Fixed again, after 494 days

 

 Alexander De Croo, 44 years old, and since 2012 deputy prime minister in the federal government for the Flemish liberals, is the new prime minister of Belgium. He  presented the program of a seven-party coalition of two socialist, two liberal, two green and the Flemish Christian-democratic parties this afternoon in the plenary of the European Parliament (as the Belgian federal Chamber has moved 1,5 km to the east,  in order to have 150 Belgian MP’s present, while keeping social distance of 1,5 meter). The vote of confidence will take place on Saturday afternoon.  Earlier on Thursday, at 10:30, the new government was sworn in at the Royal Palace in the presence of king Philip (picture, De Croo is the second from the left, first row, standing between his predecessor Sophie Wilmès and the king)

 

 De Croo is a surprising choice as he is a member of a party that was only fifth in the hierarchy of parties with the most votes at the elections of 26 May 2019, and as his party is even only the second largest Flemish party (in votes) in the new government. The main reason for that is the fact that the two largest parties, the Flemish nationalists and the extreme right Vlaams Belang, are in opposition and have together with the 4 MPs from the extreme left a slight majority of all Flemish seats in the parliament. Paul Magnette, the president of the largest group in the new government, the French-speaking socialists, believed it was wiser to leave the lead of the government to a Flemish politician.

 

 The two previous prime minister were both French-speaking, after all prime ministers between 1973 and 2011 were Flemish. In that latter period the prime minister was always the leader of the largest group in Parliament. But that implicit rule - there are almost no explicit rules on the prime ministership in the Constitution - has been undermined by the complicated relations between the two nationalities in Belgium since the Flemish nationalist NVA became the largest group in 2010 (it still is). It is one of the growing elements of instability in the formation of governments, explaining why it took so long - 494 days - to have a new government after the last elections. Since the fall of the last government with a full majority at the end of 2018, 654 days have passed.

 

 The Flemish liberals, the party of De Croo that commands only 12 of the 150 seats in the Chamber, had a pivotal position after the last elections and has played its cards best, including the cynicism to lengthen the crisis with many months during a pandemic in order to see the prime ministership arriving in the hands of De Croo instead of the then party president Gwendolyn Rutten, who was on the same track already in November 2019. 

 The socialists seem to have scored best in a government program with much money flowing towards social expenditures, although the two Flemish parties that were already in the previous centre-right coalition of Charles Michel have obtained that the measures of that government should not be reversed. The year-on budget deficit will rise to 10 % this year, to be reduced to 8 % next, at least on paper. The effect of the European Recovery Fund is not yet in that amount. The global public debt is likely to rise to 125 % gdp in the next years.

 

 In his first statement yesterday the prime-minister designated stressed the need for mutual respect and denounced the brutality of present-day political debates. It seems indeed that the potentially quite unstable coalition of seven parties has only a chance to survive if it can demonstrate unity in governing the country again, after the political class failed to do so, even during the worst health crisis in a century. The composition of the new government, that was gradually announced by the party presidents during last night, is one with eight female ministers and seven male (including the prime minister), so for the first time gender-balanced. 

 

 Both Flemish opposition parties seem in the meantime indeed to have opted for quite a macho and almost ‘Trumpian’ approach of opposition, showering harsh words and brutal images over the new coalition (‘The Flemish liberals have gone on their knees, opened their mouth and you do not want to know what they swallowed’, dixit Bart de Wever, the president of the NVA and mayor of Antwerp). They hope to obtain an elected majority for an independent Flanders in 2024, for which they failed just 5 seats in the Flemish Parliament (on a majority of 64 seats) in 2019.

 And with that line we bring to an end this episode of crisisinBelgium, the fourth one since 2007, and the longest one after that of 2010. It is rather unlikely that this will be the last one ..

Two for the last straight line

 At day 484 of the Belgian government negotiations king Philip has at last been able to send out a real 'formateur' to create a new government. Correction: he has sent out two, strengthening the impression that much remains to be solved, not the least the name of the new prime minister.

 King Philip received the two 'pre-formateurs', Conner Rousseau (president of the Flemish socialists) and Egbert Lachaert (president of the Flemish liberals) for their report at the Royal Palace in Brussels on Wednesday at 18:30. That was two days later than planned, as on Sunday a row had broken out about the manoeuvres and declarations of Georges-Louis Bouchez, the president of the French-speaking liberals.

