Anti-immigrant leader quits Dutch cabinet, toppling government
Officials from other parties in the coalition said they were prepared for negotiations over the immigration plan and accused Wilders of ditching the coalition to avoid responsibility for tough government decisions, including potential budget cuts needed to increase defense spending.
Advertisement
Wilders, who is known for anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim views, has led the Euroskeptic right-wing political movement in the Netherlands for nearly two decades and was found guilty by a Dutch court in 2016 of insulting an ethnic group.
The PVV scored a shocking first-place finish in the 2023 parliamentary elections after the relatively abrupt resignation of Mark Rutte, the longest-serving prime minister in the country's history. Rutte is now secretary general of NATO.
Wilders, however, was unable to claim the position of prime minister as part of coalition talks, showing resistance even by other conservative parties to back him personally given his controversial views, often criticized as extremist.
As a result, the PVV's power in the Netherlands has been constrained. Still, the PVV's victory demonstrated the increasing appeal across Europe of nationalist, anti-immigrant parties.
Advertisement
In the Netherlands on Tuesday, critics of Wilders accused him of putting his party's political interests ahead of the needs of the country. Analysts said the country faced a period of uncertainty in the days ahead.
'Wilders has plunged the Netherlands into another round of political chaos,' said Mujtaba Rahman, managing director for Europe at the Eurasia Group. 'The Dutch parliament can try to find a new majority or else there will be early elections. But the immediate outlook is one of chaos and uncertainty.'
The country has been in turmoil since Rutte resigned in 2023 after his coalition failed to pass comprehensive immigration legislation. The collapse of the Rutte government demonstrated 'how sensitive of an issue immigration is politically,' said Armida van Rij, head of the Europe program at Chatham House.
The position of prime minister went to former spy chief Dick Schoof, whom Wilders backed. But Schoof has made it clear he would act independently from Wilders. In the 11 months that the coalition government has been in power, PVV was unable to push forward its immigration agenda, and the party has been losing support.
'Wilders wanted the government to collapse as the support for his [party] continues to drop in the polls,' van Rij said.
Wilders presented his immigration plan just weeks ahead of the Netherlands hosting the annual NATO leaders' summit in The Hague on June 24 and 25.
Van Rij said Wilders may have planned to 'use this as leverage to force his coalition partners back to the negotiating table, knowing that having a caretaker government would not be a good look nor useful to advance key policy positions.'
Advertisement
To advance his immigration plan, Wilders had demanded that the three other ruling parties - the centrist New Social Contract (NSC); the center-right People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD); and the right-wing, populist Farmer-Citizen Movement (BBB) - reopen the coalition agreement they negotiated, and 'VVD, NSC, and BBB were not willing to do this,' van Rij said.
Now, the more likely outcome is a snap election, she said.
Leaders of the coalition parties hammered Wilders for his decision on Tuesday.
BBB President Caroline van der Plas said in a statement that many of Wilders's desired changes were on the table and had the necessary support - 'it's just a matter of doing it.'
'Anyone who stops now will hand the Netherlands over to the left on a silver platter,' she said.
VVD President Dilan Yesilgozaccused Wilders of putting 'his own interests above the interests of our country' by 'walking away … in a time of unprecedented uncertainty.'
'This wasn't about migration. Everything that could be done, we were already going to do,' she added, blaming the inaction on 'blundering' by Wilders's party.
