logo
Geert Wilders: the fall of an extremist

Geert Wilders: the fall of an extremist

New European04-06-2025
Wilders has long been at odds with the government that he helped form, after his party, the PVV, won elections in 2023. On several occasions he clashed publicly and spectacularly with Dick Schoof, the non-party-aligned prime minister. And last week he presented the cabinet with a list of demands on asylum that even anti-immigration media outlets thought were unrealistic.
The bizarre, 11-month-long sock puppet show that called itself the government of the Netherlands has come to an end, thanks to the puppet master himself. Geert Wilders, the 62-year-old, far-right anti-Islam Dutch leader, has pulled his party out of the ruling coalition, saying he now wants to be prime minister himself. But with elections scheduled for the autumn, he could end up frozen out of power.
Schoof, now caretaker prime minister, labelled Wilders's withdrawal from the coalition 'unnecessary and irresponsible' during a debate in parliament on Wednesday. While the outgoing prime minister is unlikely to play a role in the upcoming campaign, his remarks signal a line of attack on Wilders that the other parties have already taken up. This is now the second time that Wilders has brought down a government dominated by the right, the type of government he has always said he wanted for the Netherlands.
Former prime minister Mark Rutte called Wilders a 'quitter politician' in 2012, after the far-right frontman withdrew support for the minority government he was leading at the time. In the subsequent elections, the PVV paid a heavy price, and the party was left out in the cold for over a decade. The other parties are bound to highlight Wilders's apparent unreliability to end his dream of leading the country – for good this time.
The fractious coalition between the PVV and three more centrist right-wing parties managed to last for almost a year, but the end was never far away. Three of the four parties, the PVV, the farmers' party BBB, and a largely Christian Democrat offshoot, NSC, had no previous government experience, and neither did Schoof. From the start, negotiators were hit by ethics scandals, as were ministerial candidates.
Trust and approval ratings among the electorate were low almost from the start. In contrast to some other right-wing European leaders, such as Giorgia Meloni in Italy and lately Bart de Wever in Belgium, the PVV-led coalition was never able to project competence, or stability. Rumours abounded in The Hague about the inefficient and unprofessional ways in which ministers ran their departments.
Suggested Reading The right spells trouble for von der Leyen
Ferry Biedermann
Beside inexperience, the root cause of public disenchantment, and falling PVV polling numbers, might well have been the string of unrealistic promises the party made. In quitting the coalition, Wilders made much of the government's inability to fulfil his election promise of an 'emergency law' to limit asylum seekers. Instead, the government worked on a 'fast-track' law that complied with Dutch and EU rules.
On other key issues, such as easing the increasingly onerous nitrogen requirements for Dutch farmers, the coalition saw its approach blocked by the courts that forced it to stick to European targets. On broadly supported socio-economic initiatives, such as free childcare, the coalition ran into logistical and budgetary constraints.
In the end, Wilders was unable to make the transition from firebrand opposition leader to responsible statesman. He did, as demanded by his coalition partners, damp down his anti-Islam rhetoric while the PVV was in power. Wilders has been living under police protection and in safe houses since 2004, after receiving death threats following some of his remarks on Islam. Asked during the parliamentary debate on the fall of the coalition whether he would now resume his diatribes against Islam, he said it had not been foremost on his mind.
The question is whether Wilders will continue in his more moderate guise, in order to maintain his viability as a future coalition partner. But this seems unlikely and unnecessary. His current coalition partners had no issue doing business with him after the previous campaign, in which he was clear about wanting 'less Islam' in the Netherlands. And voters rewarded him by making the PVV the largest party.
Despite the decline in the polls, there is no reason why he shouldn't be able to repeat that feat in the upcoming elections. While many might blame him for bringing down the most right-wing government since the end of the Second World War, his base might applaud him for putting a clearly outmatched team out of its misery.
Still, other movements in the polls, particularly the revival of the Christian Democrats, could mean he'll be left without coalition partners. While Wilders could triumph once again, his path to power might well be blocked.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The Guardian view on Trump's tariffs: both a political and an economic threat
The Guardian view on Trump's tariffs: both a political and an economic threat

