Greater Netherlands

Greater Netherlands (Dutch: Groot-Nederland) is the political movement to unite all Dutch-speaking people into a single state. Also known as Dietsland ("Dutchland'"), which uses the word "Diets," an archaic term for Dutch. "Greater Dutch Movement" or "Greater Netherlandsism" (Grootneerlandisme) are other terms used to describe these aspirations, while in literature it is also called the "Greater Dutch Thought" (Grootnederlandse Gedachte).

The basic scenario entails the unification or reunification of the Netherlands and Flanders in any number of political forms, including a unitary state, a federation, or a confederation. Much more expansive versions tend to include the former and currently Flemish-speaking portions of France, the formerly Dutch-speaking areas of Germany, or even the ethnically Dutch and/or Afrikaans-speaking parts of South Africa and Suriname a former Dutch territory in South America.

It is not to be confused with so-called "Whole-Netherlandism" or Burgundism (after the historical Burgundian Circle), whose aim is the establishment of a "Whole-Netherlands" (Heel-Nederland). This would combine all the Low Countries as a single multilingual entity, which would be similar to the former United Kingdom of the Netherlands), uniting Belgium (as a whole), Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Northern France (most likely Nord-Pas de Calais). Yet another form is contemporary Orangism which seeks the restoration of the Dutch royal family to the Low Countries.

In its most limited form (a merger of Flanders and the Netherlands), a Greater Netherlands would consist of 23 million inhabitants, comprise an area of 54,900 km² (equivalent to a population density of 418 persons/km²) and possess a GDP per capita of $ 38.700.

Greater Dutch movement and variants

Most common view of the Greater Netherlands: A political union between Flanders and the Netherlands

Map with the Netherlands and Flanders with their flags common view of the Greater Netherlands

Narrowly defined, "Greater Netherlands" refers to the aspiration for the unification of the Netherlands and Flanders. The ideology, otherwise known as the "Dutch reunification", bases itself on the fact that the Dutch and Dutch-speaking Belgians (known as the Flemish) share a common history, culture, and language. It emphasizes that a new state unifying most of the Dutch speakers in Europe would create a more powerful political and economic bloc.

Its supporters, especially in multilingual Belgium, also advocate that a monolingual state would prove to be less bureaucratic and more efficient. A union with Flanders has not been a political issue in the Netherlands and it is on the agenda of only a single political party, the right-wing Party for Freedom, but an 21 August 2007 poll indicates that two-thirds of the population would welcome a union with Flanders.^[1] However, a (federal) union between Flanders and the Netherlands is not a popular option among the Flemish population. Given the difficulties experienced in the 2007 Belgian government formation after the federal elections and the victory of the N-VA in the 2010 federal elections (the 2010–2011 Belgian government formation is still going on), the likelihood of Flanders seceding from Belgium appears greater than before. The Vlaams Belang and N-VA parties are the primary advocates of secession in Belgian Flanders, but neither has strong opinions towards a "Greater Netherlands".

Greater Netherlandism is sometimes associated with the extreme right fascist organizations in both the Netherlands and Belgium, and the movement used part of the ideology and some of its symbols to achieve their own goals during World War II. Various moderate individual politicians have expressed their support for this particular ideology, including Domela Nieuwenhuis, Louis Tobback, Hugo Schiltz and Frits Bolkestein.^{[citation needed]}

Whole Netherlands

Sometimes, in the Flemish movement and the Flemish nationalists, the term Heel Nederland (Whole Netherlands) is used to define the whole of the Dutch-populated territories (Greater Netherlands). According to it, that is how the Kingdom of the United Netherlands should be. The Dutch nation could then be defined as a unit of Dutch people who use the Dutch language. According to this ideology the Netherlands and Flanders should to restart the Kingdom of United Netherlands based on the organic unity of the Dutch people that has existed for centuries.

