Samenvatting

In literature on public support for military missions, political discord has been criticised, because it is claimed that having a single strategic narrative as a basis for consensus helps foster such support. In this chapter the author starts from the perspective of the primacy of politics. The chapter intends to show that political parties have different and authentic views on peace and security and more specifically on the reason and the end of military missions. The discussion in the Netherlands on the reason and the ending of the Dutch military mission in the Afghan province of Uruzgan between 2005 and 2010 will be taken as a case study. First, some theoretical remarks on strategic narratives will be made. Then, the role of political parties within a parliamentary democratic system will be explored. They are seen as intermediaries between public opinion and government. When looking for support for military missions, a government needs to convincea relevant majority of members of parliament. For this, the varying opinions and ideals of political parties have to be taken into account. It turned out that the mission could reckon with a broad parliamentary support. One of the reasons that led to this support was the confirmation of a clearly defined end date.