Trump's a loudmouth idiot and the Dutch government has to look like they're doing something about it. Telling a nation that they're "not" going to share intelligence is one way to "do" that.
The only problem is, spies are born liars and the world of espionage is inherently opaque to the public, so what this really means for US-Dutch intelligence sharing is probably going to depend on what the intelligence is, what the Dutch have to gain from sharing it, and what could be prevented should it be shared.
If the Dutch government thought that they could benefit from what Trump's doing, they'd go through with it, humanitarian consequences be damned. Nations don't have values, they have interests. People in Amsterdam aren't going to stop drinking coffee en masse because of the coffee trade's reputation for economic exploitation of the global south, and they're not going to stop talking with the US if they can get to draw benefit from it, either.
https://www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/nederlandse-diensten-de...
That the leaders of AIVD and MIVD give this broad interview to him is unique, and a sign that they want to inform the voter before the election on 29th of October. These guys and services are normally very reluctant to share any information because they know the enemy reads it as well. After all, as you asserted elsewhere any idiot can use Google Translate which works quite well with Dutch for a very long time (since forever?).
And these kinds of accusations go both ways, free-speech is under constant attack in the EU, the ruling class doesn't want citizens informed or even able to inform one another of critical political processes and actions without their thumbs in everyone's mouth, that much is clear.
*Are you more cautious about sharing certain information?*
Reesink: “I can’t comment on what that relationship is like now compared to before. But it’s true that we make that assessment and sometimes don’t share things anymore.”
*That’s a striking shift. What has been the most important change?*
Akerboom: “We don’t judge what we see politically, but we look at our experiences with the services. And we are very alert to the politicization of our intelligence and to human rights violations.”
*What does it mean in practice if there are risks in those areas?*
Akerboom: “Sometimes you have to consider each case individually: can I still share this information or not?”
On one hand, this is the modus operandi of every political institutional from the CIA, to the CCP to city states to small towns in California, everyone acts in their own self-interest all the time. They're claiming nebulous "human rights" violations but don't state what they are. Could they mean blowing up boats suspected to be carrying drugs or precursors? I'd like to see Trump stop that myself, it's a pretty dangerous game he's playing.
On the other hand, I would expect the CIA/NSA have much greater potential value for the Dutch intel agencies than the reverse, so them prodding an administration after he was nearly assassinated twuce and many of his closest political officers and supporters were arrested and subjected to lawfare over the last 4 years doesn't seem like a particularly wise course of action. It's true this iteration of Trump is a lot more in tune with the way DC works so I wonder how wise the statement even is, they can accomplish what they're doing without announcing it, except now they announced what they're really up to and should probably expect some kind of retaliation.
I would expect anyone on this particular website right here to be able to let their browser do the translation. For Google Chrome that would even be the default, if it is setup knowing your language(s). The quality of the translation is excellent these days. There is no excuse.
Someone already archived it here [1]