Belgium On the Brink

[minionofmidas]

They should just make the two parts autonomous communities like in Spain, although it may be that way already.

While a strong move back in a centralist direction - but not all the way back - is indeed what Belgium needs, there's no political majority for it.

[StateBoiler]

Coalition talks break down and potential prime minister has given up, no end in sight.

http://crisisinbelgium.blogspot.com/2007/12/deep-crisis-of-regime.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Oh boy, can't believe that they're unable to fix this...

[StateBoiler]

Oh boy, can't believe that they're unable to fix this...

Look at the bright side, Germany might be getting larger from a few communities.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Oh boy, can't believe that they're unable to fix this...

Look at the bright side, Germany might be getting larger from a few communities.

Yeah, significantly larger...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Ah, so the farce of having Leterme, of all people, attempting to build a coalition is over? What now?

[Verily]

Ah, so the farce of having Leterme, of all people, attempting to build a coalition is over? What now?

Maybe they'll end up with the same coalition as prior to the elections (Liberal-Social Democrats) with the Walloon Christian Democrats added in for stability. (The pre-election coalition has exactly 75 of 150 seats now.) Another alternative would be Liberals-Social Democrats-Greens, though I think the Liberals are unwilling to work with the Greens right now. Either way, CD&V doesn't seem likely to be in the next government.

[Хahar 🤔]

Oh boy, can't believe that they're unable to fix this...

Look at the bright side, Germany might be getting larger from a few communities.

Yeah, significantly larger...

A few miles of Lebensraum?

[Bono]

Ah, so the farce of having Leterme, of all people, attempting to build a coalition is over? What now?

Maybe they'll end up with the same coalition as prior to the elections (Liberal-Social Democrats) with the Walloon Christian Democrats added in for stability. (The pre-election coalition has exactly 75 of 150 seats now.) Another alternative would be Liberals-Social Democrats-Greens, though I think the Liberals are unwilling to work with the Greens right now. Either way, CD&V doesn't seem likely to be in the next government.

Wouldn't new elections be a better way out of this? I think there's too much bad blood between them right now for any coalition to work, and anyway no party would go for those alternative coalitions, at least no Flemish party, because they would get slaughtered in the Flemish regional elections if they did.

[Silent Hunter]

Remind me, what are they arguing about?

[StateBoiler]

Here's an idea. Although I don't think the European Union (not to mention Belgians) would let it happen as it violates democratic principles.

-King Albert temporarily takes absolute power and suspends the constitution.
-King Albert, flanked by advisors, writes a new constitution that handles the constitutional problems the country are facing and the politicians are incapable of compromising on.
-After a period of time recalls the elected Parliament that has not yet seated, and has them vote on the new constitution he has drawn up. I'm not familiar with Belgian law, but I assume all he needs is a simple majority. Due to the threat of "loss of power" via worse options if the country splits up, I think you could get a simple majority to vote for the new constitution.
-King Albert then relinquishes his absolute power and gives it back to the elected Parliament, who are no longer faced with constitutional difficulties stopping the formation of government.

[Јas]

Here's an idea. Although I don't think the European Union (or Belgians) would let it happen as it violates democratic principles.

-King Albert temporarily takes absolute power and suspends the constitution.
-King Albert, flanked by advisors, writes a new constitution that handles the constitutional problems the country are facing and the politicians are incapable of compromising on.
-After a period of time recalls the elected Parliament that has not yet seated, and has them vote on the new constitution he has drawn up. I'm not familiar with Belgian law, but I assume all he needs is a simple majority. Due to the threat of "loss of power" via worse options if the country splits up, I think you could get a simple majority to vote for the new constitution.
-King Albert then relinquishes his absolute power and gives it back to the elected Parliament, who are no longer faced with constitutional difficulties stopping the formation of government.

I think there are probably less radical 'solutions' to the problem that don't involve absolute monarchies or suspending the constitution.

[StateBoiler]

Here's an idea. Although I don't think the European Union (or Belgians) would let it happen as it violates democratic principles.

