A Weak Netherlands Bows to US Pressure!!!

Hello everybody and welcome to Geopolitical Trends. My name is David Oualaalou. So good to be with you. Was the Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte summoned to the White House? And if so, why do you think that is? In this video, I'm going to provide you my own assessment, and this is my personal opinion, as to what truly is the purpose for this visit. So if you like the content of my videos, by the way, and want to show your support, consider becoming either a member or a supporter, whatever you feel comfortable with. So, and for you, if you— this is your first time visiting my channel, uh, make sure to subscribe and hit the notification button so you will be notified every time I upload a new video. And thank you all for your support. Let's dive in into this topic. President Biden just met with the Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte at the White House. The meeting took place yesterday. By the time you watch this video, it will be 2 or 3 days, so— but that's not the point. The point is about the content of it. So, and both leaders discussed the range of topics, including, of course, further support for Ukraine. What else new there? So there, of course, it's gonna— the statement is gonna come out of the White House saying that they discussed the transatlantic security issues, and here it comes, respecting human rights, including more support for Ukraine. Well, wait a minute, wasn't the Prime Minister's government also that came down on the Dutch farmers? By trying to take their living out regarding this nitrogen issue. So what is the human rights respect that they are talking about? You can just see, like I always say, Western, Western world suffers from a deficiency in leadership. They say one thing and do another, and that's usually— it's a bad sign. Anyway, so I had a chance to read the transcript for the statements from the White House, and I'm going to share with you word for word. It says, and I quote, they— meaning President Biden and the Prime Minister— they talked about strengthening— I just laugh at this because it's the cliché, it's the same, same, same clip, like always say. It says they talked about strengthening democracy, respect for human rights, and the rule-based international order around the world, including as a co-host of the upcoming Second Summit for Democracy. End of quote. You know, it's laughable. It is laughable because they think— they thinking that people cannot read between the lines. You know, is this like an insult on people's level of intelligence? I mean, yes, you might have people who do not understand about foreign policy, not understand about geopolitics. Even some YouTuber watchers will be interested in, you know, watching some silly stuff, you know. But come on, you insulting people to this level, human rights and democracy, when we couldn't even respect that in our own. So, and this is what the statement said after the meeting that took place in the White House. And by the way, the second Summit for Democracy is gonna be scheduled— is scheduled already for March. You all remember the last one that happened, which it was like a fiasco anyway. It's ridiculous. But we're not here to talk about that. We're here to talk about the content of the meeting itself. So there are two things I like you to keep in mind. As we discuss here, or as I move forward with this one. Two things. One of them has to do with US nukes in the Netherlands, on the Netherlands soil. And the second one has to do with rule-based order. And I'm going to provide you a brief assessment or analysis on each one of them to put things in perspective for you. So what you need to keep in mind is that the role the Netherlands plays when it comes to the US nuclear stockpile in Europe. You know, and here is the thing: the stationing of US nuclear weapons in Europe remains as of today a controversial issue, believe it or not, on both sides of the Atlantic. You won't hear much about it, but it is, you know. One of the less well-known cases, and here's the thing, involved the Netherlands or the Dutch government, which is, by the way, FYI, The Netherlands was the first to accept atomic weapons shortly after the two governments, the Netherlands and the US, signed a secret stockpile agreement back in January 1960. That's how far back it goes. And yes, I used to go to Netherlands. I'm familiar with the bases, and I will disclose it for you. It's not classified. So you can look it up, but I'm going to share it with you. So, so it is estimated that the— there are about— it depends where you look. Some accounts says the US has about 100 nuclear weapons, other accounts is about 150. So you put it between 100 and 150. You will never get an accurate account for stuff like this because that's just how it works, you know. Uh, so it is estimated that there are about between 100 and 150 US-owned nuclear weapons stored in Europe. They are stored across Europe, actually in 5 countries, air bases including Belgium, okay, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, and Turkey. And there are only one country among these 5 that has 2 Air Force bases where the nukes are split up between the 2, and the only country is Italy. There are two air bases there where the nukes are. The Netherlands has the nukes stationed at Volkel Air Base. That's where they are. So in Turkey, I think it's Incirlik, and Germany, I forgot where Germany was, and Belgium. So, so this is our— this is pertaining to the US nuclear weapon. As far as the rule-based order, which I find that it's a fancy word for international law. Basically, that's, that's what it is. Meaning, what does it mean just in a simple terminology? And I like to just break it down for you guys to understand because you've been— I am sure you've been hearing international, uh, uh, a rule-based order anytime we do regarding foreign policy, or rule-based order. It's just a fancy word. For international law, basically. What I mean is that countries will have to abide by certain set of rules that is assigned through usually international organizations like the UN, United Nations. But you and I know that the UN is toothless. UN can't do nothing. It's useless. So, so when one hears rule-based order, the sound of it convinces him or her that it has a worldwide acceptance. Yeah, that's what they think. You know, people who do not understand the dynamics, they say, oh, this must be worldwide acceptance of it, when in reality it does not. It does not have that. So anytime I hear it personally, and again, as one who works in Washington and understands those dynamics, anytime I hear it, I immediately know that it is disingenuous and hypocritical. That's why when I read the transcript from the White House regarding