End of Belgium?

[RotStern]

'Get ready for break-up,' says top Belgian minister
One of Belgium's top politicians warned the country's citizens on Sunday to "get ready for the break-up of Belgium," as King Albert II seeks to relaunch knife-edge coalition talks.

Leading francophone Socialist Laurette Onkelinx, considered a potential successor to party chief Elio Di Rupo, who gave up on negotiations with separatist Flemish leaders on Friday, gave her prognosis in a newspaper interview.

"Let's hope it doesn't come to that because if we split, it will be the weakest who will pay the heaviest price," she told La Derniere Heure. "On the other hand, we can no longer ignore that among a large part of the Flemish population, it's their wish.

"So yes, we have to get ready for the break-up of Belgium. Otherwise we're cooked.

"When I look at the letters I receive, loads of people think it's possible. (Our) politicians have to be prepared," underlined the current caretaker minister for the federal state, by way of contrast with the rapid evolution of Flemish political thinking.

Albert II tasked late on Saturday the respective speakers of the French-speaking Wallonia and Dutch-speaking Flanders state parliaments to try once more to navigate seven-party talks aimed at securing some form of government, other than the existing day-to-day formation.

That came after seven weeks of efforts by Di Rupo, who says that the biggest Flemish party, the independence-minded N-VA, rejected the widest set of concessions towards full autonomy in francophone Belgium's tortured recent history.

Belgium, which holds the administrative chair of the European Union until the end of the year, adding a further layer to the pressure on the sovereign, has not been able to point to a stable government since June 2007

Another leading francophone Socialist official, Philippe Moureaux, breached the break-up taboo this week when he said Belgium was on the verge of a "progressive organisation of separation." This can't be much good for the workers of Belgium.

Edit: Read more @ http://www.expatica.com/be/news/belgian-news/-get-ready-for-break-up--says-top-belgian-minister_94083.html
http://www.deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws.english/news/100905_demotte

[Q]

The divide-and-rule talk about the community question from the ruling classes is perhaps entering a phase in which it takes a life of its own in the minds of the masses. In such cases things could move quickly. Belgium didn't have a federal government in what, two years now? While much of this is empty sensation-press crap, I can imagine things going up to a boiling point at some point down the line.

This would be a huge setback for the working class, not only have we yet another division to deal with, but it also will whip up nationalist sentiments for a long period. Also the city of Brussels is going to be a big issue in any actual partition of the country: who would get the financial heart of the country?

[Dimentio]

Brussels could possibly become a third state, a sort of DC area for Europe.

I don't think it would be such a huge problem if both countries remained in the European Union. It could actually serve to make them focus on more vital issues. As it looks now, Belgium could - if the economic situation is worsened - break-up in a more violent fashion. So its better to have a velvet divorce.

[Svoboda]

This can't be much good for the workers of Belgium.

Edit: Read more @ http://www.expatica.com/be/news/belgian-news/-get-ready-for-break-up--says-top-belgian-minister_94083.html
http://www.deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws.english/news/100905_demotte
Why wouldn't it be good? Just make a French state and a dutch state and stop the stupid infighting that is occuring between the language lines.

[Q]

Brussels could possibly become a third state, a sort of DC area for Europe.

I don't think it would be such a huge problem if both countries remained in the European Union. It could actually serve to make them focus on more vital issues. As it looks now, Belgium could - if the economic situation is worsened - break-up in a more violent fashion. So its better to have a velvet divorce.


Why wouldn't it be good? Just make a French state and a dutch state and stop the stupid infighting that is occuring between the language lines.

You're both missing the point here. This community question started as a means to have a great long term mechanism of divide and rule from the position of the bourgeoisie. Once Belgium is partitioned the ruling class will have to find a new divide and rule strategy, probably get on the anti-muslim bandwagon.

Meanwhile not only the Belgian but the European working class is stuck with the mess of waves of reactionary and backward ideas that run counter to working class unity across the continent.

This would be a huge blow.

[Wanted Man]

Brussels could possibly become a third state, a sort of DC area for Europe.

I don't think it would be such a huge problem if both countries remained in the European Union. It could actually serve to make them focus on more vital issues. As it looks now, Belgium could - if the economic situation is worsened - break-up in a more violent fashion. So its better to have a velvet divorce.

What are these "more vital issues"? It's true that it would be easier for the bourgeoisie to make a "divorce" happen. It would be highly efficient for them. That's what they've been trying for years now: whip up a nationalistic frenzy in Flanders and make separation a reality. With a working-class that's completely caught up in nationalism, it would be easy to pass all kinds of reforms to get rid of those pesky unions and shit like that. All of this is well-known. I can see why this appeals to you. :rolleyes:


Why wouldn't it be good? Just make a French state and a dutch state and stop the stupid infighting that is occuring between the language lines.

See above, and see Q's post. In reality, it would only be the beginning of "stupid infighting".

[Dimentio]

What are these "more vital issues"? It's true that it would be easier for the bourgeoisie to make a "divorce" happen. It would be highly efficient for them. That's what they've been trying for years now: whip up a nationalistic frenzy in Flanders and make separation a reality. With a working-class that's completely caught up in nationalism, it would be easy to pass all kinds of reforms to get rid of those pesky unions and shit like that. All of this is well-known. I can see why this appeals to you. :rolleyes:



See above, and see Q's post. In reality, it would only be the beginning of "stupid infighting".

If they actually are divided, then people could (hopefully) focus on social rights-related issues instead.

[Wanted Man]

That's a very naive kind of hope to have.

