Belgian crisis: when will it be over?
Yet another small political rant about Belgium. I know, I know, but it’s something that I read about every morning in my two newspapers (one Flemish, one French-speaking).
For those not in the know, Belgium (that little country of just 10 million inhabitants, housing most of the EU Institutions and NATO in Brussels) has been undergoing the most “serious” political crisis it has know since its birth in 1830-1831. And as a foreigner, a European, a “Brusseleer”, a silent observer, I’m really annoyed at how things have been going on for the past year.
I’ve always been sceptical about politics, because I never felt democracy was the best solution nor well implemented, and because I never found a party to relate to. But studying law forced me to take a new look at the political scene, forced me to try to understand it, most notably because the current political issues in Belgian politics are so closely related to the Belgian Constitution and other such fundamental laws.
Crisis: a historical summary
Last year, when the federal election took place (Belgium is a federal state since 1970), I was really unsure about the future, because the biggest winner of the election was a formerly moderate party, the CD&V, forming a cartel with a separatist party, the N-VA. 33% of the vote in Flanders went to this cartel, a very rare and powerful result in Belgian politics (and I should mention Belgium imposes the vote on its citizens, which means you get an 80-90% turnout or something like it).
Since the election, over a year has passed, and we had to wait until the end of March 2008 to even have a real government. The problem was that neither of the two main sides (“Flemish” – “French-speakers”) ever tried to listen to the other one, and so there was no true negotiation. When there was a negotiation, you could always count on the extremists on either side of the linguistic border (most notably the FDF [French-speaking] and the N-VA) to spice things up and make any agreement fall to bits.
But the bickering continued. See, the CD&V/N-VA cartel won by promising a major reform of the federal system to give far more autonomy to Flanders. Yet no matter how hard they tried, the French-speakers never showed any intention to undertake such a major reform. And whenever the French-speakers agreed to this or that change, the N-VA shouted all over the media that it wasn’t sufficient, and the CD&V felt compelled to adopt the N-VA’s stance (for your information, the CD&V is almost six times as big as the N-VA).
Then, when the French-speakers thought there would be no change, Yves Leterme, who collected an almost unprecedented 800.000 votes in the election and became the Prime Minister, grew a spine. He shed his skin of “Flemish autonomist” and became a Belgian politician. He started to work towards real agreements, sometimes even foregoing his party’s stance on a subject.
14th of July: death of a temporary dream
Unfortunately, it didn’t last. On the 14th of July, the eve of the day for which he was supposed to find an agreement, Yves Leterme offered his resignation to the King.
And as they have done throughout this crisis, the newspapers presented only one side of the story, blaming the other linguistic community for Leterme’s failure (in Le Soir, the N-VA & the CD&V were blamed; in De Standaard, the French-speakers as a whole were blamed). Talk about “professional journalism”.
The real reasons for Leterme’s resignation are numerous. And from what I gather, both sides are to blame. Leterme cannot command his troops. The CD&V cannot distance itself from the N-VA. The Flemish parties are frightened the elector might not consider them Flemish enough at the next election. The French-speaking parties are either too full of themselves to realise better governance is possible or too fearful the electorate might disapprove of any concessions next time around.
The King rejected Leterme’s resignation, and got three new people to help him out, all French-speakers. The Flemish side seems pessimistic. The French-speaking side seems pessimistic.
Opinion of the people
If the political parties and the media seem pessimistic, one thing is certain: the people are fed up, frustrated, annoyed, and generally wish the political elite would implode and never be seen again. All right, not “all the people”. But “more and more”.
These people wish the politicians would stop bickering and started acting on socio-economic matters, where another crisis has appeared over the past year, something that affects these people’s lives much more directly.
Peter’s opinion
I really wish the parties involved would realise that they are playing a very dangerous game, and that they cannot solve this only through political negotiation.
Better governance is indeed possible, and I know that the current federal system is far from being the most efficient and useful one. But “better governance” does not equal “giving more competencies to the Regions”. At least, that’s just part of the equation. Some competencies should probably go back to the Federal level. But which ones?
A real multidisciplinary study is necessary for anyone to come even close to a realistic solution that can satisfy everyone. And it shouldn’t be some random one-week study. Time is needed for such a study to be of any quality.
Until someone in the political process shows enough courage to suggest it and others decide to follow the suggestion, all these current discussions will be void of substance.
So here’s my suggestion, just in case anyone would be watching/reading/listening: how about all the media stop speaking about this crisis and the politicians start focusing on what really matters? That way, in a year or so, they can start discussing this institutional stuff with some real basis for their ideas instead of just using ideology as a basis.
20 July 2008 at 20:24
“Viva la revolution!” say the French.
Seriously though, it sounds like those newspapers need to grow a backbone and try to get the right story instead of one that paints a party as an aggressor. Around here we have editorials where people can write in with their opinions on what’s going on in politics. Usually the paper itself tries to stay out of political affairs and lets people who write editorials tackle that instead. Most of the time you’ll get two editorials from opposing views on the same page, and on a good day you’ll get somebody like Chuck Green who likes to poke holes through the absurdities created by both parties. Do your papers in Belgium have something like an editorial? You should write one and send it to both those papers you read.
20 July 2008 at 20:59
I sent a little “reader’s opinion” to both newspapers (the same text in English, so that they get the exact same words), but I don’t know whether they’ll publish it.
We’ll see on Tuesday or later, because Monday is the Belgian national holiday (creation of the Kingdom of Belgium in 1831), so no newspapers until then.
21 July 2008 at 03:22
Hope something gets through to their heads. Surely there will be a stopping point somewhere and they’ll try to come to terms? Of course, not much news on Belgium reaches Colorado, which might as well be on another planet. It sounds a lot like what the Republicans and the Democrats have going here. At least our government hasn’t slogged to a stop. Yet. That could change with this year’s election.