Lachaert and Roussau (on the picture the latter just enters his official Volkswagen, while the liberal is already seated in his official Mercedes, after both made a declaration together at the gates of the Palace this evening) in the end still could report that they had achieved a basic agreement on the main issues between the seven parties around the table: two socialist, two liberal, two greens and the Flemish Christian democrats, controlling together 88 of the 150 seats in the federal parliament.

 Thereupon the Palace announced at 19:15 that the king had designated Paul Magnette, the president of the French-speaking socialists, and Alexander De Croo, since 2013 deputy prime minister for the Flemish liberals, to become the 'co-formateurs' of the new government. The formateur is normally the last negotiator before the government is formed.

 The fact that there were two formateurs to be sent out, was widely interpreted as an indication that there is still no agreement on who will become the next prime minister. Besides it is also obvious that the agreement both 'pre-formateurs' claimed to have obtained is indeed very 'general' and that many details have still to be negotiated, including the way to finance all those promises.

 On the other hand the latest evolutions seem to indicate a rather strong will among the seven parties to take the road together, if only to avoid new elections. The two formateurs have to report to the king on the 28th of August, so next Monday.

 

Corona slowdown

 

 

 Belgian government negotiations, today in their 473th day, have slowed down this week, due to a positive corona-test last Tuesday of Egbert Lachaert, the president of the Flemish liberals and one of the two ‘pre-formateurs’. Other negotiators, and even king Philip, then also took the corona-test, but nobody had a positive result. Nevertheless, all have to stay at home to have a second test confirming the first one.

 

 Meanwhile the negotiations have to take place online. As it is usual that the last round to reach an agreement is also a physical competition, whereby the negotiators play on each other’s exhaustion and the compromise is often reached after dawn, the deadline for a breakthrough was postponed.

 

 In principle the two ‘pre-formateurs’ sent out on 4 September by king Philip, Lachaert and his socialist colleague Conner Rousseau, should have reported to the king on Friday the 11th. After that a ‘formateur’ – most likely the designated prime minister of the new coalition – should have been sent out to do the real negotiations on political compromises. In reality, there has been no progress on the thorny issue of who will lead the coalition.

 

 Rousseau and Lachaert reported via telephone to the King on Friday. Their mission has now been prolonged with one week. In the official statement the 1st of October was indicated as the date where the new government should come into life. The negotiators also stated that, ‘it is important that the present federal minority government will continue to operate with full competences until that date’.

 

 The present government of Sophie Wilmès, which was a minority government (with only 38 of the 150 seats in the present parliament) since December 2018, indeed obtained the support of a parliamentary majority last 17 March, in order to combat the corona-crisis. Wilmès then announced that she would try to obtain the confidence again six months later, on 17 September.

 

 That date has now been postponed to 1 October. Nevertheless, as the extreme right opposition (Vlaams Belang) has laid down a motion of no-confidence, a vote will still take place next Thursday.

Did you say breakthrough?

 

At day 465 in the Belgian government negotiations a breakthrough was announced: formal negotiations are going to start between seven political parties. King Philip appointed the previous negotiator Egbert Lachaert as ‘pre-formateur’ and added the president of the Flemish socialists, 27-years old Conner Rousseau, in the same role. That move is intriguing.

 

 In the last week Lachaert seems to have convinced the Flemish Christian democrats to make at least a try at negotiations with the two socialist, liberal and green parties. Together they have a majority of 87 of the 150 seats in the federal parliament. The French-speaking Christian democrats, with 5 seats and although interested again (they said last year they would choose for opposition), were dumped at the request of the other French-speaking parties.

 

 The recently elected party president of the Flemish liberals was therefore announcing good news to king Philip when he came to report about his mission at the Brussels palace on Friday at 2 pm. Although there are many compromises still to be made, formal negotiations at last can start, the first time in 465 days. The king immediately reappointed him, gave a formal name to his mission (‘pre-formateur’) and nominated Conner Roussau in the same role.

 

 Both in the evening gave an interview on the Flemish public television – Rousseau in the news, Lachaert in the news analysis program afterwards – in which especially the liberal opened wide perspectives on good compromises about long-term reforms. Lachaert, impressively voluntaristic, even spoke about an attempt to set the guidelines until 2030.

 

 Asked why he seems to succeed where so many failed, the liberal party president claimed that he had shown respect for all his counterparts, whereas up to now too many negotiators had tried to push people into compromises from a position of force and even with threats. Lachaert was himself three weeks ago responsible for the break-up of the negotiations between the Flemish nationalists and the French-speaking socialists, saying that Bart De Wever, the president of the nationalists, had played his cards far too heavy-handed.

