The Netherlands has once again entered uncharted political territory. The parliamentary elections of Oct. 29 – the third in just five years – have not resolved the country’s long-running crisis of governance but deepened it. In a 150-seat parliament, no party won more than 26 seats. That arithmetic alone tells the story of a country where fragmentation has become structural. Twenty-seven parties competed, and any viable coalition will require at least three, likely four, partners. Yet most major parties continue to reject cooperation with Wilders, whose PVV remains defined by anti-Muslim and anti-immigration rhetoric. As a result, the Netherlands now faces what could be months of coalition talks, legislative paralysis and policy stagnation.
Rupture without resolution
Wilders, the architect of multiple government collapses, again managed to turn political instability into personal advantage. His deliberate torpedoing of the previous coalition months ago set the stage for this election – a move that former partners saw as sabotage but supporters read as proof of authenticity. That paradox remains central to his appeal: He thrives not despite crisis, but through it.
Yet the outcome also showed that his dominance has limits. Wilders lost ground compared to earlier highs, while D66, led by 38-year-old Rob Jetten, gained momentum with a campaign centered on pragmatism, EU integration and individual freedoms. His message of compromise and modernization appealed to younger voters seeking stability over confrontation.
Jetten’s rise represents a subtle but significant generational transformation. In a political system fatigued by populist drama, his calm technocratic tone signaled a desire for consensus. Still, D66’s surge is less a breakthrough than a balancing act: The party’s pro-European and socially liberal vision may have won the election, but it lacks the numbers to govern alone.
Fragmentation of far-right
Contrary to hopes that the far-right might recede, it has instead splintered. Wilders’s PVV remains strong, but newer far-right parties like Conservative Liberals (JA21) and Forum for Democracy (FVD) have gained ground with softened but still nationalist and pro-Israel rhetoric. Meanwhile, Dilan Yeşilgöz’s People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) – once a center-right party – has moved closer to that camp with its tough anti-immigration stance.
In this sense, the far right has not lost influence; it has diversified. The ideological gravitational pull of the far right continues to shape the political mainstream, drawing center-right and even center-left forces into its orbit. What has changed is less the content of the message than the tone of its delivery.
Fragile center
Mathematically, a coalition that excludes Wilders will likely require cooperation between D66, the Green-Labour alliance and Yeşilgöz’s VVD – a paradoxical combination that blends liberal optimism with conservative caution. Despite talk of transformation, this would amount to continuity rather than rupture.
The broader picture reveals a pragmatic electorate rather than an ideological one. Many Dutch voters punished the parties that helped bring down the last government and rewarded those promising competence and calm. But this pragmatism also signals fatigue: a desire to manage, not to imagine; to stabilize, not to transform.
The traditional left, meanwhile, continues its decline. The Green-Labour alliance suffered heavy losses, prompting the resignation of its leader, Frans Timmermans. Across Europe, voters increasingly grant power only to a “left” that accommodates the system, not one that challenges it. D66’s success reflects that pattern: conciliatory, technocratic and unthreatening to the status quo.
European dimension
This Dutch election is more than a national event. It mirrors a continental pattern: the normalization of the far-right, the erosion of traditional left-right boundaries, and the triumph of managerial centrism over ideological conviction. Europe’s political pendulum continues to swing rightward, not only through populist victories but through the quiet adaptation of mainstream parties to far-right narratives on migration, security and national identity.
In an era of geopolitical strain, from war in Ukraine to economic uncertainty, Europe’s societies are retreating into defensive politics. The Dutch case illustrates how deeply structural this shift has become: a fragmented polity, suspended between the exhaustion of liberal optimism and the persistence of nationalist energy.
The question now is not whether Geert Wilders will govern, but whether the logic of escalation he embodies will keep defining European democracy. In the Netherlands, as across the continent, the far right no longer stands outside the system. It has become one of its engines – fragmenting politics, yes, but also powering it forward in its own disruptive rhythm.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the editorial stance, values or position of Daily Sabah. The newspaper provides space for diverse perspectives as part of its commitment to open and informed public discussion.
