Netherlands: Geert Wilders agrees to deal to form coalition Dutch government

After months of difficult negotiations, Geert Wilders has finally agreed to a deal to form a coalition government, minus himself as prime minister: “Far-right Geert Wilders agrees deal for Dutch coalition government,” by Senay Boztas, Guardian, May 15, 2024:

The Dutch far-right leader Geert Wilders has agreed the basis of his first rightwing coalition government in the Netherlands.

Six months after his shock win of a quarter of parliamentary seats, his anti-Islam, anti-immigration Party for Freedom (PVV) will take the lead in an uneasy four-party coalition.

In an agreement that needs to be formally voted through by the individual parliamentary parties on Wednesday evening, he will form a government with the centre-right People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD), the New Social Contract party (NSC) and the Farmer-Citizen Movement (BBB).

However, the 60-year-old will not become the next Dutch prime minister, in an unconventional and experimental “business government” arrangement. “The good news is that we have a negotiators’ agreement, but of course, this is only definitive when the parliamentary parties have also agreed,” Wilders told the Dutch press late in the afternoon.

Politicians refused to say who was in the running to be the next Dutch prime minister. Wilders said: “We have spoken about the prime minister today and we will come back to that discussion at a later moment.”…

It is highly unorthodox that the Dutch leader would not become prime minister after such an election victory for his party. The sticking point has been Wilders’ consistent stance that the Islam is not compatible with free societies. He is right. Sharia law does not align with the values of free societies; also, Wilders has vehemently opposed open-door immigration policies, as any responsible leader should do.

In light of the truth about Islam historically and at present, Wilders’ views are tough to oppose on a rational basis, that is, beyond labels, smears and name-calling. The pro-Hamas protests now plaguing Western societies are causing many to pause and think. But slamming Wilders is more about political correctness and the fear of enraging Muslims. African Christians know all too well, as do Middle Eastern Christians, Yazidis and other minorities, what Islamic conquest entails.

The West is now challenged with growing numbers of Muslims, as we see the activities of pro-Hamas activists and their supporters.

Unlike most politicians, Wilders has shown the Netherlands that he is genuinely interested in serving the interests of the people, and is determined to protect his country’s security, even at risk to his own personal safety and political aspirations.

When Wilders’s Freedom Party (PVV) won a surprise election victory in November, Reuters reported:

After 25 years in Dutch politics without holding office, Wilders was set to lead coalition government talks and has a good chance of becoming prime minister.

It was obvious, however, that talks would be tough. As they went on, Wilders also withdrew his own 2018 proposal to ban mosques and the Qur’an, in efforts to become more acceptable to possible coalition partners; yet as Robert Spencer has pointed out, “It is not necessary to ban mosques and the Qur’an in order to stop the advance of the jihad in a country; one must simply monitor those mosques and have no tolerance for those who would plot jihad violence or work to overthrow the secular state.”

But in February, coalition talks collapsed after Pieter Omtzigt, founder and leader of the center-right New Social Contract, walked out of negotiations. Many media pundits proclaimed that Wilders likely would not be able to form a coalition, thus leaving his coalition hopes and leadership chances in limbo.

The Guardian slammed Wilders amid the breakdown in talks, and included other factors aside from the issue of Islam as reasons for the collapse of negotiations:

Besides Wilders’s unconstitutional anti-Islam proposals, the far-right provocateur’s pledges included ending the free movement of EU workers, increasing drilling for oil and gas, putting 14-year-olds before adult criminal courts, and halting military aid to Ukraine.

But the fear of backlash from Muslims with Wilders at the helm was likely the biggest reason for Omtzigt’s sudden departure and refusal to continue the talks, since coalition governments are not new to disagreement among members on a range of issues, especially economics. But amid those disagreements, coalition partners generally don’t just walk out. The topic of Islam, however, is different. It has defined Wilders’ career. He has called for the recognition that “Islam is a violent ideology.” Let’s not forget in that connection that a UK government Minister, Mike Freer, abruptly quit due to Muslim death threats, and stated: “By the skin of my teeth I avoided being murdered.” Of course, his quitting puts Omtzigt’s in a different light.

Wilders responded to the breakdown in negotiations by stating: “The Netherlands wants this cabinet and now Pieter Omtzigt is throwing in the towel while we were still in discussions until today. I don’t understand it at all.”

Wilders has finally made substantial progress, not without some losses. The biggest threat facing the West now is the rising jihad threat, which has become much more aggressive since October 7. As a result, more citizens, leaders and media are awakening to varying degrees. This awakening may well relate to the news of a Dutch coalition government to include Wilders. Although he won’t be prime minister, it is to be celebrated that Wilders is still in the mix of a likely new coalition.