 

  Both he and Rousseau indicated that this would be their sole interview and that they would keep up radio-silence again until the end of their mission, which king Philip indeed put on 11 September, next Friday. The two pre-formateurs also said that their main mission is to find out who will succeed them as the real ‘formateur’, the person who should lead the negotiations and become the prime minister if successful.

 

 It was indeed expected that king Philip would have designated one or two ‘formateurs’ yesterday, among them Paul Magnette. The fact that he appointed two Flemish politicians – whereas normally a tandem is formed of politicians of each language community – seems to indicate that the problem is on the French-speaking side.

 

 Magnette in an interview on Thursday said that if a French-speaking politician is accepted as prime minister, his party has the right to claim the job as the biggest one in French-speaking Belgium, and because the socialist ‘family’ (both socialist parties together) is the largest one in parliament. And that he is ready to take up the task if confined to him.

 

 But it seems that this was not accepted by his French-speaking liberal counterpart Georges-Louis Bouchez during a quite noisy meeting on Thursday evening. Besides there seem to be some claims on the Flemish side too. The four Flemish parties taken together command only 42 of the 89 Flemish seats in the federal parliament. This would be ammunition for the Flemish opposition, the two largest parties in that part of the country, the right-wing nationalists and the extreme-right (and also separatist) Vlaams Belang.

 

 Lachaert and Rousseau yesterday argued that 48 % of the votes in Flanders is sufficient legitimacy and that many previous federal governments did not have a majority in each part of the country. But comments in the media do not exclude that a Flemish prime minister would be a good way to compensate this, even if he does not lead the biggest political group in the government (which is the PS, followed by the MR).

 Each of the four Flemish parties in the federal-government-in-the-making commands only 6 or 8 % of the seats in parliament. Should nevertheless a Flemish politician be needed tot become prime minister, the Flemish liberal Alexander De Croo is the most likely candidate, although the Flemish Christian democrats last week claimed they had obtained more votes (but as many seats in the parliament) in the elections of 2019.

 

 Yesterday morning Gwendolyn Rutten, Lachaert’s predecessor as head of the liberals, posted on Instagram the at that time controversial picture again she posted first in November last year. In it she is blowing a bubble that takes the colours of green, purple ('purple-green was the name of the first and only coalition of socialists, liberals and greens between 1999 and 2003) and orange, the colour of the Christian democrats. (picture). Rutten seemed last autumn on her way to become prime minister of such a coalition, but was torpedoed by her own party. Among the crew of the U-boot were Lachaert and De Croo, using the argument that such a coalition would be bad for the country and its liberals.

 

 Rutten nevertheless congratulated Lachaert with his breakthrough in a tweet later on Friday. It might become a long and thrilling week in Belgian politics.

Last try, heading for center left

 

 King Philip has given Egbert Lachaert, the president of the Flemish liberals, one more week to start formal government negotiations in Belgium. At day 459 it seems that in three weeks there will be either a center-left government or a decision for new elections.

 

 Lachaert started his negotiations on 18 August. And although he refuses to confirm it explicitly, it is obvious that he is working on a center-left coalition with liberals, socialists and greens and eventually the Christian democrats. Without the latter – leading to a reconstruction of the first 'purple-green' coalition of Guy Verhofstadt in the years 1999-2003 – the coalition would have 76 of the 150 seats in the federal parliament. It will in any way not have a majority among the Flemish MPs.

 

 The negotiator is working on a note of 50 pages to propose to his coalition partners. Up to now he encountered frozen reactions with the socialists – who suggest they obtained less from him than from Bart De Wever of the N-VA in the beginning of August. The Christian democrats for their part express serious doubts, maybe only to raise the prize. The greens seem to be the most willing. Lachaert received on Friday one week from king Philip to bring a workable majority around one negotiating table, something which has happened only a few moments in the previous 459 days, each time in vain.

 

 Before that the president of the Flemish socialists, Conner Rousseau, declared that if this attempt fails, he will seek new elections. This is indeed the most likely scenario in that case. On 17 September parliament will meet to see if it confirms its vote of confidence, that it gave on 17 March to the caretaking government of Sophie Wilmès, in order to tackle the corona-crisis.

 

 The intriguing question these days is why Egbert Lachaert changed his mind. Last November, when the then liberal party president Gwendolyn Rutten was manoeuvring to take part in a coalition of greens, socialists and liberals – eventually with herself at the head – Lachaert, who was in the running to succeed her, was the most strong advocate against this coalition, pleading instead to work with the Flemish nationalist.

