Others might argue that the vote was also hardly representative with just 32% bothering to turn up and vote.
And, finally, European Union officials have indicated that even if the Dutch fail to ratify, the AA/DCFTA remains in force.
But already the Dutch government have made clear that they will abide by the result – all Western governments these days are much more mindful of being seen to listen to the “will of the people” through democratic elections.
And European Commission officials appear unclear what the technical implications of this are – how can the AA/DCFTA be applied everywhere in the EU aside from the Netherlands?
Aside from the technical implications of this no vote which appear unclear, I do think this vote has very profound long-term implications for Europe on so many different levels, and I attempt to sketch some of these out below:
1 – Europe’s elites detached from people
First I guess it just further shows how far Europe’s elites are detached from their populations. All too eager to embark on elite political projects, e.g. even including the single currency, without thinking through all the implications and popular opinion. This is another vote against the establishment, and I guess affirms the crisis at the heart of democracy which we are now seeing across the West.
The low turnout perhaps also reflects the disillusion with politics and the political process in the West, which is also very worrying.
2 – Dutch not as liberal as we assumed
Second, and likely related to the point above, it underscores the changing political mood in Europe, the rise of xenophobia which has come with mass immigration, and recent floods of migration. These flows are creating seismic changes in political views and also perhaps challenging European and Western values which hitherto were taken as given/sacrosanct. The Dutch like to view themselves as “liberal” but maybe this vote reveals that they are not as liberal as we assumed, and opinion and values are changing, and rapidly.
It is perhaps tempting to argue that this vote reflects an ignorance of what the AA/DCFTA was about on the part of the Dutch electorate – it was not a green light to Ukraine’s EU accession, far from it. But I think this vote was not about Ukraine specifically but a Dutch vote of frustration about the EU, enlargement and immigration. This vote was about more than Ukraine, but the state of Europe itself.
3 – Blow to Ukrainian reform process
Third, this is nevertheless a bitter blow to the reform process in Ukraine. Remember that this vote was never a vote on Ukrainian EU membership – the EU has never given Ukraine any real EU membership perspective. I would argue that that is part of Ukraine’s problem, as it needed an EU reform anchor to force its elites to change, as was the case with other Emerging European countries which were told that if they abided by the terms of the Copenhagen Treaty on enlargement from 1994 they would be allowed to join – the likes of Poland, Hungary, Slovenia, Slovakia, et al, which have made truly remarkable change over the past two decades and are now European and full EU members.
Reformers in Kyiv might well now find it that much more difficult to sell painful political and economic reforms to their own populations given that the Dutch have basically closed the door to them in terms of any European perspective, in the broadest of terms. The door has been closed, the draw bridge raised.
Actually Europeans might think that they are helping Ukraine, and are pouring huge resources and funds into Ukraine. They are not. Loans extended have to be paid back. This vote is a wake up call that Europe has actually done very little in reality to support EuroMaidan Revolution and the reform process in Ukraine. Talk is cheap, Ukraine needs real and meaningful support, and a real European reform anchor and perspective. This vote is a further step back from that.
4 – Blow to other EU aspirants
Fourth, this is not only a blow to Ukraine, but any other country in the queue for EU accession, many of whom are already halfway down the runway, including Bosnia and Herzegovina, Albania, Serbia, Macedonia, Moldova, Georgia, Montenegro, Turkey and Kosovo. If the Dutch voted on the Ukrainian AA/DCFTA which is not a green light for its EU accession, then surely one has to assume that the Dutch and others will hold similar referenda on actual EU membership for these other countries. In effect this vote just closed the door, de facto, to further waves of EU enlargement. So again, the reform anchor in these countries just weakened. And if, as I do, you think the single biggest achievement of the EU over the past close to 60 years was that through the real and meaningful prospect of accession, it forced political reconciliation and ensured peace, security, stability and prosperity in a Europe, this anchor has just been pulled. This vote now raises serious questions about whether the enduring peace in the Balkans will last, why should Turkey continue with peace talks over Cyprus? By this vote, Europe just got much less secure and and it got more dangerous – and remember that the Dutch and other European countries still have peacekeepers deployed across the region. They may well now need more. Indeed, it is again incredible that this vote came from the Dutch who surely still should have painful memories of conflict in the region after events in Srebrenica, watched on by Dutch UN peacekeepers.
5- Risks of Brexit remain high
Fifth, the Dutch no vote underscores the anti-establishment vent now appearing in Western politics. I think this plays to the Brexit camp in the UK, with the June vote now appearing knife edge, with the risks of Brexit in my view not suitably priced by the market.
6 – Undermines alliances
Sixth, this vote likely undermines Euroatlantic alliances, and particular NATO. From a US perspective, why should it pay for Europe’s defence when the Dutch and others are unwilling to politically, and economically, support US strategic interests in places like Ukraine? This will play to the mantra of Donald Trump in the US elections that Europe is a mess and not worth supporting.
7 – Huge victory for Moscow
Seventh, this vote was a huge victory for Moscow, which is eager to weaken Euroatlantic integration, the EU and NATO, with Putin’s big picture vision of redrawing the European post War and post Soviet security and political architecture. He will be encouraged to work more effectively on this front, and Russia will likely support Brexit, and other centrifugal forces working in Europe on the right and left. Short term Russia will likely ease back on military intervention in Ukraine, assuming that after Brexit, and the US elections the West will offer Russia significant concessions and a new security settlement in Europe.
It is hard to see any positive side to his vote.
