The Cooperative Narratives of the EU, NATO, and the Netherlands

By Yael Velvel, MA Media and Strategic Communication ’23

Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte meets with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky (Ukrainian Presidential Press Office/AP)

The Netherlands has historically served as a humanitarian home for political and religious refugees. Following the Second World War, the country recognized the need for a strategic alliance with its neighboring countries in order to preserve this identity, and became a founding NATO member in 1949. Despite the Netherland’s size, it took on an unusually large role in preserving peace and international order for the new alliance of nations.

While Russia portrays the Ukrainians as a Nazi-infested government, the Ukraine’s goal to elicit Western support prior to Russia’s invasion has proven fruitful in the West. Unsurprisingly, the Netherlands’ diplomatic narrative stands in solidarity with Ukraine, the EU, and NATO, and in stark opposition to that of Russia.

As Russia loomed outside of Ukraine in February, 2022, threatening to invade, Dutch Prime Minister of the Kingdom of the Netherlands Marke Rutte met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv to celebrate the upcoming 30th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relationships between the two countries. Together, they expressed ongoing support for mutual interests – a key strategy of Ukraine’s to elicit support and legitimize its democracy in the eyes of the West. In a joint statement, Prime Minister (PM) Rutte expressed his unwavering support for Ukraine in its efforts to combat Russian aggression at its borders, and both leaders emphasized the importance of a peaceful solution. PM Rutte vocalized his appreciation for Ukraine’s allied efforts and supported Ukraine’s EU aspirations.

The Netherlands echoed the EU and NATO’s contestation of Russia’s narrative. In their official statements, the Dutch government framed the conflict as an illegal act of aggression and an attack on Western Europe’s democratic values. It is an open contestation of Russia’s narrative, which argued that their invasion is a strategic military operation to free the Ukranian people of a fascist, Nazi regime, and expressed its desire to re-absorb the nation into Russia. NATO’s official statements framed the invasion as an attack on democracy and internationally recognized borders. In her first statement following the invasion, EU President von der Leyen framed the invasion as an attack on Europe, European stability, and international peace.

The Dutch statement on PM Rutte’s visit with President Zelenskyy underscored the nations’ concurrent values and identity narratives. In their meeting, the two leaders underscored that their alliance is based upon “shared values and principles of freedom, democracy, rule of law and respect for human rights”. These values are part of the Netherlands’ core identity as a liberal democracy, and the statement evidences the Ukrainian government’s commitment to instilling these values into the identity of their own young nation. Even more, it demonstrates Ukraine’s attempt to raise its status in the new global order. Dutch support for Ukrainian resistance to an invading nation also taps into their own historical identity: the Dutch, although swiftly defeated by German forces, were committed to resisting foreign occupation during the Second World War.

When Russian forces invaded Ukraine, the Netherlands joined their defensive allies, the United Kingdom and Canada, in releasing a joint statement. The trilateral statement condemned Russia’s violations of international law and reiterated their unwavering support for Ukrainian resistance. As a member nation of the EU and NATO, the Netherlands’ statements closely resemble the rhetoric and stance of the EU and NATO in combating Russian aggression and supporting Ukraine. The Netherlands underscored in the trilateral statement the importance of humanitarian action to protect Ukraine’s most vulnerable populations: women, children, and the elderly. Its identity as an EU and NATO member nation is also demonstrated in the trilateral statement with its strategic defense partners, the United Kingdom and Canada. The three NATO nations’ shared identities as free, democratic nations and history as cooperative allies during WWII undoubtedly influenced their commitment “to sustain and coordinate the political, humanitarian, economic and defence support that is so vital for a free and independent Ukraine.”

Dutch membership of NATO and the EU demonstrates cohesiveness between national identity narratives and global system narratives. The Netherlands’ joint statements with President Zelenskyy, and the U.K. and Canada, tap into the core qualities of NATO and EU: the importance of democracy, independent sovereignty, and peaceful resolution; as well as NATO and the EU’s desire to preserve Ukrainian sovereignty.

NATO and the EU operate as global peace keepers, and proponents of democracy and liberal society. Following the Cold War, the EU’s primary strategy to stabilize Europe was to expand its membership and encourage neighboring nations to adopt EU values. Although Ukraine is not an EU member, it has made its intentions to join the EU exceptionally clear. The EU has not been unsupportive of Ukraine’s intentions, but has expressed that certain reforms must be put into place before Ukraine has the strength and values of an EU member nation.

Moreover, the Netherland’s individual statements are strategically aligned with the narratives of Ukraine, NATO, and the EU in stark contestation to Russia’s. Given the Netherland’s historic ties to NATO and the EU, it is highly unlikely they will stray from the approved messaging frame, and will continue to be a cooperative player in the war against Russia.