 

 Now, almost ten months later, he takes the same direction as Rutten. The difference might be that he had then the support of Alexander De Croo, today minister of Finances and deputy prime minister. He seems to have it today again, for the other option. De Croo might turn out to become the next prime minister, if Paul Magnette, the president of the French-speaking socialists, thinks this is better to defend the vulnerable Flemish flank of the new government to form.

 

 In one week we might see more clear.

 

 

 

The doubter to lift the doubt

 

King Philip has appointed Egbert Lachaert, the new president of the Flemish liberals, to seek an outcome for the Belgian government formation, today in its 448^th day. He received no official title, and will report on the 28^th of August. The days of the still present government Wilmès II seem now numbered.

 

 King Philip started his consultations on his return from holiday on Monday morning. Until Tuesday noon he spoke to all party presidents, except those of the extreme left and the extreme right. Then Tuesday afternoon at about 3 pm the palace announced that the King had accepted the resignation of Bart De Wever and Paul Magnette and had appointed Lachaert to take ‘the necessary initiatives with the aim of forming a government with a wide majority in parliament”. 

 

 Lachaert received no official title for his mission. Indeed there is officially still a government with a working parliamentary majority: the government of Sophie Wilmès, that is composed of the two liberal parties and the Flemish Christian democrats. This was a caretaking minority government from 18 December 2018 until 15 March 2020. It then obtained the support of a majority of parliament to combat the corona-crisis. It will face a confidence vote on 17 September, when parliament returns.

 

 As both socialist parties and the Flemish nationalists have indicated they will vote against her government, they have, together with the two extremes, a majority of 83 votes. There is no doubt that this number is sufficient to topple the government, but there are some ambiguities in the constitution. If Wilmès hands in her resignation before a vote, parliament is obliged to vote for new elections to prevent her of staying on indefinitely as caretaker government.

 

 King Philip took back the initiative that he has to form a government on 20 July after some, in the end rather confusing attempts were made outside the normal procedure via the Palace. The argument was that the king’s role is limited to periods when there is only a caretaking government.

 

 Egbert Lachaert is 41, from Merelbeke in the province of Eastern Flanders. He was elected in the federal parliament in 2014, became group leader of Open VLD (the Flemish liberals) in July 2019 and was elected party president with a large majority on 22 May this year.

 

 The last few days he has widely been blamed for the failure of the attempt of Bart De Wever and Paul Magnette to form a government based on the two largest parties in each region. Indeed the Flemish liberals have been internally divided and constantly wavering, including Lachaert himself, on the course to follow ever since the aftermath of the elections of 26 May 2019.

 

 Lachaert replied that it was the inflexibility of De Wever and Magnette that caused the failure. It is not unusual for the palace to send out the person who is perceived to have killed the previous attempt. The new negotiator announced on Tuesday afternoon that he will work in all discretion.

 

Announcing failure

 

 Paul Magnette and Bart De Wever, the two royal negotiatiors that were sent out by king Philip on 20 July to form at last a Belgian government, have leaked to the press today that they will hand in their mission next Monday, in failure. Although this is as yet not official and leaves two full days for a last round of poker, the odds are that the best change to form a stable government is now gone. Elections should be the only remaining outcome.

 

 Friday was Day 444 in the government negotiations in Belgium after the elections of 26 May 2019. Since the 20^th of July the leaders of the biggest party in each part of the country were at last working together to build a coalition that would tackle all the crises that the country is suffering from: corona, the economy and the consequences of the devastating election result last year.

 

 De Wever and Magnette, respectively the leader of the Flemish nationalists and the French-speaking socialists, succeeded in convincing the Flemish socialists, and both Christian democratic parties to start negotiations. Together they have 70 of the 150 seats in the federal parliament. They need a sixth partner to reach a majority.

 

 Both tried since two weeks to convince at least one of the two liberal parties to participate. The two together was not acceptable for Magnette, as this looked too much a reconduction of the previous centre-right government, with only the socialists (and the small French-speaking Christian democrats) added.

 

 As for De Wever his aversion against the French-speaking liberals has been growing, and especially against its new president George-Louis Bouchez, who opposes new institutional reforms. When the liberals maintained they would either enter together or stay out together, and put up some tough counterproposals to those of Magnette and De Wever, the latter went to the media last Saturday to denounce Bouchez publicly.