The Guardian

time2 hours ago

  • The Guardian

The Guardian view on Trump's tariffs: both a political and an economic threat

Donald Trump's 1 August tariffs deadline did what it was always intended to do. It kept the markets and the nations guessing amid last-minute uncertainty. It attempted to reassert the global heft of the United States economy to take on and master all comers. And it placed President Trump at the centre of the media story, where he always insists on being. In the event, there were some last-minute agreements struck this week, few of them fair or rational in trade terms, most of them motivated by the desire to generate some commercial order. Some conflicts are still in the balance. There were 11th-hour court challenges too, disputing the president's very right to play the trade war game in this way. Even now, no one, probably including Mr Trump himself, knows whether this is his administration's last word on US tariffs. Almost certainly not. That's because Mr Trump's love of tariffs is always more about the assertion of political clout rather than economic power. Mr Trump's antipathy towards the European Union drives one example. The pact agreed by Ursula von der Leyen in Scotland last weekend underlines that the EU's aspirations as a global economic superpower exceed its actual clout. The EU could not prevent Mr Trump making European goods 15% more expensive if they sell on US markets. Nor could it stop Mr Trump getting EU tariffs on US goods withdrawn. Equally eloquent about the global balance of economic power is that Mr Trump has not been able to force China to bend the knee in the manner of the EU. China has responded aggressively to Trump's tariff threats, retaliating with tariffs of its own and blocking the sale of commodities, including rare-earth minerals, that the US most covets. Unsurprisingly, this standoff has not produced one of Mr Trump's so-called deals. Friday's deadline has been reset for later in the month. It would be no surprise if it was eventually pushed back further. Mr Trump is not imposing tariffs on the rest of the world in order to promote global trade or even to boost the US economy. He is doing it, in part, because Congress has delegated this power to him, allowing the president to impose or waive tariffs at will. He uses this power for many purposes. These include raising government income without congressional oversight and also, because tariffs are regressive, shifting the tax burden away from the very rich, like Mr Trump himself, on to the middle and working class. But economics also comes way down the field in the list of reasons why Mr Trump is wielding the tariff weapon internationally. US talks with Brazil – with which the US runs a trade surplus, not a deficit – have been hijacked by Mr Trump's grievance over the prosecution of its former president Jair Bolsonaro for trying to overturn his 2022 election defeat. Talks with India are deadlocked because Mr Trump wants to penalise Delhi for buying energy and weapons from Russia. Those with Canada have been hit by Mr Trump's objections to Ottawa's plan to recognise Palestine. The ultimate test of the policy, however, will indeed be economic. For now, financial markets appear to have decided that Mr Trump's tariffs are manageable. If tariffs now raise the cost of goods on US high streets, slowing growth and feeding inflation, as they may, the wider market response could change quickly. In that event, the mood among American voters might even shift too. Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Young Ukrainians get their way as Zelensky overturns law to defuse crisis
Young Ukrainians get their way as Zelensky overturns law to defuse crisis