NSC leader Nicolien van Vroonhoven called Wilders 'irresponsible' and said, 'we could have achieved a lot - especially when it comes to stricter migration policies.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
A look at Trump's travel ban timeline throughout his first presidency
President Donald Trump signed a proclamation on Wednesday banning or restricting travel of foreign nationals from several countries, reminiscent of his first administration when he banned travelers from seven majority-Muslim countries in 2017. The ban, which goes into effect on June 9, affects Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. The entry of people from seven other countries: Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela, will be partially restricted. The travel restrictions were first reported by CBS News. "We will not allow people to enter our country who wish to do us harm,"Trump said in a video posted on X, formerly Twitter. He said the list could be revised and new countries could be added. Since returning to the White House for his second term, the president has vowed to replicate the impact of his original travel bans, which stirred several legal battles with courts that blocked the mandate. Here's a timeline of what ensued then. Jan. 27, 2017: Trump issues an executive order entitled "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States." It suspends travel from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen for 90 days, blocks refugees for 120 days, and suspends travel from Syria indefinitely. Jan. 28: Chaos reigns at U.S. airports as Department of Homeland Security agents block travelers from entering the country, leading to protests and legal action. Feb. 3: Federal District Court Judge James Robart in Seattle issues a nationwide restraining order that blocks the travel ban from being implemented. Feb. 9: TheU.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, based in San Francisco, refuses to reinstate the ban, ruling that it violates due process rights without a sufficient national security justification. March 6: Trump issues a revised travel ban targeting only six countries and exempting visa- and green card-holders in an effort to reverse his fortunes in the courts. March 15: Federal District Judge Derrick Watson in Hawaii issues a nationwide halt to the revised travel ban on immigrants and refugees. March 16: Federal District Judge Theodore Chuang in Maryland blocks part of the travel ban that applies to travelers from six predominantly Muslim nations. May 25: TheU.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, based in Richmond, upholds the ruling from Maryland on the basis of religious discrimination against Muslims. June 12: The 9th Circuit appeals court upholds the ruling from Hawaii, saying the ban discriminates based on nationality. But it clears the way for a review of screening practices. June 26: The Supreme Court upholds parts of the ban and schedules oral arguments for October. In the meantime, travelers in a wide range of visa categories must prove their connection to a U.S. organization or individual in order to avoid the ban. Sept. 24: Trump issues his third version of the ban following what the administration says was a deep dive into international vetting procedures. Included indefinitely: Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, Chad, North Korea and Venezuela. Chad was recently dropped from the list. Oct. 17: Judge Watson in Hawaii blocks the third version nationwide, writing that it "suffers from precisely the same maladies as its predecessor" and "plainly discriminates based on nationality." Oct. 18: Judge Chuang in Maryland says much the same thing, ruling that it still constitutes a "Muslim ban" that violates the Constitution's protections against religious discrimination. Dec. 4: The Supreme Court rules that the ban can take full effect while legal challenges continue in federal appeals courts. The justices urge those courts to render decisions "with appropriate dispatch." Dec. 22: A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit appeals court rules against the ban in part, contending that Trump exceeded his authority under federal law. Jan. 19, 2018: The Supreme Court agrees to hear the Justice Department's appeal of the 9th Circuit ruling, leading to oral arguments. Feb. 15: The full 4th Circuit appeals court again declares the ban unconstitutional based on its discrimination against Muslims. April 25: The Supreme Court hears oral arguments on the appeal of the 9th Circuit ruling. Conservative justices appear sympathetic to the administration's stance. June 26: The Supreme Court reverses the 9th Circuit's ruling, handing a major victory to Trump. June 31, 2020: Trump adds visa restrictions to six more countries including Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar, Nigeria, Sudan and Tanzania. The White House said those nations failed to "comply with basic national security" requirements or to conduct "proper identity management" procedures. USA TODAY's Joey Garrison and Reuters contributed to the reporting of this story This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump's travel ban is back: See timeline of what happened last time
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
President Trump bans travel from 12 nations, partially restricts entry from seven others