 

 After that both negotiators started talks with both green parties. But is unclear – certainly for the Flemish nationalists – if this attempt was genuine, or just a tool to pressure the liberals. Jean-Marc Nollet, the president of the French-speaking greens, has always been the most outspoken adversary of a coalition with the N-VA in it.

 

 A coup the theatre followed on Thursday. Greens and liberals issued together a press statement wherein they refused to be played out against each other again. Magnette and De Wever had brief meetings this morning with first the greens and then the liberals, which were quite icy in atmosphere. From noon onwards they started to leak their view: that they will go to the King on Monday on his return from holiday to hand in their mission.

 

 This leaves two days in which discreet contacts might still force a breakthrough, under the pressure of the political disaster that the failure of Magnette and De Wever inevitably would be. After they failed to meet in March, at the beginning of the corona-crisis, they now seem to have reached a fragile balance of aims to start negotiations, with institutional reform on the one hand and some kind of social generosity on the other. The personal relationship also seems to have widely improved.

 

 Ever since both parties came out as the strongest in each region in 2010 it is obvious they will have to talk to each other and work together as the only possible constellation to stabilise Belgium. Indeed, if Belgium would fall apart, the same parties would be doomed to find an agreement on separation.

 

 But after Magnette came out as an unpredictable negotiator in March, this time it is mainly Bart De Wever, already reputed to be a too heavy-handed negotiator with his partners, that lost his nerve in coming out with remarks you should keep inside as long as you are at the steering wheel. The negotiations skills of former prime ministers like Jean-Luc Dehaene, Guy Verhofstadt or Elio di Rupo are clearly failing in this crisis.

 

 Having said that, it is even more obvious that greens and liberals, whatever their argument that they needed more change on the proposals of the negotiators, have killed an historic moment with pitiful tactical considerations. The greens clearly are afraid of risks, the Flemish liberals, as a party and in their leadership, have not the slightest idea of what they really want.

 

 As for MR-president Bouchez he is more and more suspected of wanting to keep as long as possible the present government of Sophie Wilmès in power, which might in a crucial vote on 17 September in Parliament have lost all support, except that of the two liberal parties (26 seats together, not even 20 %). In that government the MR has seven ministers and a few hundred cabinet staff.

 

 The sudden alliance of greens and liberals on Thursday has created the suggestion that they will be the next to try another coalition of socialists, liberals and greens, eventually joined by the Christian democrats. The N-VA would remain outside. Such a government would have no majority of seats in Flanders, and is so, even if it is formed, unlikely to stay on for long.

 

 The paradox behind all this is that the opportunities to score and reform have never been greater. Institutional reform is obviously needed after the corona-mess and the elections of last year. There is wide scope for generous social policies, at least in the health sector and probably also about worker’s rights in enterprises. Liberal policies are needed for the hard-hit self-employed workers, against bureaucracy and for direct democracy and decentralisation. Climate change could create a mobilising investment project at the core of relaunching the economy, with for instance funds to isolate homes of the poor. Budgetary discussions should be limited to a tentative policy for the next ten years, as no one can for the moment predict what will be defined as sound budgetary policies even so soon as next year. All this lies hic et nunc on the table, but very few see it.

 

 The most likely outcome of the present mess are new elections, somewhere in October or early November. If one or two parties succeed in bringing over a sense of dramatic choice for the future of the country to the voters, it might rollback the result of last year, the most polarised and unstable parliament in the history of Belgium. But given all the bad impressions that have been created during the long, long and never sustained negotiations, the result might even be worse.

 

 

 

 

 

Just like starting over

On Day 419 of Belgium’s agonizing search for a new federal government, suddenly there is what may be the beginning of a breakthrough. The two big boys take over, Paul Magnette from the Parti Socialiste and Bart De Wever from the Flemish nationalists. They formalized this to the outside world in a sober bow before king Philipp (both!) and distinct but coordinated video-messages on Twitter.

 

  The funeral bells for Belgium were already tolling when the last attempt to form a government, by three new presidents of three smaller parties bickering among themselves, turned into ridicule. Then last Monday the news came out that Paul Magnette had announced to his party bureau that he wanted to make a new attempt to form a government with the N-VA. The last time he tried, he was rebuffed by this party bureau, on 15 March this year. This time he seemed to get through, at least for the moment.