This term has been hijacked by the Belgicists^{[citation needed]}, who created the "Whole-Netherlandism" ideology or Burgundism, whose aim is the so-called "Whole-Netherlands" (Heel-Nederland) combining all the Low Countries as a single multilingual entity, uniting not the territories in which Dutch people live, but Belgium (as a whole), Luxembourg, the Netherlands (which would be similar to the former United Kingdom of the Netherlands) and Northern France (most likely Nord-Pas de Calais) after the historical Burgundian Circle), creating a Greater Belgium. This should not be confused with the Greater Dutch Movement, since it advocates the inclusion of French-speaking people.

Other names for Greater Netherlands

Besides Greater Netherlands (invented by Pieter Geyl) and Whole-Netherlands by these Flemish nationalists (including Jan Derk Domela Nyegaard), there are other names for the state that should unite Flanders and the Netherlands. Dietsland is often used. This matches the concept of Diets. Because this designation had become infected because of the collaboration movements in the Second World War (see above), it is widely judged unfit. The United Netherlands or the United Provinces, the United Dutch Provinces, or simply "the Netherlands", the same as the (Republic of) United (or reunited) Provinces.

Contemporary Orangism

Yet another form is contemporary Orangism which seeks the restoration of the Dutch royal family in Flanders both within Netherlands or as independent state with strong links with Netherlands. Many Orangists are Greater Dutch and vice versa, but not all Greater Dutch are monarchist orangists, as some want to structure the state differently. Orangism has become more popular since 1980, when the term was used to refer to Greater Netherlands projects with a focus on the restoration of the Dutch royal family to the entire Dutch-populated part of the region.

The popularity of the House of Orange-Nassau in Flanders is partly based on the French-mindedness of the Belgian monarchy. Contemporary Orangism in Flanders and Netherlands should not be confused with the Orangism of the 19th century and earlier.

Symbols

Greater Dutch groups often use the historical Prince's Flag (Orange, White and Blue) as a flag

The Prince's Flag is sometimes used by Greater Dutch groups because in the Eighty Years War it was used by supporters of William I of Orange, seen as the leader of the revolt, while it was also used as the flag of the Dutch Republic and United Kingdom of the Netherlands.

Origins of the Greater Dutch Movement

The Greater Dutch movement emerged at the end of the 19th century. In Belgium, the Dutch citizens were increasingly up in arms against the privileged position of French and the corresponding subordination of the Dutch in government and in public life. The fear of a desire of the Flemish to return to the Kingdom of the Netherlands was the main reason that the Belgian government restored Dutch as the language of education and administration (but not of university and military) in Flanders.^{[citation needed]} Nationalists from both Flanders and Netherlands created the Dutch General Union in 1895.

World War I further sharpened the conflict between Dutch and French speakers in Belgium. For instance, the Flamenpolitik of the Germans, involving the administrative separation between the Dutch and the French-speaking part of Belgium was also influenced by a Flemish Movement, whom they wanted to use as Allies. Nevertheless, the desire to secede from Belgium and join the Netherlands grew stronger.^{[citation needed]}

The Dutch General Union was joined, at the end of World War I, by a considerable number of people in the Netherlands and Flanders^[quantify]. It also enjoyed widespread popularity among students, leading to the creation of the Diets Student Association. During the wars, the Greater Dutch idea remained popular in the Netherlands and this popularity was widely accepted by most of Dutch society's columns.^{[citation needed]}

The Second World War brought not only Belgium but also the Netherlands under German occupation. Consequently, it was believed in nationalist circles that the Germans would allow the creation of a Greater Dutch state. The Nazis however saw nothing in this idea and desired either a Greater German or a Greater Germanic empire, in which the differences between the German and Dutch populations would be ignored.

After the war however, the Greater Dutch Movement was stuck by the stigma of collaboration. Throughout the war numerous, Flemish and Dutch supporters of the movement^[who?] believed that to realize the reunification of Flanders with the Netherlands it would be necessary to collaborate with the Germans (although some pan-Dutch groups such as Nederland Één! and some members of Verdinaso were in the resistance against the Nazis), particularly in the Flemish National Union and the National Socialist Movement in the Netherlands. At the same time, the Flemish National Union hijacked the term "Diets" and abused the flag for its own political ends. As a result of these the Greater Dutch movement carried a significant post-war stigma in the two Benelux countries.

