Diplomatic spat Netherlands and Russia: two worlds of law and diplomacy

Diplomatic stars like highly visible special envoys apart, practitioners of diplomacy are rarely to be found in the limelight of media attention. Not so for Dmitri Borodin, Minister-Counselor at the Russian Embassy in The Hague.

The Russian diplomat is at the center of a nasty diplomatic row between Russia and the Netherlands. Neighbors called the local police when the diplomat, supposedly excessively drunk, was seen to maltreat his own children. Four police officers rang the Borodins’ doorbell and took the diplomat away for questioning.

From the APEC summit in Bali, Indonesia, president Putin was quick to show his outrage. The same day Netherlands Foreign Minister Frans Timmermans offered a public apology to the Russian Federation.

Was the Russian government right to be so upset, and was it necessary for the Dutch to apologize?

The incident gives evidence of the incompatibility of two different legal worlds, with international law prevailing. Putin was quick to point out that the Dutch had overstepped their mark in what amounted to a breach of international rules on diplomatic immunity.

The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations states that diplomats must not be liable to any form of arrest or detention in the country where they are posted. They are immune from civil or criminal prosecution in the receiving country. The Dutch ambassador in Moscow was summoned to the Russian Foreign Ministry, whilst legal advisers in The Hague were clarifying to their own Foreign Minister what he already knew. For the Dutch government there was little room for manoeuvering.

In The Hague - once dubbed by Kofi Annan as the world’s legal capital - the police looked at things from the point of view of Dutch law. Public drunkenness is illegal and, besides, not socially accepted in the Netherlands.

Knowing that they were dealing with a person protected by diplomatic immunity, the on-the-spot calculation of the police was that the rights of children should prevail. The name of the Netherlands’ seat of government is connected to the so-called The Hague Conventions on the protection of children (1993) and child abduction (1980).

Immediately following his written apology to Russia, in a televised interview Timmermans made good use of the potential ambiguity of diplomatic language directed at foreign and domestic audiences, when he displayed his ‘understanding’ for the way in which the police had stepped in.

Could this have been resolved through the tried and tested channels of quiet diplomacy?

With the issue in the media right from the start, the Russians decided to raise the stakes by means of a public diplomacy offensive, albeit largely aimed at domestic public opinion. Against the background of Dutch complaints about human rights violations that are a constant irritant in bilateral relations, in particular the prominent Dutch role in a recent campaign against Russian anti-“gay propaganda” legislation, human rights ambassador Konstantin Dolgov showed his public outrage.

Famously, in private conversation some years ago, Putin had already told former Dutch Prime Minister Jan-Peter Balkenende to stop moaning about human rights issues. Leading parliamentarians in Russia were also quick to start a call for a ban on Dutch tulips and dairy products. Diplomatic irritation between the Netherlands and Russia had already gone public weeks earlier, with the Moscow government’s capture of Greenpeace vessel Arctic Sunrise sailing under a Dutch flag south of Nova Zembla.

Two Greenpeace activists are now in a Russian prison, awaiting their fate whilst being accused of piracy. These are only two examples of public irritants between the two sides.

But quiet diplomacy is not out of the window. The Dutch government will complete its investigation of what exactly happened in the Russian diplomatic family’s flat in The Hague’s seaside resort of Scheveningen. They will hand over their findings to the Russians through confidential diplomatic channels and the two foreign ministries will continue their discussions.

The flipside of immunity for individual diplomats is that all states have a shared interest in their own diplomats’ best behavior. Within Russia’s diplomatic service, the affair is also unlikely to be closed. Mr. Borodin is not accountable under Dutch legislation, but he will have to report to his own ambassador and it is unlikely that his superiors in Moscow will be pleased.

Whatever the details of this incident, Russians also love their children and through the social media many people no doubt got wind of what caused the Dutch police to act. This is the official story of violation of diplomatic law and hurt Russian national pride versus the private tale of potential maltreatment of minors within a family.

Is the damage of this affair to bilateral relations likely to last?

One day after the affair the controversy has already been pushed into the background by other pressing issues on both sides. Political leaders are no patient species and their agenda tends to be more crowded than they wish to admit. Diplomats will have to follow things up, just as they also usually prepare what leaders say.

The public only sees the stars but preparations and rehearsals normally take place backstage. With the immediate Dutch apology the Russians had insisted upon by means of an ultimatum, the case will quickly fade into the background. Both sides have an interest in going back to normal. They still have some other irritants and the potential legal battle about the fate of the Arctic Sunrise on their hands.

The irony of the whole affair is also that it takes place against the background of a bilateral year of friendship. Russia and the Netherlands have decided to celebrate four hundred years of diplomatic contacts. The Russian government is particularly fond of such special occasions and the Dutch are pulling out all the stops.

King Willem Alexander and Queen Máxima will visit Russia in November, accompanied by Foreign Minister Timmermans, and the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra taking care of a grand finale. This year counts three special Dutch trade missions to Russia, of which exports to the Netherlands amount to more than 20 billion euros per annum, mostly consisting of oil and gas.

Hundreds of events organized by both governments, the corporate sector and civil society organizations are taking place. Interestingly, the ‘bilateral year’ is not just meant to celebrate everything going smoothly, but also to improve mutual understanding through cultural relations and the frank discussion of outstanding differences. Probably more than both sides have wished for.

Can diplomats as members of a privileged caste get away with everything?

The truth is that the history of diplomacy is full of minor incidents, for instance with abuse of the so-called ‘diplomatic bag’ that host countries may not open under the same rules of the Vienna Convention. The ‘bag’ has been abused for such niceties as importing hard drugs and kidnapping individuals out of the country.

In 1984 the world was shocked when in central London policewoman Yvonne Fletcher was shot and killed by a gunman operating from inside the Libyan embassy in St James’s Square. The Sterling submachine gun found its way back to Tripoli in the diplomatic bag, the culprit remained exempted from punishment under national law, and the British government severed diplomatic ties with Libya.

Compared to the diplomatic spat between Moscow and The Hague, things could therefore still get a lot worse. Governments are keenly aware that none of this is in the interest of stable and peaceful international relations, even though they may choose to resort to the diplomatic megaphone.