-King Albert temporarily takes absolute power and suspends the constitution.
-King Albert, flanked by advisors, writes a new constitution that handles the constitutional problems the country are facing and the politicians are incapable of compromising on.
-After a period of time recalls the elected Parliament that has not yet seated, and has them vote on the new constitution he has drawn up. I'm not familiar with Belgian law, but I assume all he needs is a simple majority. Due to the threat of "loss of power" via worse options if the country splits up, I think you could get a simple majority to vote for the new constitution.
-King Albert then relinquishes his absolute power and gives it back to the elected Parliament, who are no longer faced with constitutional difficulties stopping the formation of government.

I think there are probably less radical 'solutions' to the problem that don't involve absolute monarchies or suspending the constitution.

Can you give one? The politicians have presented themselves as completely incapable. Per a constitutional court, the Parliament is required to revise the Constitution, but neither side can agree on it.


I find this whole event fascinating. I can't think of a single precedent in post-World War II Western Civilization if it occurs. That's why this crisis intrigues me. Canada and Quebec came within 1% of the vote in the 1990s, but the split still did not happen there. The only country breakups and border changes we've had in recent history were Central and Eastern Europe after the Iron Curtain fell just because the states were no longer sustainable when there was no communist strongman dictator to hold the state together (best example of that being Tito in Yugoslavia), there's been some independence movements in far off spots in the world (East Timor from Indonesia, Eritrea from Ethiopia) and occasional mergers (West and East Germany, South and North Vietnam), but this is the first time in most people's lifetimes that a culture mostly similar to ours (similar meaning western civilization) is seeing a breakup due to political reasons. These sorts of things, from the perspective of your "globalization is king, nationalism is dead" type, should not happen in "an enlightened country".

[StateBoiler]

Remind me, what are they arguing about?

This article is from September and provides the background.

http://crisisinbelgium.blogspot.com/2007/09/what-are-issues-that-have-hampered.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Bono]

Here's an idea. Although I don't think the European Union (not to mention Belgians) would let it happen as it violates democratic principles.

-King Albert temporarily takes absolute power and suspends the constitution.
-King Albert, flanked by advisors, writes a new constitution that handles the constitutional problems the country are facing and the politicians are incapable of compromising on.
-After a period of time recalls the elected Parliament that has not yet seated, and has them vote on the new constitution he has drawn up. I'm not familiar with Belgian law, but I assume all he needs is a simple majority. Due to the threat of "loss of power" via worse options if the country splits up, I think you could get a simple majority to vote for the new constitution.
-King Albert then relinquishes his absolute power and gives it back to the elected Parliament, who are no longer faced with constitutional difficulties stopping the formation of government.

Hm, first, he'd need a two thirds majority. Second, the new parliament actually has already seated, that's how they were able to vote on BHV.

[Јas]

Here's an idea. Although I don't think the European Union (or Belgians) would let it happen as it violates democratic principles.

-King Albert temporarily takes absolute power and suspends the constitution.
-King Albert, flanked by advisors, writes a new constitution that handles the constitutional problems the country are facing and the politicians are incapable of compromising on.
-After a period of time recalls the elected Parliament that has not yet seated, and has them vote on the new constitution he has drawn up. I'm not familiar with Belgian law, but I assume all he needs is a simple majority. Due to the threat of "loss of power" via worse options if the country splits up, I think you could get a simple majority to vote for the new constitution.
-King Albert then relinquishes his absolute power and gives it back to the elected Parliament, who are no longer faced with constitutional difficulties stopping the formation of government.

I think there are probably less radical 'solutions' to the problem that don't involve absolute monarchies or suspending the constitution.

Can you give one?

Well, for a start, Bono is right, a new election may well be the most reasonable way to proceed.

[StateBoiler]

Well, for a start, Bono is right, a new election may well be the most reasonable way to proceed.

They can't hold new elections until the Brussels-Halle-Vilvorde electoral district is split per the country's Supreme Court because it is unconstitutional, which is one of the sticking points on why a government can't be formed. So they can't hold new elections until that is done.

