The kingdom of Belgium: Asophisticated, but great idea.

1

Name: Frederic van HavreDate: 15/08/2014ID:I6020685Supervisor: Darryl CressmanAssignment: Literature reviewIntroduction

Belgium is a small country situated in the heart of

Europe with a population of nearly eleven million

inhabitants. For centuries the territory of Belgium has

been a very strategic geo-political spot for the

governance of Western Europe. Many wars and battles have

been fought on this vast territory. “There are probably

more battlefields, battle sites, and reminders of ancient

and modern wars in Belgium than in any comparably sized

territory in the world” (van Berlo p.15). Charles

Baudelaire who inhabited the country in the 1860s

concluded that Belgium is what France might have become

had it been left in the hands of the bourgeoisie. Karl

Marx wrote something quit different stating that Belgium

was the paradise on earth for capitalists. Today, more

than half the population of the country Dutch-speaking

Flemings have divided and federalised the country to the

point of near extinction while the other half French

speaking has no distinctive identity. Whether the Belgian

country needs to exist is a difficult question to answer

but what is certain is that its creation is more than a

historical accident. Despite its internal linguistic and

2

cultural conflicts, Belgium still stands as a state today

with the national slogan ‘L’union fait la force’ (united

we stand strong). Therefore I think Belgium is an

interesting but difficult phenomena to understand. As a

real Belgian, knowing both cultures (Flemish and

Francophone) I decided to write a small paper about

Belgium in order to understand the country and its

variety of cultures.

This small paper seeks to give a proper understanding of

Belgium by going briefly trough its history and culture.

Furthermore it will briefly analyse its political

functioning since its creation in 1830.

Birth of Belgium

The country of Belgium was officially born on July 21,

1830, the great European powers of the time - France,

Britain, Prussia none of whom wised to see it fall under

the other’s sway decided to make a country out of it in

order to balance the power in Europe again. The Belgian

territory would (once more) serve as the cockpit of

Europe. The state that came into being at the London

conference was removed from the control of the Dutch,

furnished with a newly minted king from Germany (married

with a queen from France). A constitution modelled on the

French one of 1791 and a new name. The population of the

new country then were very much affiliated to their local

community. Even today Belgium is the only country in

Europe where identification with the immediate locality

3

trumps regional or national affiliation in the popular

imagination. Indeed, Belgium counts a variety of solid

communities. But the most fascinating fact about the

small country of Belgium is its existence and well

functioning with two opposing democracies and communities

and two total different languages spoken. The development

of these two totally different societies can be explained

by many factors. The different languages have been the

main reason of conflict for a long period of time. The

linguistic difference mainly exists because the Flemish

political, cultural and economic elite was mainly French

speaking until the nineteenth century and therefore

increasingly bilingual. French was the formal language

spoken in Western Europe and therefore also the official

language in Belgium. One crucial event that strongly

influenced Flemish nationalism was the Great War.

Following the atrocities Flemish soldiers and civilians

endured during the war, a Flemish movement was formed for

the Flemish soldiers who died for Flanders. The Flemish

movement claimed that Flemish soldiers during the war

were discriminated by Francophone officers who gave

orders in French and therefore Flemish soldiers couldn’t

understand the orders given. The truth is that the

Walloon soldiers from Liege or Charleroi could not

understand proper French either. In Belgium every

community/region had its own dialect. (Zemmour, p. 28)

A memorial tower in Ieper still stands there today where

it is written AVVKV ‘Alles voor Vlaanderen, Vlaanderen

4

voor Christus’ (everything for Flanders, Flanders for

Christ) and. The tower stands as a symbol against war and

for stronger Flemish autonomy. This memorial tower also

became the fief of Flemish nationalist movements where

they gather every year on 11 July to commemorate the

battle of the golden spurs (Courtrai, 11 July 1302). This

battle was victorious for the Flemish lords who revolted

against the French crown, and still today it remains a

very symbolic day for Flanders.

The Flemish movements pushed for more Flemish rights

towards their language and autonomy.

Greater divisions within a union

As a result of these movements, language legislation was

passed in the 1920s and 1930s, where Flanders became

officially monolingual Dutch-environment.