For more on the topic by the author, please click here.


The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author. They do not express the views of the Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communication or the George Washington University. 

Solidifying Spain’s European State Narrative

By Miranda Ewald, MA Global Communications ‘22


Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez meets with Moroccan King Mohammed VI, Moncloa (REUTERS)

Spain and Morocco’s Shifting Relationship

            Until recently, tensions between Spain and Morocco had been building for decades, particularly over Spain’s lack of recognition for Morocco’s autonomy in the Western Sahara. Spain and Morocco, along with Mauritania, signed a tripartite agreement in 1975 that aimed at stabilizing relations in the Western Sahara region. However, Spain had not formalized or honored its political and diplomatic ties to Morocco. In 2021 Spain welcomed nationalist movement leader seeking independence from Morocco, Brahim Ghali, into its country despite him also being wanted in Spain for crimes against humanity. In retaliation, Morocco then opened its border in May 2021 to Ceuta, a Spanish autonomous city in Morocco, leading to many trying to illegally enter the city and chaos erupting.

            Despite the historical tension and recent challenges between the two countries, as of this month, Spain has decided to realign its relationship with Morocco. On March 18 of this year, Spain announced through its foreign minister, José Manuel Albares, that it considers Morocco’s proposal regarding the Western Sahara to be “the most serious, realistic, and credible” plan to de-escalating tensions in the region. The plan involves giving Morocco limited autonomy in the Western Sahara, a region it annexed in 1975, which is inhabited largely by the Polisario Front independence movement. Spain’s backing of the proposal symbolizes a turning point in its foreign affairs with Morocco.

Spain’s Evolving Identity

            Spain’s strategic messaging of its newly defined stance with Morocco highlights how Spain is attempting to develop the narrative that it is a cooperative democracy and international partner. Since the end of General Franco’s dictatorship in Spain, the country has worked diligently to democratize and become part of the international system. This however conflicts with Spain’s imperialistic history with Morocco, and until recently, apathetic nature towards mending lingering tensions. In order for Spain to shed its dictatorial and imperialistic ways and prove its relevance as a democratic actor, it needed to readjust its relationship with Morocco. For example, when Spain invited Brahim Ghali into its country, Morocco began portraying Spain as indifferent to crimes against humanity. Spain could not let Morocco continue to capitalize on the meeting with Ghali to maintain its reputation as a democratized state. Moreover, for Spain to appear as a collaborative foreign power, it could not continue to ignore its diplomatic agreements with Morocco in the Western Saharan. Amends needed to be made with Morocco to prevent anything from undermining Spain’s legitimacy and relationships in the international system

            Spain made the announcement of the backing of Morocco’s proposal through its highest foreign affairs official to validate its stance further. Albares emphasized the commitment even further by stating that Spain is looking to strengthen cooperation particularly regarding migration in the Western Sahara. Spain’s alignment with Morocco though symbolizes much more than this. In the spring of 2021, Morocco organized mass migration through Ceuta, a Spanish city on the border of the two countries. The weaponsing of migration outraged Spain, but also the EU, which has established that it desires maintaining a strong relationship with Morocco. For Spain, it is important to appear as a cooperative and loyal state, something it was not under General Franco. Therefore, to project this narrative, Spain needed to begin appearing active in working towards resolution in the Western Sahara.

Implications for Spain’s Repositioning

            Spain’s new positioning will have, and has had, many potential implications for the state. Thus far, Spain’s new positioning has led Morocco to reinstate its ambassador to Spain, which it had previously recalled. This, in addition to other comments made by Morocco, portrays that Morocco is pleased with Spain’s new alignment and is open to working with the state. The EU has also established that it welcomes Spain’s change in stance with Morocco. While Spain has strengthened some of its relationships through this decision, it has also had some negative implications as well. For example, since the Polisario Front is backed by Algeria, Algeria removed its ambassador to Spain because of its decision. Besides this damaging foreign relations between Spain and Algeria, it could also have economic consequences for Spain. Algeria supplies gas to Spain, and given the crisis in Ukraine, Algeria’s supply has become ever more important. Spain could risk increasing gas prices even further if relations are damaged even more with Algeria.


Polisario demonstrators protest against Spain’s support for Morocco’s autonomy plan in Madrid, (AFP).

Going forward, Spain’s relations with other states will shift as well. Some states support Morocco’s proposal and will embrace Spain’s new positioning, such as the US. However, there are other states and international organizations that believe a referendum should occur in the region to decide who is in control. To illustrate its identity as a collaborative and credible democracy, Spain should continue its use of elite officials as spokespeople, remain loyal to and supportive of allies and be proactive in discourse around international issues.

For more on the topic by the author, please click here.


The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author. They do not express the views of the Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communication or the George Washington University.