on fear, the fear that external powers will challenge their survival. The thousands year old phrase “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must"
provided by Thucydides is an assumption of international relations that is still central to realist theory.
The Theory of International Politics by Waltz (1979) is considered to be one of the most important contributions to the neorealist discourse (Hollis & Smith, 1990).
Neorealism can be argued to be a more structured form of realism, Waltz himself also used the phrase 'structural realism' to describe his own theory. Waltz (1979), much like the foundation of realism in general, argues that the international system is characterized by anarchy and decentralized organization. This means that unlike the internal structure of a domestic political system, actors in the international system are equal and are not controlled by a higher authority. This is because the decisions are made by the political units in the international system (states) and not by a central government (Waltz, 1979).
2.1.1 The characteristics of states
In the international system states are the most important political units (Waltz, 1979). In this anarchic order states all have the same function, and all have the same goal
In the international system states are the most important political units (Waltz, 1979). In this anarchic order states all have the same function, and all have the same goal