| dc.description.abstract | How could the Dutch unequivocally support Israel in 1973 while recognising the Palestinian right to self-determination and condemning Israeli settlements by endorsing the European Venice Declaration in 1980? The prevailing explanation in the literature points to European Political Cooperation (EPC), a framework established in 1970 wherein European states aimed to align their foreign policies. Scholars generally agree that during the 1970s, the Netherlands increasingly adhered to the common EPC position on the Middle Eastern conflict, becoming more aware of Palestinian suffering. However, an analysis of the relationship between the development of the Dutch national position and the EPC common stance is missing. This thesis aims to fill this gap by examining, within the framework of Europeanisation theory, how the evolving EPC stance influenced Dutch foreign policy (downloading), and how Dutch policy impacted the EPC’s stance (uploading) between 1973 and 1980. It contributes to the academic debate on foreign policy Europeanisation, where comprehensive studies on the policies of smaller EC member states towards the Middle Eastern conflict, based on archival material, continue to be scarce.
Drawing on archival material, including previously unseen sources, this thesis connects three levels: the EPC common standpoint, the Dutch role in EPC negotiations, and the Dutch national stance. Contrary to the prevailing notion that Dutch policy passively aligned with the EPC norm, the analysis reveals a continuation of the Dutch commitment to protecting Israeli interests and avoiding European involvement in the US-led peace process. The Dutch actively opposed several proposals in EPC discussions but attempted to avoid public isolation from the Nine to protect their reputation in the Arab world. Persistent Dutch opposition within the EPC, supported by other members conscious of Israeli interests, led to declarations perceived as groundbreaking. However, closer examination reveals that seemingly groundbreaking aspects were formulated in a way that was unlikely to have practical implications, underscoring ongoing disagreements between member states. | |