this meeting, I just shook my head because I know it's hypocritical. We say one thing and do another. So, and it's almost like what we say here in the US. If you happen to be an American and understand, of course, how our system works, what do we say about the President of the United States? And I'm going to put it in quote here, the leader of the free world. What free world are we talking about? What leader are we talking about? And yet, that's what we say. So, and yet, you and I, if you happen to be an American understanding how the system works, You and I know that the President of the United States has no power and is doing what he is being told to do. And like I always say, I am a student of history. Using history as my guide, I'll take you back to November 22nd, 1963. What happened? The assassination of JFK. Why was it? It's because He didn't abide by the rule of the wind, what is being told, so they took care of him. So when you hear the term leader of the free world, it just shake your head. So that's basically what it is about this one. So international law, on the other hand, is a reference to International Court of Justice. I mean, not just one, because when you say international law, you refer to many other aspects. For example, International Court of Justice, the Nuremberg Law, the UN Security Council, which by the way it needs an update, you know, or the new, even the new institutions, the International Criminal Court or ICC, which is headquartered in The Hague in Netherlands. So, and by the way, the United States is not a signatory to the ICC. So when a government— doesn't matter which one, and I'm going to give you an example, by the way, today about this— when a government says it is doing XYZ under so-called rule-based order, it's basically doing what it's being told. And the best example I can illustrate for you is what just happened 3 days ago with Australia. Australian troops now have been deployed to train Ukrainian soldiers in the fight against Russia. So they are up to, uh, based on the research that I did, up to 70 Australian military personnel are being deployed to Britain to help train Ukrainian troops to strengthen Ukraine defense against Russia. The Deputy Prime Minister And Defense Minister Richard Marles said, and I quote, just listen carefully to what he said. He said, and I quote, Australia continues to stand with the embattled nation after Russia's clear violation of rule-based order, end of quote. You got the idea, you know. As a matter of fact, I'm here to tell you, when it comes down to Australia, Sad to say, and I know some Australians, I've dealt with Australians before, wonderful people. I've never been in Australia, but I sort of had encounters with Aussies, so wonderful people. What is sad about Australia is that it has surrendered its sovereignty to the US. That's the sad part. So I hope this clarifies to you that difference regarding when you hear the rule-based order and international law and so forth. So, and by the way, if you like this video so far, make sure please to subscribe and hit the like button. And thank you for your support. So let's go back to our topic here. So there is one key topic, I bet, I bet my credibility on it, that it was discussed during the meeting. And that topic is microchips, and I'll tell you why. And microchips for a reason, and this is pursuant to the US export restrictions that the US placed on China back in October 2022. No, even the Dutch trade minister who just yesterday issued a statement, and her name is Liesje Krijnmaker, She said, and I quote, while the US has legitimate concerns about China potentially using chip technology for military purposes, the Netherlands would not simply sign on to the sanction rules without proper dialogue, end of quote. Basically what she's saying is they don't want to go along with the US, but there is a reason And I'll tell you why. And the reason has to do with the Dutch company by the name ASML. It is a European tech giant, you know, which is based in the Netherlands. Uh, and ASML makes basically, uh, specific machines that are designed, and they are designed to produce semiconductors. And here is the kicker. For ASML, China represents or accounts for 15% of ASML total revenue. That is huge. This is why the trade minister said, sure, we can have a conversation with the US, but no, I'm not gonna just sign off on it because That's a big market for them. So to those who say, like I heard some individuals saying, well, the economy of China is going to collapse and all that, it's nonsense. It is nonsense. So, and mind you also, you put this within the context of what China just did. And what it did is that it produced the 5 nanometer, yeah, nanometers chips. And it's on its way to produce 4-nanometer chips. And by the way, I checked on the 5 nanometers from different sources and it was confirmed, with the latest being Huawei company. And I checked not from within China but from outside China and it was confirmed. So, so here is my conclusion for you, just to put this in, in perspective. Assembling a European or Asian anti-China containment coalition, kneecapping China's economy, or engaging in an arms race, or even aligning local regimes to encircle Beijing and demanding countries to choose between China and the United States. Will, in my opinion, lead to regional and global fractures. Yes, it will lead to a global fracture, which will lead to a war, not stability. And this is basically why the Prime Minister was summoned to the White House, basically to choose between the US or China, because 15% of the Dutch company ASML revenues are within China's market. Where else they gonna get that? In US? No, because we don't produce anything here. See, that is the reason why. So this is why I always like, uh, anytime I share information with you, uh, make sure to put it within the greater context. It will make more sense to you. It will make perfect sense to you. So here's my question for you for today. Yeah, do you believe Netherlands will stand up to the US and say no? Let me repeat, do you believe, in your opinion, that the Netherlands will stand up to the US and say no? Make sure to leave me some comments. Like I always do, I read your comments, you know, and I learn from them. And thank you, by the way, for your shall we say, positive or constructive criticism. I welcome all your opinions. Yeah, if I disagree, I will let you know because that's what we're here for, is to exchange ideas. There's no one is better than the other. So, and that's why I like coming out here, and I appreciate your support to keep me going with coming up with new contents for you to put things in perspective. As always, remember, geopolitics impacts your daily life in more ways than one. Till next time, guys. Bye-bye.