[Dimentio]

It doesn't seem to be very much of a hope for it to would be any better in a situation like the current one, where a large part of the Flemish don't want to be a part of Belgium at all.

[Kayser_Soso]

I say why not? The EU and NATO have been practicing divide and conquer in Eastern Europe since 1991, preaching about the self-determination of every nationalist group led by some local bureaucrat who wants to be a bigger fish by shrinking the pond. Meanwhile Basques and other Western European minorities had no chance of self-determination. It's a lot like post WWI when the right of self-determination was reserved for European countries and not colonial possessions in Asia or Africa.

[Tower of Bebel]

It doesn't seem to be very much of a hope for it to would be any better in a situation like the current one, where a large part of the Flemish don't want to be a part of Belgium at all.
Says who Dimentio? You're arguments are basically hot air. What's not "vital" about politicians searching for the means to get the 25 billion euros they need to get rid of an excesive public debt? That's vital! And worse: people like you and me have to pay for it.

What you say about the Flemish is not true. If there were any such sentiments they have started to change... into their opposites. People become more and more apolitical - as a result of current politics. They don't want to talk about politics like they used to. They don't even want to talk about independence. They have arguably voted for the only "democratic" party not involved with the "squabbling" over federal government: the Flemish nationalists.

Do they support the programme of Flemish nationalism? Only a small minority wants separation, and even less want severe budget cuts. Yet, this is what it's all about: devide and rule to make it easier for capitalism to cut spending. Making Belgium "a healthier state", making it "more efficient", giving comunities (like the Flemish) more "responsabilities" is a cover-up for neoliberalism.

Our goal should be the broadest unity of the working class. Self-determination, the right to speak in ones own language, etc. ? Yes, we need that. But self-determination doesn't equal "national independence". Since differences between Walloons and Flemings are not genuine cultural differences - sure there's a difference in language, but who cares? -, less one of "nationality", why split from the point of view of the working class? Why not fight for democracy while arguing for the unity of Flemish and Francophone workers? To make sure people are not diverted... by the current dispute? You cannot even find a solid argument for this. In more unitary countries like The Netherlands or France they've found another scapegoat. Take Muslims for example. You want us to deport the muslims so we can get to the more "vital" issues? There's always a dispute among rulers, and there will always be a form of divertion following from it.

It's typical for Belgian media - followed by international media of course - to focus on what certain politicians said about splitting Belgium. Journalists, due to time and money saving devices, don't dig deeper and just write nice stories that could get some attention. However, even the biggest nationalist involved in the current dispute, De Wever, aknowledges you cannot simply split the country. Sure, they don't want revolution. It takes time for a split to occure and the biggest problem on the road to a two-state solution is Brussels. Who gets Brussels? Both want it. Brussels is too small to live of its own. Who wants to pay for the billions Brussels needs... in times of crisis? Nobody wants to. This is a constant contradiction in Belgian politics. One moment politicians are in favour of separation, the other day they preach unity.

Before you believe what a politician says you should take a look at his political agenda. And maybe you can also start to investigate how the media functions in all this. Well phrased or even spectacular words are handy fig leaves for nasty decissions like the refusal to pay any more money for Flemish education in Brussels. In order to do this some scapegoated the government of Brussels. Why such a decission, and why such a fig leaf? Because it is basically a means to gain the millions to please the financial sector without arousing ordinary people.

[Revy]

Another case of language divisions. Could these nationalists possibly realize that a multilingual state is not such an impossible thing?

If you think about it....that's all nation-states ever were, language-based entities. The divisions of the world throughout history and today reflect that.

A few exceptions exist, like Pakistan, where religion was more of a factor. Or post-colonial states, their borders having being drawn arbitrarily by colonial powers. Even then, language emerges as the guiding force of new conflicts.

If the Quebecois spoke English, how popular would their independence movement be? Ask that question for all the other such movements. And you come to a realization: new nationalisms, old nationalisms, they're all led by the ignorant who refuse to learn any bit of other languages or cultures.

Because there is a vacuous emptiness of struggle, the left opportunistically supports these movements, hoping that through them they can find some relevance. By propping up bourgeois nationalists, all that is accomplished is the carving up of more of the world into new and slimmer capitalist states.

But at least we can live in Flanders without having to dial 1 for Flemish!:rolleyes:

[Wanted Man]

It doesn't seem to be very much of a hope for it to would be any better in a situation like the current one, where a large part of the Flemish don't want to be a part of Belgium at all.

I really don't get this line at all. Yeah, let's encourage, expand and formalise the divisions between working-class people that are constantly being whipped up by politicians, media, business, etc. Sounds like a plan. Again, without trying to minimise concerns that do exist among people, it would seem incredibly naive to pretend that Flemish separatism is really acting on the political will of the great masses there. It's much more superficial than that, a fig leaf, as Rakunin says (excellent post, btw).

You yourself even said that the main way to make these tensions worse would be a worsening in the economic situation. That may well be possible, but it's a different thing from what people are proposing here. On the other hand, nobody in Flanders would seriously be willing to take up arms purely for the sake of those small Flemish communities surrounding Brussels that are being "Frenchified" (one supposed "major issue" of Belgian politics), never mind Brussels itself, a "Flemish" city that has been "Frenchified" for a long time now.


I say why not? The EU and NATO have been practicing divide and conquer in Eastern Europe since 1991, preaching about the self-determination of every nationalist group led by some local bureaucrat who wants to be a bigger fish by shrinking the pond.

So let's do it! Brilliant conclusion. :rolleyes: