Between the devil and the deep blue sea - University of Canterbury

- 6-
their rhetoric, were also under no illusions. They realised that the Netherlands had few
feasible options; it remained a small nation flanked by very powerful neighbours. Io In many
respects, holding on to neutrality was a last ditch effort to maintain some independence on
an increasingly insecure and unstable European continent. Nevertheless, the rapid
capitulation to Nazi Gennany in May 1940 carne as a huge shock, shattering the faith so
many had in neutrality.
At the same time, the Nazi occupation undennined the importance of the entire era
of neutrality in the country's popular history. Non-involvement in the Great War ensured
that this conflict lost its original significance after 1945, which helps to explain why, until
recently, Dutch historians have not paid it due attention. They did not view the First World
War as an important or unique episode in their national history, seeing it only as one event,
among many, that tested neutrality during the Netherlands' supposedly "long nineteenth
century", spanning from 1813 to 1940. 11 In the process, they perceived the war almost
wholly as an external event with little impact or developments within their own borders.
This selective focus has skewed Dutch history, as the historian M. C. Brands rightly
warned, in that the supposed break with the past did not corne in 1914, as it did for the rest
of Europe and much of the world, but in 1940. 12 The Netherlands' "twentieth century" was
very short indeed (from 1940 - 1991).13 It has also meant that some Dutch historiography,
For others criticising neutrality see: Olaf Bartelds, "Wakkere geesten. Critici van de neutraliteitspolitiek 1933 - 1940"
[Spirits awake. Critics of neutrality policy 1933 - 1940] Skript. 18, 1995, pp. 14 - 23.
10 Madelon de Keizer, "Dutch neutrality in the Thirties: voluntary or imposed?" in L. -E. Roulet (ed.), Les Etats
Neutres Europeens et la Secollde Guerre Mondiale. Neuchatel: Edits de la Baconniere, 1985, pp. 177 - 206; 1. C. H.
Blom, "'Durch kamen sie doch'. Het Nederlands defensiebeleid in de jaren dertig opnieuw beschouwd" ['Durch
kamen sie doch'. Another look at Netherlands' defence policies in the thirties] in G. Teitler (ed.), Tussen Crisis ell
Oorlog. Maatschappij ell krijgsmacht in dejaren '30. [Between crisis and war. Society and armed force in the 30s]
Dieren: De Bataafsche Leeuw, 1984, pp. 116 - 143; C. M. Schulten, "Van neutralisme naar bondgenootschap de
mobilisaties in 1870,1914 en 1939" [From neutralism to alliance, the mobilisations in 1870,1914 and 1939] in C. A.
Kuyt (ed.), Nederland mobiliseert. The Hague: Maatschappij Stichting Krijgsmacht, 1985, p. 3; Louis de Jong, Het
Koninkrijk del' Nederlanden in de Tweede Wereldoorlog. Deel1 Voorspel. [The Kingdom of the Netherlands in the
Second World War. Volume 1 prologue] The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1969, p. 59.
II M. C. Brands, "The Great War die aan ons voorbijging. De blinde vlek in het historische bewustzijn van
Nederland" [The Great War that passed us by. The blind spot in the historical awareness of the Netherlands] in M.
Berman, J. C. H. Blom (eds.), Het belmlg van de Tvveede Wereldoorlog. De bijdragen voor het symposium op 22
september 1997 tel' gelegenheidvan de opening van de nieuwe behuizing van het Rijkstinstituut voor
Oorlogsdocul7Jentatie. [The interest in the Second World War. The contributions to the symposium on 22 September
1997 held at the occasion of the opening of the new building for the State Institute for War Documentation] The
Hague: Sdu Uitgevers, 1997, p. 10.
12 Bob Moore, '''The Posture of an Ostrich'? Dutch Foreign Policy on the Eve of the Second World War" Diplomacy
and Statecraft. 3, no. 3, November 1992, p. 478.
13 Eric Hobsbawn, Age of Extremes. The Short Twentieth Century 1914 -1991. London: Michael Joseph, 1994.