In the months following 7 October, Dutch politicians predominantly sided with Israel, Zaslove noticed. “There were critical parties, but a clear dissenting voice was lacking in The Hague.”
In a House of Representatives with more parties than ever, you would think there would also be parties taking a clearly pro-Palestinian stance. Why is this stance largely missing? “That’s hard to answer,” says Zaslove. But he tries to anyway: “It may have to do with the political culture in the Netherlands, which has promoted a pro-Israeli stance since the Second World War. Unlike their counterparts in European countries such as Spain, Norway, and Ireland, Dutch politicians are therefore reluctant to criticise Israel.”
Protest movements fill a gap
In the Netherlands, demonstrations have increasingly been the response to discontent concerning government policies in recent years. Zaslove cites anti-COVID demonstrations, climate marches, and farmers’ protests. “In those cases, too, protest movements filled the gap left by political parties not or not sufficiently expressing certain views.”
Similarly, discontent over the Palestinian issue has slowly risen to the surface. This was evident for the first time during the demonstrations around the opening of the National Holocaust Museum in Amsterdam where Israeli President Yitzhak Herzog was a guest.
As a result, the demonstrations in early May came as no surprise to Zaslove. “Protests were already underway in the United States, and you often see protests that arise out of dissatisfaction with the political process spreading like an oil slick. Think of the Arab Spring, and more recently the Black Lives Matter protests.”
Looking at politicians, Zaslove sees a slight shift since the demonstrations. “There are parties calling for more attention to the situation of the Palestinians, for example GroenLinks-PvdA. At the same time, there’s a reinforced commitment on the part of the coalition to maintain the current policy.”
Parties are losing their roots in society
Is there a link between rising populism, one of Zaslove's main research themes, and the increase in demonstrations? “These are two different developments, but they do stem from the same dissatisfaction,” Zaslove argues. “You can see that traditional parties in particular are losing their roots in our changing society. They are less able to represent certain groups of Dutch people.”
Zaslove points to the farmers' protests, where farmers felt they were not being heard. “Traditionally, a party like the CDA would have made sure the farmers' voices were heard.” Something similar is happening in the current demonstrations for Palestine. “Students are taking action partly because they feel that left-wing parties aren’t doing enough.”
Attention or a large constituency?
According to Zaslove, demonstrations are characteristic of a healthy democracy. He refers to the origins of Western democracies in the nineteenth century. “They arose as a result of protests, for example for universal suffrage. So without protest, no democracy. We mustn’t forget that.”
So while Zaslove is basically positive about demonstrations, he recognises that they can also turn into something negative. “Protesters are testing boundaries, and sometimes deliberately cross them to make their views clear.” Where do these boundaries lie? “For governments, it's pretty clear, namely when the law is breached. But for protesters and society as a whole, it’s harder to determine.”
Many people draw a clear line in cases of vandalism and physical violence, but even there people sometimes differ in their opinions. “Some think that vandalism goes too far, while others see it as a necessary evil to draw attention to the cause.” Movements need to be well aware of this, advises Zaslove. “You can attract attention with radical actions, but in doing so, you can also lose some of your supporters.”