BBC News

time3 hours ago

  • BBC News

Young Ukrainians get their way as Zelensky overturns law to defuse crisis

As Ukraine's MPs gathered at the parliament in Kyiv on Thursday, some held cardboard signs that read, "We are with our people."It was a message to thousands of young protesters who had taken part in the biggest anti-government demonstrations since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion. They were out in force again on MPs then entered parliament, the Rada, and took part in a vote that overwhelmingly overturned a law introduced by President Volodymyr Zelensky last week that curtailed the independence of two key anti-corruption agencies known as Nabu and Sap - the National Anti-Corruption Bureau and Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office. The signs carried by the MPs outside the Rada were a nod to the placards carried by thousands of young people who had taken to the streets in towns and cities across Ukraine for almost a protesters had demanded that Zelensky and his government "take their hands off" the two anti-corruption bodies, and they threatened to continue carry on until the government made a days, it did. Zelensky's original bill had stripped the two bodies of their independent authority to decide who to prosecute in high-level corruption cases, giving that prerogative to the general prosecutor - a presidential the placard-waving protesters, safeguarding the independence of Nabu and Sap was as crucial to their European future as the war against Russia was a matter of life and death for their 2022, Kyiv was granted the coveted status of EU candidate country – but on condition it mounted a credible fight against Ukraine's Western partners, donors and investors who pour money into the country through international assistance and funding programmes, the existence and independence of the two anti-corruption bodies are for Ukraine and its war-shattered economy – that external financial help is was only 10 days earlier that MPs had backed Zelensky's controversial law, and yet they voted on Thursday by 331 to 0 to overturn it. On both occasions they appeared to be following Zelensky's direction."Ukraine is a democracy - there are definitely no doubts," he said on social media. Many Ukrainians see the hand of Zelensky's right-hand man, Andriy Yermak, behind the president's recent position as head of the presidential office is is not regulated by the constitution nor limited by any checks or balances. And questions are being asked about such a role in Ukraine's that democracy and Ukraine's course towards European integration were the key drivers for the young protesters, while their parents and friends were defending their country on the front did their best to show the problem was now solved, but this crisis has left behind an unpleasant has brought into question Zelensky's dedication to the anti-corruption he seemed ready to compromise on these reforms may have seriously dented the trust the EU put in him. Read more: Kyiv death tolls rises to 16 as wave of Russian strikes defies Trump demandZelensky backtracks on law after protestsUkrainecast: Can Zelensky recover from nationwide protests? Some made the link between the government's bid to curtail the independence of Nabu and Sap. Powerful figures in Zelensky's circle have come under scrutiny, with some either facing charges or move also came after the government rejected a candidate selected by an independent commission to head the Bureau for Economic Security - the main agency for investigating economic crimes in official reason Oleksandr Tsyvinski didn't get the job was that he didn't get the security clearance from the security service, and that is under the president's Tsyvinski is a well-regarded anti-corruption expert and the selection commission still wants him these elements resulted in one of the biggest power crises for Zelensky's team since he came to power in and a half years into the full-scale war, the risk of further such mis-steps could come at a significant year, Ukraine's budget deficit could hit $13bn (£10bn), according to a National Bank estimate. Kyiv would not be able to continue fighting the war if were to lose Western partners' the EU has reduced some of its financial aid to Ukraine because the government has not kept up with promised young protesters appear to have understood that all too well, and were prepared to challenge their government in a country they chose to stay in despite the deadly threat of Russian drone and missile attacks.

Kyiv protesters celebrate as parliament votes to restore anti-corruption bodies' power
Kyiv protesters celebrate as parliament votes to restore anti-corruption bodies' power

The Guardian

time4 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Kyiv protesters celebrate as parliament votes to restore anti-corruption bodies' power

