The Netherlands is eager to jump on the European AI wagon and become a frontrunner in exporting the European brand of human-centered AI. In terms of AI readiness, the Netherlands is a frontrunner in many respects, although the public funding for Research and Development (R&D) in AI has been criticised for having a rather shaky basis. In terms of AI that aligns with fundamental rights and values, the Netherlands has strong preconditions. Yet, cases like CAF-11 and SyRI have also shown that these beneficial preconditions do not guarantee that the right balance is struck in practice. In its national AI strategy, the Netherlands does not follow the policy documents of the High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence (AI HLEG), with little mention of trustworthiness. The three central documents constituting the national AI strategy (the Strategic Action Plan for Artificial Intelligence, SAPAI, published in October 2019, and two governmental letters) are sceptical of abstract concepts and vague ethical guidelines, instead focusing on how guidelines can be operationalised pragmatically within the national Dutch context and given bite through practical tools, legislation and supervision. However, while pragmatism is sympathetic, the Dutch AI strategy might have benefited from some more overarching vision. Dealing with the national strategy in three separate documents brings along a strategy that is somewhat dispersed, and also gives the impression that the fundamental values and rights are purposefully kept outside the upbeat glossy SAPAI report. Given the recent CAF-11 and SyRI cases in the Netherlands, it is clear that the public sector has had a difficult time in finding a middle ground between governmental efficiency and protection of fundamental rights.