WASHINGTON ― President Donald Trump has issued a full travel ban blocking the entry of foreign nationals from 12 countries into the United States, reviving a controversial policy from his first term that is likely to be challenged in court. Trump cited "national security risks" posed by citizens of the targeted nations, which include several Middle Eastern and African countries, in a June 4 proclamation he signed imposing the ban. He also partially restricted the entry of foreign nationals from seven other nations. The restrictions are scheduled to go into effect on June 9. The ban prohibits entry into the U.S. of foreign nationals from Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. Trump issued partial travel suspensions for foreign nationals from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela. Trump presidency: Marco Rubio says US will revoke visas from Chinese students, add new restrictions In videotaped remarks from the Oval Office, Trump pointed to last weekend's fiery assault on pro-Jewish demonstrators in Boulder, Colorado, carried out by suspect Mohamed Sabry Soliman, a native of Egypt who came to the U.S. on a tourist visa in late 2022 and stayed after the visa expired. "The recent terror attack in Boulder, Colorado, has underscored the extreme dangers posed to our country by the entry of foreign nationals who are not properly vetted, as well as those who come here as temporary visitors and overstayed their visas," Trump said. "We don't want them." Egypt is not among the countries facing new restrictions despite Trump invoking the attack, which the White House has blamed on the Biden administration's immigration policies. Trump's travel ban: A timeline look throughout his first presidency The move comes after the Trump administration has worked aggressively to deport immigrants who are in the United States unlawfully, halted the government's refugee resettlement program, and last week announced plans to "aggressively" revoke visas of Chinese students. The ban resembles similar actions Trump took during his first term to bar the entry of foreign nationals from several predominantly Muslim countries. The restrictions do not apply to visas that have already been granted, lawful permanent residents, certain athletes, immediate family members of current visa holders, and other classes of individuals for whom the administration granted exceptions. "In the 21st century, we've seen one terror attack after another carried out by foreign-visa overstayers from dangerous places. They should not be in our country," Trump said. "We will not let what happened in Europe happen to America." Council on American-Islamic Relations Executive Director Nihad Awad said the government already vets visa applicants extensively. The new order risks separating families, depriving students of educational opportunities and blocking patients from unique medical treatment, he said. "President Trump's new travel ban targeting mostly Muslim and African nations and raising the specter of more vague free speech restrictions is overbroad, unnecessary and ideologically motivated,' Awad said. "Automatically banning students, workers, tourists, and other citizens of these targeted nations from coming to the United States will not make our nation safer." Amy Spitalnick, CEO of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, said in a post on social media that the antisemitic attack in Boulder shouldn't be used to justify a ban on travel from primarily Muslim-majority countries. 'We'll keep saying it: the Jewish community's legitimate fears and concerns should not (be) exploited to undermine core democratic norms, or otherwise advance discriminatory & unconstitutional policies,' Spitalnick said. 'Doing so only makes Jews – and all communities – less safe.' Rep. Judy Chu, a California Democrat who introduced legislation in February that sought to prevent the Trump administration from banning travel to the U.S. by people of any religious group, lashed out at Trump on X. "Just now, Trump has re-issued his disgusting, bigoted, and Islamophobic travel ban. This goes against our core American values while doing nothing to make us safer. We can do better, we must do better," she said. What travelers need to know: Trump issues new travel ban affecting nearly 20 countries Trump's first-term travel bans were overturned repeatedly in the courts for apparent religious or racial motivations before being upheld by the Supreme Court. Within hours of the new ban, the International Refugee Assistance Project, a group that sued Trump in 2017, slammed the ban as arbitrary for making exceptions for athletes traveling to the United States for sporting events such as the Olympics and the FIFA World Cup, "while closing the door to ordinary people who've gone through extensive legal processes to enter the United States." "It is yet another shameful attempt by the Trump administration to sow division, fear, and chaos," Stephanie Gee, senior director of U.S. Legal Services, said in a statement. Trump's latest ban follows through on a day-one executive order directing his administration to identify countries throughout the world "for which vetting and screening information is so deficient as to warrant a full or partial suspension on the entry or admission of nationals from those countries." Trump said he evaluated recommendations from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Attorney General Pam Bondi based on foreign policy, national security, and counterterrorism goals and largely accepted their recommendations. Factors included whether a county "has a significant terrorist presence within its territory" or a high rate of people overstaying their visas, Trump's order said. The president said the administration also considered a country's "cooperation with accepting back its removable nationals." At one point, the administration looked at slapping as many as 43 countries with restrictions. Egypt was not on either of the draft lists that circulated in March. The president said in the order that Rubio and Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller provided him a list on April 9 of countries to consider. The White House did not immediately explain why it took Trump nearly two months after he received the report to take action. The State Department did not respond to a request for comment. "Very simply," Trump said, "we cannot have open migration from any country where we cannot safely and reliably vet and screen those who seek to enter the United States." Contributing: Bart Jansen, USA TODAY Reach Joey Garrison on X @joeygarrison. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump signs proclamation banning travel into US from 12 nations