5

Another crucial element that accentuated the cultural

division in Belgium is the rise of a federal state. The

growing linguistic disputes between Flemings and

Francophones made the government very unstable. Therefore

the French speaking part demanded more economic and

political autonomy. As a result of these demands, in

1980, the state had been reformed into three cultural

communities, the Flemish cultural community, French

cultural community, German cultural community and

Brussels as a bilingual community. Each community

obtained more political and economical autonomy as time

passed by. Later these community were renamed too

regions. The most influential and tangible examples of

such autonomies are independent newspapers and television

programs and especially an independent education. Each

community became autonomous and obtained a total

different style in education and media. Therefore, most

of the youngest generations of Belgians have been

educated in monolingual regions and therefore also

consider French or Dutch as more foreign languages and

culture. The independent media and education for each

side resulted with the emergence of two different and

opposing cultures with diverging humour, social

sensitivities, fashion and customs. This also means that

the central government barely holds any policy

instruments in hand to promote any shared Belgian

culture. This automatically leads to an alienation (on

both sides) from each region.

6

Despite these cultural and linguistic differences within

the country, Belgium has been able to function perfectly

well. Even for a period of 589 days without an elected

government (world record for a democracy going without an

elected government) Belgium has been able to perform

well. Indeed, some elements make the country function and

especially make the country stick together. The first and

probably the most important element is the monarchy. The

monarchy serves as a symbolic bond between the Walloons

and Flemings. Although the king has very little political

say in the country “ Around 52 per cent of Belgians in

2003 agreed with the following statement, ‘we should be

happy that we have a King because the country would fall

apart otherwise’” ( p.919). The king of Belgium has the

formal right to approve each new legislation passed

before it can become official. A noble example of such a

formal right to approve a new law is when King Baudouin

in 1990 refused to approve and sign a new law, which

would permit abortion. As a Roman Catholic it was against

his personal morals to sign such a bill and therefore,

the King asked the civilian government to temporarily

suspend his rule for one day so that the bill could be

passed without his approval. A noble gesture from a King

who had a strong personality but nevertheless took his

duty and responsibility of king very serious.

Furthermore the King of Belgium has the power to appoint

a reformer of the federal government after elections are

7

held. Despite its weak political involvement, the

monarchy still has a key influential role in holding the

country together. By acting as an example for the Belgian

population, the Belgian monarchy strongly defends the

unity of Belgium and rejects any radical demands for

increased regional autonomy; it fits, more closely with

Walloon than with Flemish public opinion.

Conclusion

It is true to think the two regions of Belgium

increasingly form separate routes and are growing

socially apart. Nevertheless, the emergence of such a

division is not the cause of this far-reaching social

development but a logical consequence. The political

development resulted in an institutional dismantling

instead of an institutional union and the creation of two

separate party systems with two democracies. Indeed, The

central government has very few policy tools to stop

these divisions. It is therefore logic to think that both

communities will grow further apart in the future.

However, this does not mean Belgium will cease to exist

as a country. Belgium’s 180-year history and the

historical solidarity between the Walloons and Flemings

left a strong mark. The Belgian feeling is still strongly

expressed and widespread throughout the whole country.

Although this feeling is more present in the south than

in the North of the country, a strong economic and

8

political elite in Belgium still exists and are very much

in control of the unity of the country. Moreover, the

still very popular monarchy plays a key role in this

respect. Therefore, I think the likelihood of Belgium

dividing into two separate states is not very probable in

the medium run. The country might evolve in to a

confederate or bi-national union where regions have

stronger autonomy but continue to decide mutually on

community matters. At the same time, I think the

classical concept of the nation-state is outdated as a

result of economic and cultural globalisation and a

stronger global interdependence. Belgium is a very

difficult country to understand as it has a very diverse

population and two very opposing cultures, but that makes

the beauty of this small but important very European

country. In my opinion, one can only have a proper

understanding and Belgian feeling if it has lived within

the two different societies for a while. Furthermore,

Belgium has the characteristics of many European states

(Germany, France, the Netherlands, Italy, Great Britain

etc) and therefore Belgian’s diverse culture could serve

as a perfect model for cultural European integration.

9

Reference list:

Barnard,B., Van Berlo, M., Van Istendael,G., Judt,T.

(2005). How can one not be interested in Belgian history: war, language and

consensus in Belgium since 1830. Trinity college Dublin: Academia

press.

Witte, E., Craeybeckx, J., Meynen, A. (2000). Political Historyof Belgium from 1830 onwards. Brussels: VUB Press.

Stengers, J., & Gubin, E. Le grand siècle de la nationalité belge – Histoire du sentiment national en Belgique des orginies à 1918 – Tome 2. Editions Racine

Billiet, J., Maddens, B., Frognier, A-P. (2006). Does

Belgium (still) exists? Differences in political culture between Flemings and

Walloons. Western European Politics 29:5, 912-932, DOI

Zemmour, E.(2010). Mélancolie Francaise, chapitre 3: les Belges. Fayard/Denoel

10