By Rohan Minogue Nov 24, 2005, 3:32 GMT
The Hague - The Netherlands will soon be only the third country, alongside the United States and Britain, to possess Tomahawk cruise missiles, after it became clear last week that there is a majority in parliament backing their purchase.
Defence Minister Henk Kamp has moved steadily towards his goal of acquiring 30 Tomahawks from U.S. company Raytheon, overcoming objections that a small country has no need of the long-range capability that Tomahawks offer and that the Netherlands simply cannot afford them.
His aim is to mount them on two of the four new LC-class frigates that have been launched since 2000 and are the pride of the Dutch Royal Navy.
The opposition Labour Party (PvdA) and others on the left of the political spectrum oppose buying the Tomahawk on the grounds that it is an 'offensive' weapon, pointing out that Dutch troops are usually engaged only in peacekeeping and reconstruction in troublespots like Afghanistan and Iraq.
And the Christian Democrats (CDA), who make up the largest party in Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende's three-party coalition, have been hesitant throughout the two years the topic has been under debate.
They cite the cost of close to a million dollars apiece for the missiles, plus the modifications needed to equip the frigates to launch them.
The CDA came round only after Kamp, a member of the liberal VVD, had secured additional funding from his party colleague, Finance Minister Gerrit Zalm, to buy new Chinook helicopters, in what critics slammed as an internal VVD trade-off.
CDA members are keen to have the three helicopters lost to crashes in Afghanistan replaced.
Kees Homan, a retired major-general with the Dutch Royal Marines who is now a military analyst with the Clingendaele Institute, believes the decision to buy the sophisticated long-range missiles is the right one.
'The main argument against the Tomahawks is that they are an offensive weapon, but I don't agree with how the opposition is arguing,' he says.
'The Dutch participate in the NATO Rapid Response Force, which is supposed to be for operation in a high intensity environment. If they can send ground troops into a high intensity environment, then why not have cruise missiles?' Homan queries.
But what does the Netherlands, a country with a population of a little over 16 million, want with the sophisticated weapon that drew world attention when the U.S. Navy used it to attack Baghdad in the 1991 Gulf War?
Homan acknowledges that he 'can't imagine a situation where the Dutch would operate without having the United States and Britain alongside'. And opponents of the weapon argue that these countries could supply all the Tomahawks necessary.
The 'Block IV' Tomahawks that Raytheon now offers are considerably more sophisticated than their 1991 predecessors.
They can now overfly their target to beam back pictures to controllers before attacking, or loiter over the target area waiting for the most opportune moment to strike. And all of this at a range of 1,600 kilometres.
While there are other cruise missiles available, none match this kind of sophistication and range. But they are expensive at close to a million dollars apiece.
Kamp has set aside more than 100 million euros for this project to which he has attached all his ministerial prestige. <!--page-->
Comment in the Dutch media has been muted.
The left-of-centre Volkskrant daily was equivocal last week. The purchase would mean closer ties with the U.S. both militarily and politically, although it would allow the Dutch a role 'in the heat of battle' and presumably greater influence over how things are arranged once the fighting stopped, it said.
This is how Britain's Tony Blair has argued. When the second Gulf War began in March 2003, the launching from submarines of British Tomahawks at targets deep inside Iraq was highlighted by the prime minister and broadcast on national television.
But how much influence the involvement of British forces in the actual fighting actually bought when it came to governing Iraq afterwards is questioned, even in Britain.
The Volkskrant was quick to dismiss the 'offensive weapon' argument as outmoded thinking. 'In enforcing peace, as Kosovo demonstrated, there are often operations with an unmistakeably offensive character,' it said.
But it noted that a higher profile military role alongside the U.S. and Britain could turn the Netherlands into a terrorist target.
The more centrist NRC Handelsblad is completely opposed to the Tomahawk purchase, saying it is simply too great a step for the Netherlands.
It too said Dutch military policy would inevitably become even more closely entwined with that of the U.S. and suggested that Dutch peacekeeping and reconstruction efforts in the Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq would suffer as a result.
The drawn-out debate has yet to galvanize the Dutch public, which mounted mass demonstrations at the beginning of the 1980s against the deployment of nuclear-tipped cruise missiles on Dutch soil to counter the Soviet threat.
And the shifting sands of Dutch coalition politics could yet put paid to Kamp's ambitious plans.
The funds will not actually be spent until after the 2007 elections, when the anti-Tomahawk PvdA homes to make a comeback into government.
Your Talkback on this Story