[The Mikado]

Here's an idea. Although I don't think the European Union (or Belgians) would let it happen as it violates democratic principles.

-King Albert temporarily takes absolute power and suspends the constitution.
-King Albert, flanked by advisors, writes a new constitution that handles the constitutional problems the country are facing and the politicians are incapable of compromising on.
-After a period of time recalls the elected Parliament that has not yet seated, and has them vote on the new constitution he has drawn up. I'm not familiar with Belgian law, but I assume all he needs is a simple majority. Due to the threat of "loss of power" via worse options if the country splits up, I think you could get a simple majority to vote for the new constitution.
-King Albert then relinquishes his absolute power and gives it back to the elected Parliament, who are no longer faced with constitutional difficulties stopping the formation of government.

I think there are probably less radical 'solutions' to the problem that don't involve absolute monarchies or suspending the constitution.

Can you give one?

Well, for a start, Bono is right, a new election may well be the most reasonable way to proceed.

Wouldn't that just reinforce Vlaams Belang's message that Belgium doesn't work and drive more Flemish voters into their camp?

[Хahar 🤔]

Well, for a start, Bono is right, a new election may well be the most reasonable way to proceed.

They can't hold new elections until the Brussels-Halle-Vilvorde electoral district is split per the country's Supreme Court because it is unconstitutional, which is one of the sticking points on why a government can't be formed. So they can't hold new elections until that is done.

It's a Catch-22.

[Bono]

Well, for a start, Bono is right, a new election may well be the most reasonable way to proceed.

They can't hold new elections until the Brussels-Halle-Vilvorde electoral district is split per the country's Supreme Court because it is unconstitutional, which is one of the sticking points on why a government can't be formed. So they can't hold new elections until that is done.

So, they do that with the current parliament.

[Verily]

Well, for a start, Bono is right, a new election may well be the most reasonable way to proceed.

They can't hold new elections until the Brussels-Halle-Vilvorde electoral district is split per the country's Supreme Court because it is unconstitutional, which is one of the sticking points on why a government can't be formed. So they can't hold new elections until that is done.

So, they do that with the current parliament.

The previous Parliament has been dissolved, and the majority of the previous Parliament opposed splitting the district anyway. (The only parties which support splitting it are CD&V-NVA and Vlaams Belang, though Sp.A has not been very committed in its opposition.)

Also, although Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde is illegal under the Constitution, it is also plainly the proper decision to keep it; the Francophone regions around Brussels should be annexed to Brussels, and want to be, but the Flemish are trying to impose themselves again. (Merging them would create a corridor from Wallonia to Brussels, horror of horrors!)

[Bono]

Well, for a start, Bono is right, a new election may well be the most reasonable way to proceed.

They can't hold new elections until the Brussels-Halle-Vilvorde electoral district is split per the country's Supreme Court because it is unconstitutional, which is one of the sticking points on why a government can't be formed. So they can't hold new elections until that is done.

So, they do that with the current parliament.

The previous Parliament has been dissolved, and the majority of the previous Parliament opposed splitting the district anyway. (The only parties which support splitting it are CD&V-NVA and Vlaams Belang, though Sp.A has not been very committed in its opposition.)

Also, although Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde is illegal under the Constitution, it is also plainly the proper decision to keep it; the Francophone regions around Brussels should be annexed to Brussels, and want to be, but the Flemish are trying to impose themselves again. (Merging them would create a corridor from Wallonia to Brussels, horror of horrors!)

Hm, I don't know what you are talking about. I'm talking of the current parliament, the one elected in June, which has already been seated, and in a committee, has voted to break up BHV in a near unanimous vote by the Flemish parties.

[Хahar 🤔]

It's the amazing disappearing Belgium!

[The Mikado]

It's the amazing disappearing Belgium!

That gives Flanders to the Dutch and Wallonia to the French, right?  What about Brussels?

[Joe Republic]

What about Brussels?

In all seriousness, I wonder if it would be granted its own autonomous status as the capital of the EU, in a similar way to DC in the USA, or the ACT in Australia?