Menu Back
issues About
Diabolic Digest
A state of pragmatism
As one
of the original six founders of the European Union, Belgium has been a powerful
driving force behind the continent’s unification. However, after nearly 174
years of pragmatic nationhood, the marriage between its two main communities
has become increasingly shaky. What are the prospects for enduring national
unity and how much does it matter in a borderless Europe?
By Khaled
Diab
March 2004
The modern
nation state often seems to be particularly contrived and Belgium counts among
the more bizarre examples of this creature. It has no natural or linguistic
boundaries to explain its separation from its neighbours – the house gradually
get smaller as you head into the Netherlands and the pastures get bigger as you
head into France. In addition, it has no common language, no national
newspapers or broadcasters, and an increasingly powerless and dysfunctional
federal government.
One country,
three languages
Belgium is
home to three languages communities –
Dutch, French and German – and three geographical – Flanders, Brussels and
Wallonia – regions. In such a multi-lingual setting, nothing quite matches the
power of words. Language – an issue which gets passions rising across the
country and is often used as a sounding board for wider political and economic
grievances – was the midwife to Belgium’s birth and threatens to split it apart
today.
Although the
country’s short-lived union with the Netherlands was a match made at the bank
and brought with it prosperity, Belgium emerged as an independent state on the
back of an 1830 revolt that began at, of all places, the Brussels opera house.
King William’s authoritarian rule, Protestant faith and his decision to impose
Dutch as the only official language caused a great deal of disgruntlement among
his Belgian subjects, who were already reeling from a general economic downturn
in Europe.
Following
independence, French grew to become Belgium’s lingua franca for
education, government and all official purposes. Frustration began to mount
among the country’s Dutch-speaking population and – although some language
reforms took place after the first world war – these came to a head in the
1960s Flemish civil rights movement.
Continuing
state of compromise
Although
Belgium’s famous ability to compromise has resulted in a bizarre political
arrangement, the quiet revolution of the past few decades has prevented
cultural grievances from exploding into a violent conflict as they have done in
other parts of the world. Unlike most federal systems, the once central state
apparatus is gradually being deconstructed. This time, the process did not
begin at the opera but in the tiny village of Voeren/Fouron, where a linguistic
dispute precipitated the collapse of the national government in 1987.
The
subsequent devolution has resulted in a unique parallel system where power is
divided geographically into regions and linguistically into communities to
satisfy contrasting Walloon and Flemish ambitions for greater regional economic
power and more cultural autonomy. Although the federal government still
controls such critical areas as defence and health care, the most radical
reform has been the gradual corrosion of the supremacy of national over
regional authorities. This has led to the rather surreal situation of each
region setting its own foreign policy and Flanders considering the prospect of
bidding for the 2016 Olympics.
Judging from
the amount of media coverage and the lack of knowledge they exhibit of their
compatriots, it sometimes appears that Flanders and Wallonia might as well be
in different countries. Nevertheless, calls continue – particularly among
Flemings who regard the poorer Francophone region as an economic burden – for
further devolution.
The Belgian
paradox
It is difficult
to miss the apparent paradox of Belgium being one of the key architects of an
increasingly unified Europe and yet facing such obvious estrangement at home.
But it is an allegory of the wider European scene: the burgeoning EU is united
by political pragmatism and economic common sense, but divided by linguistic
and cultural diversity. And, as the Union expands ever eastward, what
constitutes a European identity is becoming even more difficult to pin down.
Strangely
enough, the very fact that Belgium is at the heart of a larger evolving animal
could be assisting its own demise. In the borderless EU, the concept of the
‘nation state’ is slowly becoming more notional. If Flemish nationalists felt
their demands for independence meant – rather than simple cultural autonomy –
financial and political isolation, the movement would quickly lose steam.
Neither of
Belgium’s two regions is likely to be able to make it alone in a global village
populated by titan multinationals. Since becoming part of the Netherlands and
France is also not an option the vast majority of Belgians are willing to
countenance, their best bet is to stick to their current union however
imperfect it may seem.
For the
country to be more than a patched-together marriage, it needs more to cement it
together than a smudging of pragmatism. It needs to overcome the cultural
estrangement and political distrust between its two main communities. This
requires the nurturing of a national awareness and pride of the country’s
diversity. The media and bilingual schools could help to protect the linguistic
heritage of both communities, while raising a new generation of Belgians who
can bridge the gap between Flemings and Walloons.
This article appeared in the March 2004 issue
of Newcomer magazine.
ă2004 K. Diab. Unless otherwise stated, all the content on this website
is the copyright of Khaled Diab.