A few decades after the war, however, the number of politicians suggesting this idea grew significantly and is still growing^[quantify], first only among Flemish nationalist parties, but, later, in the moderate parties, the idea has gradually extended.^{[citation needed]}

Modern politics

In the post-war politics, people of various (political) currents are once or repeatedly spoken highly of this idea:

• Jan Derk Domela Nieuwenhuis Nyegaard, free-thought parson
• Marcel Minnaert
• Willy Kuijpers
• Hugo Schiltz
• Hilbrand Nawijn (Partij voor Nederland)

in the past and present:

• Siegfried Bracke (N-VA), former Belgian political journalist
• Derk Jan Eppink (LDD), MEP
• Jan Terlouw (D66),
• Sven Gatz (Open Vld)
• Bert Bakker
• Erik Jurgens (PvdA),
• Bart De Wever en Matthias Storme (N-VA),
• Bert Anciaux (spirit),
• Louis Tobback (sp.a),
• Axel Buyse (Flemish Representative in the Netherlands),
• Andries Postma (CDA)
• Frits Bolkestein (VVD)
• Filip Dewinter (Vlaams Belang)
• Geert Wilders (PVV), although formerly regretted it
• Several members of the Nederlandse Volksunie and the now former Nationale Alliantie.

On 12 May 2008, Geert Wilders (PVV) (who previously saw the reunification of Netherlands as "a Nazi and old-fashioned policy") said in De Telegraaf that he was interested in the possibility of a merger between the Netherlands and Flanders. Among the advantages he mentions were the acquisition of the port of Antwerp, the good state school system (Gemeenschapsonderwijs) in Flanders, the Antwerp International Airport, improved employment and lowered taxes.

Wilders proposed that, in accordance with previous polls, referendums would have to be held in the Netherlands and Flanders on the merger. He was not planning to impose the Flemings to merge but stated that then-Prime Minister Balkenende needed to talk with his Flemish colleagues on the subject. Balkenende responded by saying that "the fate of Belgium is not for us to decide".

From Flanders, Luc Van der Kelen responded by saying that he was glad that the Flemings were welcome, but he did not like the idea of a merger. The Vlaams Belang, (a political party formerly demonized by Wilders) said they supported this idea because they saw the formation of a "Federation of the Netherlands" as a logical and desirable consequence to a Flemish secession from Belgium.

Yves Leterme (who applauded Wilders's former scorn towards the Greater Dutch and Flemish Movement as a defender of Belgium's integrity) replied on 13 June 2008 in the Times, saying that a merger between Belgium and the Netherlands was 'science fiction' and that Wilders was thinking simplistically about the Belgian crisis. Leterme said that he instead supported further cooperation within Benelux, whether he wanted closer cooperation with North Rhine-Westphalia. On July 7th, 2008 Wilders, along with Martin Bosma, wrote a follow-up piece in the NRC Handelsblad in which they made clear that action must be taken because "the artificial state on our southern border is done quickly."

However, he came back on his story to make it clear that he would to consult the people before any real steps are taken. Wilders exclaimed, "The Netherlands must print the Flemish Lion on the chest wall and say: "Welcome home, we have never forgotten you."

