Farewell the Netherlands: Leaving Afghanistan

One of the more accomplished forces in a rather unaccomplished conflict is leaving Afghanistan. The Taliban are gleeful and have even proven congratulatory – another force bites the dust in the graveyard of empires. ‘We would like to offer the citizens and government of the Netherlands our heartfelt congratulations for having the courage to take this decision independently,’ claimed Qari Yusuf Ahmadii, spokesman for the Taliban (Telegraph, Jul 29). Whatever it’s successes on the ground, the Dutch involvement in Afghanistan, some 2000 personnel in the province of Uruzgan, had been a problematic one on the home front. The coalition government in February collapsed over disagreements on any continuing deployment of troops.

Already, their deployment offers a domestic blueprint for the problems of that intervention. The troops, the Dutch public had been assured, would return by 2008. That date was scrapped and moved forward to 2010, with the Christian Democrats strong proponents of that move. No one was willing to foot the replacements. Such a reversal was the very reason Wouter Bos, then Labour leader in the coalition, withdrew his party.

The Dutch have had to resort to promoting a warm image of their stay, citing improvements in security in the province as a model policy in coping with the insurgency. Gen Peter van Uhm was adamant that the situation had stabilised though ‘a lot still has to be done’. There is little doubt though that any marks penned on their report card will be better than most of the Nato forces. Emphasis has been placed on the ‘3D’ policy of defence, diplomacy and development. Fighting the Taliban was a simultaneous venture undertaken with tribal elders and putting development programmes into place. While the policy came with its costs – some 24 troops died over the four-year deployment – it was certainly less costly than the missions of the US, UK and Canada.

Despite the domestic considerations compelling this withdrawal, the chatter about its lack of wisdom has proven noisy. Back in February, there were voices such as those of Robert Fox, noting that the withdrawal was taking place at a ‘delicate’ time in the overall strategy (Guardian, Feb 22) of the Coalition forces. A few rank-and-file soldiers stationed on the ground have expressed dissatisfaction with the move. Jan Kleian of the Dutch military trade union claimed that they wanted ‘to finish what they had started.’

The schedule is starting to become clearer, and grimmer, for the Nato troops. Canada is scheduled for withdrawal next year, with Poland set to follow, and the UK in either 2014 or 2015. The numbers of foreign troops might well be increasing, but basic arithmetic shows that the larger share is coming from U.S. forces, who seem more entrapped by the situation as the days go on. The dying and policing in Uruzgan province will now fall to a US-led continent with Australian, Slovak and Singaporean soldiers. The question of how long their respective constituents will approve will no doubt be answered sooner rather than later.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

© Scoop Media