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump overpowers Musk's attacks on mega tax bill with blizzard of orders
WASHINGTON − After watching Elon Musk rip his signature bill throughout the day, President Donald Trump unleashed a flurry of executive actions that bulldozed the discourse to other matters. Although not the stated goal, the president's blizzard of proclamations on the night of June 4 ‒ reviving a controversial travel ban, ordering an investigation into former President Joe Biden's use of an autopen and banning Harvard University from welcoming international students ‒ was classic Trump: when the going gets tough, change the subject. Trump, never shy to lash out at his critics, has remained silent about Musk ‒ not a single Truth Social post ‒ as the world's richest man this week launched a full-out effort to kill what Trump has called his "big, beautiful, bill." (That could very likely change when Trump faces reporters Thursday as he hosts German Chancellor Friedrich Merz at the White House.) Not even a peep after Musk urged his 220 million followers on X, the social media platform he owns, to lobby their lawmakers to "KILL the BILL." More: President Trump bans travel from 12 nations, partially restricts entry from seven others The orders dropped later that evening. It came shortly after Trump attended a "summer soiree" for political appointees on the White House South Lawn, his first public appearance since playing golf over the weekend. "We don't want them," Trump said in pre-taped remarks on his proclamation to impose a full travel ban blocking the entry of foreign nationals from 12 countries into the United States, while partially restricting entry of citizens from seven other nations. Trump cited "national security risks" with these countries. Yet the timing of the order raised eyebrows. In his proclamation, Trump said Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller provided him a list on April 9 of countries to target with a travel ban. They were carrying out an executive order Trump signed on Jan. 20, the first day of his second term. Trump pointed to last weekend's fiery assault on pro-Jewish demonstrators in Boulder, Colorado, saying it "underscored the extreme dangers" posed by the entry of foreign nationals. Mohamed Sabry Soliman, a native of Egypt who came to the U.S. on a tourist visa in late 2022 and stayed after the visa expired, has been charged in the anti-Semitic attack. But Egypt is not among the countries facing new restrictions. The White House did not immediately say why it took Trump nearly two months after he received the report to take action. Democratic critics accused Trump of trying to shift the subject amid the legislative drama over the reconciliation bill. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn, said the travel ban is meant to "distract" to try to push through a "super unpopular" bill. "How do you get that done?' Murphy said in an interview on MSNBC. 'You distract people by making them think that they're at war with other Americans ‒ making them think that they have something to fear from people who look different from them or speak a different language.' More: Trump orders investigation of Joe Biden's alleged 'cognitive decline' and use of autopen If a sweeping travel ban wasn't enough for one night, Trump also issued an order directing an investigation of Biden's alleged "cognitive decline" to determine who decided his signature should be applied to official documents by autopen. Biden's use of an autopen, in particular for the last-minute pardons of family members, has become a fixation on the right. Trump has acknowledged that he, too, has also used an automatic pen but claims only for trivial items like responding to letters. In another extraordinary proclamation, Trump suspended Harvard University from welcoming foreign students and researchers, escalating a battle with arguably the nation's most prestigious university. Musk's barrage of criticism over the deficit implications for the massive tax and policy bill has put the legislation in jeopardy by giving skeptical Republican senators ‒ who Trump has criticized over their objections despite his constraint with Musk ‒ cover to voice their opposition. A senior White House official told USA TODAY that Trump is disappointed by Musk's criticisms over the tax bill but the president is committed to getting the legislation passed. More: 'Kill the bill': Elon Musk tries to nuke Trump's GOP tax plan Musk's tirade comes after he left the White House as a senior adviser last week after leading the government-slashing Department of Government Efficiency for the past four months. Although Musk had started to voice criticism with Trump's bill before his exit, Trump had seemed to smooth things over when he welcomed the Tesla and SpaceX CEO into the Oval Office for a send-off news conference. Yet the rift between the Musk and the White House had started to widen. Musk, prior to his White House departure, asked for his special government employee status to be extended beyond 130 days to allow him to continue to lead DOGE, but the White House declined, a source told USA TODAY. Last weekend, Musk expressed disappointment after Trump withdrew his nominee for administrator of NASA, Jared Isaacman, a billionaire commercial astronaut with close ties to Musk. And, Trump's bill would also end $7,500 consumer tax credits for buyers of electric vehicles, a Biden policy that has benefited electric car companies like Musk's Tesla. Contributing: Francesca Chambers of USA TODAY Reach Joey Garrison on X @joeygarrison. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump overpowers Musk's attacks with blizzard of orders
