Farmer protests escalate. The roadside was on fire this week, in the middle of the night waste and debris was dumped on highways, including material containing asbestos. Accidents took place. Companies that had to clean up the mess were intimidated. Also in the village streets the battle is hardening. In Winterswijk the municipality no longer removes the reversed flags because of threats, the same happened in Oldebroek. The mayor found two men in her yard trying to plant a flag, one of whom had a bag cut over his head with two holes in it.
The actions are becoming more extreme, the dangers for civilians are increasing. ‘Let’s really stop calling this ‘demonstration’, D66 party chairman Jan Paternotte wrote. Twitter. “This is terrorizing.” Is that right? Where is the line between protest, extremism or even terrorism?
‘The farmers’ protests fall into different categories,’ says Jelle van Buuren, terrorism expert at Leiden University. ‘There are normal demonstrations, such as in Stroe. Civil disobedience and violation of the law can be part of this, but in a democratic society it can be abrasive. Driving slow tractors on highways has a certain predictability, which is why it doesn’t fall under extremism. Things get dangerous when farmers fill the highways with junk at night. It is not possible to warn about this in time. Those actions are disruptive. When companies that have to clean up the highways are threatened and intimidated, activism will turn into extremism.’
When does terrorism occur?
‘I’m careful with that loaded term. We must not set the bar too low. Terrorism is violence aimed at human lives. That is not yet the case here. No, not even if farmers on highways endanger people, because that is not the purpose of those actions. Terrorism must involve long-term social disruption, and we are not yet seeing that either.
‘Another element of terrorism is that the violence must be motivated politically and ideologically. It’s complicated in this case: the peasant protest is against a policy change, not against the system or democracy. But there are radical elements, radical farmers. You saw the same cocktail in the protests against the corona measures: there were people who simply demonstrated, but also people who think we don’t live in a democracy, so strongly anti-government extremism.’
What do you think of the political response to the peasant protests so far?
‘Very unclear. On Thursday, Prime Minister Rutte wrote something on Twitter along the lines of ‘unacceptable’ and ‘this must stop’. That sounds just as helpless as: not smoking, because that is bad for your health. It is up to politicians, the police and the Public Prosecution Service to make clear where the boundaries are and how they will be enforced. The government will have to take a clear position. I’m never really into alarm bells, but something is definitely going on in society: polarization, distrust of the institutions. That requires a self-conscious government, a self-conscious public administration.’
Caroline van der Plas of the BoerBurgerBeweging no longer makes public appearances because of receiving death threats. What does that say about the state of the country?
‘This shows that the polarization can come from several directions. It is not yet clear from which quarter the threats come. “Apparently we are getting too big in the polls,” she said herself, but radical farmers can also blame her for speaking out against dangerous actions this week. What we know about the historical dynamics of protest movements is that they also lead to counter-movements, which is another step in the escalation.’
The police seem to opt for de-escalation. Is that a good strategy?
‘Yes. Repression does not solve this problem; you cannot convince the population that this is a good solution for the nitrogen crisis with repression. This is essentially a social problem and it is up to politicians to solve it.
‘It sounds soft, but for the police it is important to keep in touch with the peasantry, to see what can get them moving. This is probably all happening behind the scenes, but it would be good to provide more insight into the outcome of those conversations. It must be prevented that the police lose support. This also happened in the corona crisis, when even mayors called on the cabinet to take fewer ad hoc measures because the policy was no longer explainable. The police constantly confronted the population. That ultimately undermines your institutions as well.’
Protests by climate activists often intervene quickly, while farmers are given a lot of space. Is there a double standard?
‘That question is getting more pressing. If 100 Extinction Rebellion protesters occupy an intersection, that intersection is often free again after an hour. They struggle a bit when they are towed away, but for the police it’s a piece of cake. It is different with farmers: it is also difficult to act against fifty tractors with only a baton and a police car. The operational problem thus determines how the police respond. That is understandable at first, but should not remain an excuse.’
A radical organization such as Farmers Defense Force says it is not involved in the actions, but understands it. How can the sting be taken out if it is not entirely clear who the drivers are?
‘That’s difficult. Comparisons are always flawed, but in the radicalization surrounding the corona protests, for example, the judiciary has decided to take targeted action against The Red Pill Journal, the site that played a driving role in threats against Jaap van Dissel. That was a strategic, almost surgical operation, designed to remove a source. You only have to glance at social media to know: they could have persecuted thousands of people. But you shouldn’t do that. You have to look strategically.’
For the interpreters of these protests, it is a balancing act, concludes Van Buuren. ‘You can easily get carried away by all the extremist voices on social media, but they are not representative. Not all farmers believe in the conspiracy theory that a ‘globalist elite’ is taking power. There is talk of extremism and that should certainly be mentioned. At the same time, it is important to keep an eye on how varied the farmer’s voice is.’