Greater Dutch organisations

• Partij voor de Vrijheid (Netherlands)
• Benev (Netherlands & Flanders)
• Vlaams Belang (Flanders)
• Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie (Netherlands)
• De Pacificatielezingen vzw (Flanders)
• Delta-Stichting (Flanders)
• Het Pennoen (Flanders)
• Die Roepstem (Flanders, the Netherlands and South Africa)
• Voorpost (Netherlands & Flanders)
• Werkgemeenschap de Lage Landen (Netherlands and Flanders)
• Zannekin (Flanders)

Studies in support of a Greater Netherlands

A strong advocate and authority in the area was Pieter Geyl (1887–1966) in his 1925 work "History of the Dutch Tribe" ("Geschiedenis van de Nederlandsche Stam"). In this work, he described a historical coherence of the Dutch language. Afterwards he worked, before World War II, actively towards his ideal: a reunion of the Dutch language, which he thought would strengthen the Dutch national character.^{[citation needed]}

Professor Andries Postma, antoher advocate, cites the following arguments in an article^{[citation needed]}:

• Agreement regarding voting.
• Linguistic similarities with the Standard Dutch and the Dutch Language Union.
• Economic agreements with mergers including Fortis Bank and ING, the objectives of the VEV and the Association of the Chamber of Commerce.
• Convergence in education, thanks to the GENT Agreements.
• Cultural agreements emerging from the Flanders-Netherlands Cultural Treaty (before 1995 known as the Cultural Agreement Belgium-Netherlands), followed by the critical Flanders-Netherlands Cultural Treaty Commission, which include:
• Convergence in the media. There has recently been a cooperation between TROS and VTM. NOS and VRT also work together in BVN. Also, in 2005, Internet radio station Radio Mi Amigo 192 set up a free radio station operating from the Netherlands that invokes the Flemish offshore station Radio Mi Amigo. The station works with both Flemish and Dutch DJ's. Radio Popular followed in 2006.

The Algemeen-Nederlands Verbond and the closed Algemeen-Nederlands Congres, very joined on both sides of the border and in the diaspora, based their ideology on the one-language-one-country Greater Dutch Movement. Also in the Marnixring, the Order of the Prince and among the subscribers of Ons Erfdeel and Septentrion want a reunification between Netherlands and Flanders. Cross-border municipal consultation BeNeGo advocates on practical grounds for a Great Netherlands.

According to a poll taken by the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf more than 50% of 3500 readers wanted that the Dutch government started at the same day a progressive reunification of the Netherlands with Flanders, meanwhile than 25% wanted an immediate reunification.

In Flanders, this idea is even more popular. In a review of Jaak Billiet of the Catholic University of Leuven in 1999, showed 51% wanted Flanders to part of the Netherlands immediately. The trend between 1999 and 2007 it had only been rising.

The Algemeen Nederlands Persbureau reported on 21 August 2007 that a study by TNS NIPO (commissioned by RTL Nederland) shows that over 85% of the Dutch wanted a closer cooperation with Flanders. In fact, nearly two in three Dutch wanted before a merger of Flanders with Netherlands. More than 60% of Dutch people think that both countries gain from a merger. It also appears that three in five Dutch think that the new state should lead the Orange, 17% think both monarchies should be abolished and 10% believe that both areas should retain their royal houses.

But 56% of respondents believe that Belgium will still continue to exist independently, compared with 44% who think Belgium will split. More than three quarters of Dutch people support the idea that Flanders and Wallonia must separate from each other. In response, both Flemish state-controlled VRT and the liberal-oriented newspaper Het Laatste Nieuws published an Internet poll in Flanders (both accused of having manipulated results). Both show a different result: VRT said 36% of the Flemish, whereas Het Laatste Nieuws 50.9% with 12.7% want Flanders being within the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

A clear pattern emerges really is no different from previous polls. However, since 2007, the media has given more attention to the idea. This is partly due to the years-long 2007–2011 Belgian political crisis has created, providing more alternatives to look.

See also

• Dietsch
• Flemish movement
• Orangism
• Pieter Geyl
• Union of Utrecht
• Pan-nationalism
• Low Countries
• Bakker-Schut Plan
• Imperial Federation
• Seventeen Provinces
• Burgundian Netherlands
• Partition of Belgium

References

1. ^ "Dutch Would Reunify with Belgium's Flanders." Angus Reid Global Monitor. 25 August 2007. Accessed 10 January 2008.

External links

• Whole-Netherlands (in politics) – Government and Politics Research