Ukraine's parliament has passed a law restoring independence to two anti-corruption bodies, essentially annulling another law adopted last week that prompted the biggest street protests since Russia's full-scale invasion three years ago. Several hundred protesters outside the parliament building in Kyiv erupted into chants of 'the people are the power' as the bill passed on Thursday lunchtime. 'Unity is important in wartime, but even more important is remembering the values that our soldiers are defending on the frontline,' said Oleksandra, a 19-year-old economics student who said she had been to every protest since they began last week. 'I'm happy that the government has listened to us.' Volodymyr Zelenskyy will hope the new law will put an end to what had threatened to become a political crisis domestically and had worried European allies, who warned him privately that the moves would be disastrous for Ukraine's image as a democratic state. He signed the law into force swiftly after the vote. The law passed as Russia continued to bombard Ukraine with drones and missiles nightly. A huge attack on Kyiv overnight killed at least nine people, including a six-year-old child. One missile strike in the early hours of Thursday led to the partial collapse of a nine-story block of flats, and authorities reported that 124 people had been injured, including 10 children. In another major attack on Monday night, Russian missile strikes killed more than 25 people, including at a prison and a maternity hospital in the east of Ukraine. Donald Trump appears to be taking a slightly tougher tone with Russia and earlier this week lowered a 50-day deadline for Russia to make progress on a ceasefire to '10 or 12 days', saying he had not seen any serious desire from Vladimir Putin to end the war. On Thursday, the senior US diplomat John Kelley told the UN security council that Trump wanted the war ended by next Friday, though he gave little detail of why this effort was expected to succeed where previous attempts had failed. Before taking office Trump had promised to end the conflict within 24 hours. Kelley said: 'Both Russia and Ukraine must negotiate a ceasefire and durable peace. It is time to make a deal. President Trump has made clear this must be done by August 8. The United States is prepared to implement additional measures to secure peace.' He did not specify what measures he had in mind. Zelenskyy called on Ukraine's allies on Thursday to put further pressure on Moscow after the latest strikes on Kyiv. 'Today the world once again saw Russia's answer to our desire for peace with America and Europe … That is why peace without strength is impossible,' he wrote on Telegram. He also called for foreign leaders to push for regime change in Russia. 'If the world doesn't aim to change the regime in Russia, that means even after the war ends, Moscow will still try to destabilise neighbouring countries,' he said in a speech on Thursday to a conference marking 50 years since the signing of the cold war-era Helsinki accord. Overnight in Kyiv, explosions rang out for hours, making it another sleepless night for many before the parliamentary vote. Nonetheless, several hundred people gathered in a park close to parliament during the vote, the latest in a set of protests over the past week predominantly attended by young Ukrainians. The law passed with 331 votes in favour and none against, a rapid U-turn from the bill that passed the previous week with support from Zelenskyy's Servant of the People party. That bill stripped powers from the national anti-corruption bureau, known as Nabu, and the specialised anti-corruption prosecutor's office, Sapo. Both work independently of other law enforcement bodies specifically to target high-level corruption. The changes would have brought them under the control of Zelenskyy's handpicked general prosecutor. Sign up to Headlines Europe A digest of the morning's main headlines from the Europe edition emailed direct to you every week day after newsletter promotion Oleksandr Klymenko, the head of Sapo, said on Wednesday that the two institutions have open investigations against 31 sitting MPs and said the move to bring Nabu and Sapo under control was probably caused by their investigations into powerful people. 'The main thing about our work is the enormous preventive effect it has,' he said in a briefing at his office, claiming that the prospect of being caught meant fewer top officials risked engaging in corrupt activities. Zelenskyy announced late last week that he had listened to the criticism expressed during street protests and from various western officials and would table a new law. In an interview, Mykhailo Podolyak, a Zelenskyy aide, denied that introducing the original law was a 'mistake', and also denied that the bodies were targeted in retaliation for bringing cases against top-level officials. He said the government's swift response had shown it listened to criticism. 'The question is how you react if your initiatives are not accepted by people. Either you ignore protests and complaints, or you analyse them and then make corrections. President Zelenskyy has shown that he reacts very quickly to society and is ready to cooperate constructively,' Podolyak said. Thursday's parliamentary session devoted to the law was televised for the first time since 2022, lifting a security ban on filming. Opposition MPs made fiery speeches criticising Zelenskyy and the presidential administration before the vote. When the results were announced, the crowd outside parliament broke into cheers and sang the national anthem. Protesters have been clear that they do not have revolutionary intentions, with most acutely aware of the dangers of political destabilisation in wartime. Instead, they say, the demonstrations show that Ukrainian democracy is functioning despite a lack of elections under martial law.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store