Belgian politicians doubleplusgood at blackwhite groupthink
Politics is the art of the possible. Good politics, in doing so, has a plan of the desirable. Belgian politics, it seems these days, is the art of painting yourself in a corner by planning the undesirable and desiring the impossible.
What is desirable in the negotiations for a new federal government in Belgium?
- The will to continue living together. Contrary to the distorted interpretations of the debate by foreign correspondents who are unable to speak Dutch, that will is certainly there among the majority of Flemish political parties. The exceptions are anti-immigrant Vlaams Belang and Flemish-nationalist NVA. A practical problem today is that NVA has allied itself with the (much larger) christian-democrat CD&V (led by possibly future PM Leterme) and that the latter has adopted much of the NVA’s regionalist rhetoric. Much, but not all: CD&V wants devolution, not independence.
- The will to have a dialogue. This may be a bigger problem as it requires some understanding of what moves the other side. And this may be less often be the case than in the past, due to the fact that Belgian political parties have split along linguistic lines during the last decade or so. As a result the groupthink that political parties are prone to anyway has spread asymmetrically in their respective linguistic demoi, resulting in widely different views on “community issues” on both sides of the linguistic divide. A group of political scientists has proposed to reinvigorate the inter-community dialogue by introducing a federal (nation-wide) constituency. This may be a good idea, especially if it stimulates related political parties to rejoin forces with their other-lingual counterpart by selecting candidates who appeal to voters across linguistic lines.
- An understanding of democratic principles. This does not mean majority rule under all circumstances, but instead allows minorities a fair (larger than proportional) say on issues that matter to them as communities. Neither the vote in the Flemish parliament on splitting the Brussel-Halle-Vilvoorde constituency, nor the (French-speaking nationalist) wish to have referendums in the Flemish communes around Brussels on becoming part of the Brussels region, fulfill such criteria (which is not to say that threatening to use these means cannot be acceptable tools during negotiations).
- An understanding of the role of group rights in a liberal democracy. Group rights do not exist to make life easier for individual members of society, but to preserve important cultural traits (which indirectly makes life easier for individual members of society). The principle is “entre le fort et le faible, c’est la liberté qui opprime et la loi qui libère”, that is: using the law to protect the freedom of the weak against the freedom of the strong. Hence, language laws are good if they protect a language community against suffocation by a dominant neighbour. This is the case in Québec (where French is protected against English) and on the federal level in Belgium (where French and Dutch are protected against each other), but not in the region around Brussels (where French-speakers demand more rights despite the fact that French locally is the dominant language).
And what about the art of the possible? Well, I don’t think Belgium is about to split any time soon. The current crisis is part of the political game – it shows voters that politicians have been foghting for what they promised, before they reach the inevitable compromise. Within a month, I expect Belgium will have a government, and the beginning of an agreement on constitutional reform.
8 November 2007 at 08:42
There has been such a vote in Flemish parliament, but your audience doesn’t know that. They’ll think your meddle up with the vote in the “commission” of the federal parliament.
Please clarify… How can French be the dominant language if they live in Flanders (they might be a majority in some municipalities, where they have faciliteiten/facilités/special privileges, but local government is in Dutch…
9 November 2007 at 17:37
Funny that – I actually meant the recent vote in the Domestic Affairs Committee of the Federal Parliament. Although it is true that the Flemish Parliament voted about it as well – which is even more ridiculous as they have no say on the matter (it being a federal competence).
Of course French is the dominant language in the Flemish communes à facilités around Brussels: the share of their inhabitants being French-speakers who are either from Brussels originally or from Wallonia, and of inhabitants working in Brussels in a mainly French-speaking job, is often around 50% or higher. The fact that this share is rising, and has been rising for many years, is evidence of that dominance.
The error many people make is that because the number of French-speakers in the region is rising and sometimes above 50%, there should be more facilités to accommodate the French-speaking majority. It is the other way round: because the number French-speakers is rising, French does not need more protection. Dutch does.