This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 THE HAGUE 000966 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: MOPS MARR PREL PGOV IZ NL
SUBJECT: DUTCH PARLIAMENT DEBATES IRAQ 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary:  On April 15, the Dutch parliament engaged 
debated Foreign Minister Bot and Defense Minister Kamp in a 
debate on the future of Iraq.  Looming in the background is 
the government's upcoming decision whether to renew the 
deployment of Dutch troops currently in Iraq beyond July. 
with in the background the question as to whether Dutch 
troops should stay beyond June.   Bot and Kamp parried 
opposition demands for a complete UN takeover as well as 
calls for criticism of U.S. strategy.  Both the gGovernment 
and parliament agree on the desirability of a bigger UN role 
for the UN, in Iraq but Bot rejected athe callpremise put 
forward  by the opposition Llabor (PvdA)Pparty spokesman 
Koenders to give the UN "the political "final 
responsibility" for all international efforts."  Bot 
notedpointed out that the UN does not wantto assume such a 
role, and suggested doing so also because it would be wrong 
to havewould amount to  Iraq being ruled again from the 
outside by another occupation force, so to speak.  The goal 
after all is, he said toinstead of giving give "Iraq back to 
the Iraqis."   Kamp robustlyardently defended the U.S. 
approach in Iraq and put down clearstrong markers for a 
renewedcontinued deployment stay of the Dutch troops.  He 
warned that a Dutch pullout would have very negative 
consequences for the Iraqi people and underlined that . 
Moreover, tthe UN, U.S. and UK have explicitly asked the 
Dutch to stay.  Ambassador Sobel will follow up with Bot on 
April 22.  By then, the dust will have settled and it will 
be clearer as to the effect of the debate on a possible 
extension.  End Summary. 
 
UN Role 
------- 
 
¶2. (U) Much of the debate centered onThe definition of the 
future role of the UN in Iraq was extensively debated.  Bot 
recalled that the government has persistently soughtbeen 
pushing in past months for a more significant UN role; h. 
However, talks with UN SYG Kofi Annan and UN Sspecial Eenvoy 
Brahimi have made clear that to him in a recent meeting that 
the UN does not seek a dominant role.  is not aspiring to 
assume a lead role. It would certainly not be advisable for 
the UN to take over the administration.  For that reason, 
Accordingly, Bot rejectedopposed a resolution tabled by 
opposition Labor Party Foreign Affairs Spokesman Koenders 
callingthat called for giving for the UN to have "the 
political final responsibility" for all international 
efforts."  Bot noted that Meanwhile, work continues on a new 
UNSCR resolution, the adoption of which, which heBot called 
desirable, and the goal of which is to get more countries 
involved but he expected that such a resolution would only 
be adopted by mid-June.  The ultimate intention is to get 
more countries involved in the process.  To that end, heHe 
said he had specifically discussed these issues with his 
French and German counterparts, and had observed a 
willingness on their parts on their part to consider sending 
troops if the UN role washas been more clearly defined. 
 
¶3. (U) Overall, Bot was cautiously optimistic about the 
political developments in Iraq.  He asserted that the noted 
that current violence trouble is primarily caused by small 
groups of extremists who do not have much support among the 
population.  He said that those.  Those who oppose the 
current process towards establishing democracy can be 
expected to continue to try to frustrate this process in 
every possible way.  Bot was nonetheless was hopeful that it 
would be possible to get the security situation under 
control. 
 
Arguments for stayingRenewing the Dutch deployment in Iraq 
----------------------------- 
 
¶4. (U) Defense Minister Kamp presented strongly arguedments 
in favor of a continuingued stay of the Dutch troop 
deployments in Iraq (note:  the Dutch have approximately 
1300 personnel serving in AlMuthanna province as part of the 
UK Multinational Division South-East).  He notedFirst, the 
UN, U.S. and UK requests for the Dutch to remain and 
observed there would behave explicitly asked the Dutch to 
stay.  There'd be "very negative consequences" for the Iraqi 
people," if they left.  He also cited the importance of 
Dutch aAssistance to Japanese forces in AlMuthannawas cited 
as another reason for staying.  He did allow forKamp 
referred to three three possible scenarios in which 
ituations in which the Dutch troops might bewould be 
withdrawn:  .  "If the Iraqis no longer appreciate our 
presence; if the UN involvement does not become bigger, and 
if the security situation deteriorates so much that it would 
be no longer responsible to stay." 
 
¶5. (U) Kamp said Meanwhile, preparations continue for 
relieving currently deployed the present troops.  The Dutch 
are coordinating closely plan with the British, and 
byheKamp warned it would becomes more and more difficult to 
pull out as time passes, since other countries rely on the 
Netherlands.   The Dutch relief forces are due to arrive in 
Iraq by mid-June to giveing them a few weeks to acclimatize. 
AccordinglyThus, he said the final deadline for anthe 
extension decision would beis mid-June, but preferably 
earlier.  Both Bot and Kamp supportedwere positive about a 
larger future role for NATO in Iraq, although they said for 
the moment NATO is very much preoccupied with Afghanistan. 
 
¶6. (U) A majority of MPs from the three coalition parties, 
the Christian Democrats, the Liberals and the Liberal 
Democrats, are inclined to support the extension, while the 
smaller Green Left party and the Socialist party are 
opposed.  While the main opposition Labor Party supported 
the initial Dutch deployment and its first renewal, it now 
states it will not support a renewal unless the UN is 
granted a "lead role" and the entire strategy is "radically 
changed."  (Comment:CDA, VVD and D66  the political problem 
is that the Dutch prefer to have the main opposition onboard 
for deployment decisions.  Technically the government has 
enough votes without the Labor party or the smaller far left 
parties, but it would be a significant shift to proceed 
without them.  End comment). 
 
¶7. 
 
¶78. (U) The debate disintegrated after Green Left Foreign 
Affairs Sspokesperson Karimi tried hard to induceprovoke 
either Bot or Kamp to criticize the U.S. for its handling of 
affairs in Iraq.  Neither  but they did not riserose to the 
bait.  Kamp .  In fact, Kamp was delivered a strong and 
lengthy defense of U.S. actions and objectives, noting that 
the U.S. was "investing tens of billions in Iraq" and that 
the main goal of the U.S. is to "bring about improvements 
for the people, to transfer power to them, and to leave the 
country as soon as possible."  He said the Netherlands is 
"glad to be part of that" and "just like President Bush, I 
say in all modesty, we won't stay a day longer than is 
strictly necessary." to present such a strong defense of the 
U.S. approach and its objectives that he managed to disgust 
both Karimi and Koenders.  When In response to Kamp's 
remarks Karimi shouted that she had to throw up, and Kamp 
advised her to see a doctor.  Koenders then stalked out of 
was so angry that he left the parliament in a huff shouting 
that there was no point in talking to a minister who resorts 
to "taking the moral high ground." 
 
¶8. (SBU) Comment:  Such antics are uncommon in the Dutch 
parliament.  Dutch MFA contacts, perhaps relieved that 
Koenders and Karimi had not been able to corner the 
ministers, said the exchange was more reminiscent of the 
British parliament.  Bot and Kamp robustly defended the 
Dutch role in Iraq and laid down markers for a future debate 
on the renewal of the deployment.  Even so, we anticipate 
further tough debates leading up to a renewal, especially 
since a decision will likely need to be made before 
consideration of a UNSCR is completed.  End comment. 
 
SOBEL