• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Why the Department of Defense Should Be Watching the Dutch Elections

    Later this week, voters in the Netherlands will elect a new government after the center-right coalition government, led by Prime Minister Mark Rutte, collapsed in April.

    Unsurprisingly, the top election issue is the eurozone crisis and how it is affecting the Dutch economy. Other issues, such as the continued Dutch participation in the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), could also be at stake—especially with the Socialist Party doing so well in recent polls.

    After the national elections that were held in June 2010, Rutte became prime minister at the head of a center-right coalition. In April 2012, this pro-economic austerity coalition collapsed when one of its coalition partners, the Freedom Party, led by Geert Wilders, refused to back the government’s economic austerity package.

    The economic crisis in Europe has directly impacted the Dutch. Riding this wave of discontent has been the Dutch Socialist Party, which is consistently second (and sometimes first) in the national polling just behind Rutte’s center-right People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy.

    The Socialist Party, with help from the center-left Labour Party, led the campaign to scrap the country’s participation in the JSF program in July. Thankfully, since there was no government, this was a non-binding vote. Nevertheless, it should have been viewed as a warning shot to the Department of Defense.

    It is assumed that the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy will win the largest share of the vote after this week’s election but not enough to form a majority government. What the shape and configuration of the subsequent coalition will look like, and what role the Socialist and Labour Parties will have, remains to be seen.

    As with all coalition building, there will be the inevitable policy tradeoffs. With the European economic situation being the pressing political issue, there is a concern that other policy issues, such as Dutch participation in the JSF, may be traded to ensure that the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy can get its economic agenda adopted.

    Sacrificing the Dutch participation in the JSF program for short-term political gain may be tempting for Dutch politicians, but its impact would be felt in the U.S. and throughout the NATO alliance.

    As The Heritage Foundation recently pointed out:

    For the Dutch, cancelling the Joint Strike Fighter program would be a blow to NATO. The Dutch are one of the few NATO countries that actually has a capable air force that they are willing to use. The Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNAF) has provided close air support to NATO troops in Afghanistan, contributed to NATO’s Baltic air policing mission, and recently flew patrols over the skies of Libya.

    Without the JSF, the RNAF will be without a fast jet capability after 2025, when their F-16s are expected to leave service. If they choose to procure anything other than the Joint Strike Fighter, put simply, it will be outdated before it leaves the tarmac.

    There is a nuclear deterrence aspect to this as well. Dutch F-16s and their F-35 replacements are dual-capable aircraft—meaning they can also deliver NATO’s tactical nuclear weapons if required. A Dutch failure to procure the F-35 would create an additional problem inside NATO regarding the future of its tactical nuclear weapons.

    From a purely economic point of view, a decision to cut the JSF would also mean cutting Dutch jobs. As part of the Dutch participation in the JSF program, the defense sector is expected to win several important contracts worth tens of millions of euros for the manufacture of various component parts of the JSF.

    The Department of Defense—and all countries participating in the JSF program—should keep an eye on the Dutch elections. If the Dutch leave the program, it could have far-reaching consequences.

    Posted in International [slideshow_deploy]

    3 Responses to Why the Department of Defense Should Be Watching the Dutch Elections

    1. Guest says:

      Again, for the Dutch, cancelling the lemon Joint Strike Failure program would not be a blow to NATO, without the JSF is better because the F-35 is such a huge mistake for Dutch's requirement at the first place.

      "A Dutch failure to procure the F-35 would create an additional problem inside NATO regarding the future of its tactical nuclear weapons". That's completely false. The RNLAF will be stuck with an increasingly expensive aeroplane that will result a failure for their air defence program if the F-35 wasn't ditched which will mean you'll be suffering the consequences.

      Put it simply, sinking money into the F-35 is just appalling. Of course the threats are continuing to evolve. That’s just a fact, and if you have only just F-35s that just aren’t capable of dealing with the threat, it just doesn’t do you any good to buy them and maintain them at extreme high cost. Because there's absolutely no point of sticking with the F-35 because some hostile nations could well be purchasing The Nebo M Mobile “Counter Stealth” Radar.

    2. Guest says:

      The Nebo M Counter Stealth Radar is an advanced digital solid state 3D multiple band radar intended to detect and track stealth aircraft at all altitudes and long range; VHF-Band, L-Band and C-Band antenna elements with digital track fusion modelled on the US Navy CEC system and STAP modelled on E-2D Hawkeye; Nebo M components carried by high offroad mobility 8×8 BAZ-6909 vehicles; Stow and deploy times ~15 minutes, possibly less, for evasion of guided munition attacks; Advanced processing algorithms for track fusion, and Space Time Adaptive Processing (derived from Nebo SVU design).

    3. Guest says:

      The F-35 program. Where will it end up? The JSF (Joint Strike Failure) will be put in the Davis Monthan AB, Arizona and see the "overweight baby seal" get chopped up and shredded away into the bin as a cancellation which I really love to see that happen for good. Dust bin awaits. Another person that needs to get dismissed is Lockheed Martin Tom Burbage (Executive Vice President and General Manager, F-35 Program Integration, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics) and his colleagues from the organisation. They can escort with the F-35 program to Davis Monthan AB to see the lemon get shredded and dumped. "Say goodbye to your lovely F-35 Mr Burbage".

      I suggest RNLAF must seek some alternatives to the failed F-35 just as the F-16V Viper, Eurofighter Typhoon and Dassault Rafale.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.