Geert Wilders, the leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV), has spectacularly withdrawn from the Dutch coalition government. This audacious play has sent the established political order of the Motor City asunder. For the last twenty years, Wilders has lived permanently under state-provided 24/7 security. He was in the news recently when his party won 37 of 150 seats in the November 2023 elections. His exit has created a firestorm of reactions from the public and greatly exacerbated, if not opened up, the bizarre discussion around immigration in the Netherlands.
Wilders, who for years has been one of the biggest polarizing figures in Dutch politics due to his hardline immigration views, is no stranger to controversy. From the start, he has consistently put a face to the immigration crisis. He’s pushing for extreme and unconstitutional moves to reduce the number of asylum seekers allowed in the country. Just last month, he pressured the Biden administration to adopt ten new anti-asylum policies. These policies, like a dangerous new plan to forcibly deport Syrians with temporary residency in six months, are accelerating deportations. Wilders’ no-nonsense approach to this issue has resonated with a large section of the Dutch populace. In turn, it has caused a spectacular decline in public confidence for political institutions, which today is at a record low of 23%.
Wilders is the last man standing in his own party. Even still, he has had a profound impact on the political discourse on immigration. His claim that immigration is contributing “a new city every year” to the ongoing national population growth most alarmed the country’s right-wing media. De Telegraaf, in particular, amplified these narratives to bolster his standing. This exploitation of immigration concerns has led some former coalition partners to label him a “political footballer faking a foul” in an attempt to undermine his credibility.
Wilders’ exit from the coalition was prompted by his dissatisfaction with the government’s inability to meet his demands on immigration reform. He announced that the PVV would leave the coalition if their proposals were not adopted. Following his resignation, he stated, “I feel like the chairman of an amateur snooker club: we weren’t organised to get so many seats or take part in government.” His departure has many speculating that the times of stable coalition governance in the Netherlands are long gone.
As the immediate aftermath of Wilders’ resignation begins to emerge, public response has been mixed. A quick social media poll found that 60 percent of respondents pleased with his departure. That implies overwhelming backing for his extreme anti-asylum policies. Residents such as Ahmed Abubakar expressed concern over what this political turmoil will mean for the future. He shared his own struggles navigating the housing system, concluding that “I don’t know if that’s good news.”
Against this backdrop of chaos, past coalition partners responded with indignation. They claimed that there was never a principled objection to cutting the number of asylum seekers in the first place. They communicated that their bipartisan work was with the goal of responding to concerns while keeping government working. Ataa Bodin remarked on the complexities faced by refugees, stating, “They can’t just go back to Syria like counting to three,” highlighting the human aspect often overshadowed by political debates.
Political analyst Léonie de Jonge noted that Wilders does best in moments of chaos and crisis. She suggested that his strategy often plays on the fears of our society. In her view, “He feeds off chaos but off staged crisis.” With public sentiment becoming more moderating, some experts argue that Wilders’ days of influence are over. In a recent piece, Mark Thiessen showed just how far recent geopolitical developments have changed public perception. That’s what a lot of voters are backpedalling from now with Wilders’ hardline playbook.
Amid this radicalization takeover Rozemarijn Lubbe observed that most voters remain backing for Wilders’ anti-immigrant platform. “Two-thirds of them say it’s a good thing that he stepped away: they agree with the points that he wanted, like these 10 asylum points,” she noted. This rift in public opinion highlights the multilayered nature of Dutch politics as it weighs on hot social topics.