 

 The three presidents, who were trying to form a new government without the normal royal mission to do so – as there is indeed officially a functioning government with a parliamentary majority – on Sunday wisely concluded that their task had to be put on a hold. Then on Monday afternoon, a few astonishing events followed.

 

 It was learned that De Wever and Magnette were about to be received by the king at 16.30 at the Royal Palace in the heart of Brussels. This was just in time to have the cameras taking Magnette and De Wever together at their arrival, after which first the socialist party president, then the leader of the Flemish nationalists made a discreet bow when they met the king (picture VRT). Philipp asked both to pose with him before the cameras and then took them inside. After half an hour the Palace announced that the king had asked both ‘to take the necessary initiatives to form a government that can be supported by a large majority in the parliament’.

 

 Both then, clearly in a coordinated way, send out a video-message of about one minute, Magnette at 19.00, De Wever forty minutes later. Both stressed the need to take up responsibility in a moment of deep crisis, - ‘we are the sole country without urgent health plan and without an urgent recovery program’ Magnette said - even if negotiations will not be easy. De Wever said the PS had accepted to discuss institutional reforms, and that ‘this option should be explored’. Magnette said only the socialists were able to ‘save and strengthen the social security.’

 

 It afterwards came out that both parties have had some preliminary negotiations since about three weeks. Obviously promises were made to go for an institutional reform towards more devolution – as the N-VA wants and is obviously needed after the last election results – and for a solid program of social policies – which are now on the agenda in most European countries.

 

The main difficulty will inevitably be the budgetary policies and the repartition of federal money over the regions. But the spending spree everywhere in the world these days – one and a half kilometer from the Royal Palace European leaders were still discussing a recovery program with an unseen debt level for the EU – might make this task way more easier than only six months ago.

 

 A special element in this story is the new role of the king. Although the government of Sophie Wilmès is now still in charge and the role of the king is traditionally only to help in the search for a new one after elections or the resignation of the prime minister, the Palace seems to have wanted to take the reins into its hand again. It must have foreseen that this intervention would be explained as a clear royal support for the two biggest parties of the country to seek an understanding.

 There was no official timing announced, but Magnette in his message said there are exactly fifty days before prime minister Wilmes and her government – that is composed of three parties commanding only 38 of the 150 seats in the federal parliament – will face a vote of confidence early September. And that he will in these 50 days relentlessly work to have a new and solid government.

 

Fin de régime

The last and already slightly dubious attempt to form a Belgian government has slid into ridicule in recent days. The formation process itself now seems more and more limited to an attempt to cover the long summer break before reaching the obvious conclusion: that the formation of a new Belgian government is no longer possible, at least not within the political landscape that came out of the elections of 26 May 2019, now 407 days ago. The thirteen years old crisis in Belgium is nearing its moment of truth.

 

   It was Day 346 in 2010-2011, when Belgium was on its course to break the world record of the longest government formation in the world ever (in the end it doubled the record score held up to then by Iraq to 540 days): the Belgian king appointed Elio di Ripo, the final negotiator who was to become prime minister two hundred days later, to pick up his baton that was to lead him through his long and patient pilgrimage out of the political crisis (see our article in May 2011.)

 

 In the present crisis, after 407 days, we have not even reached that point. On the Ides of March this year, just when corona was rising, the Flemish nationalist N-VA and the Parti Socialiste, the two biggest parties of the country and both also the biggest in their respective region, failed to form a government to tackle the urgency. Since then two attempts have been made to form a new majority.

 

 They both took place in the informal margin of normal procedures, as, faute de mieux, almost all parties except the two extremes, agreed in March to promote the extremely minoritarian caretaking government of Sophie Wilmès into becoming the crisis manager. That small coalition did so with much good intentions, but also with a blatant lack of legitimacy and competence to steer the country with the stronger hand that was needed in such a crisis.

 

 The first formation attempt, started by the two socialist party presidents early in May, ended in an original proposal to try a minority government of the three traditional parties. It would seek support case by case with either the Flemish nationalists (rather seldom) or the greens (probably more frequently). The fact that both presidents offered this scenario to prime minister Wilmès with the request that she should execute it, was not a signal of overconfidence in its success. It ended with Wilmès turning it down.

 

 Then, in mid-June, the two liberal party presidents and the Flemish Christian democrat party president (all three new in their job) started an attempt to lure the Flemish socialist party president, a young rising star, into support for the former coalition formula of 2014-2018, with their parties and the Flemish nationalists of N-VA. Regardless of the fact that this would again be a government with the support of only one third of the French-speaking members in the federal parliament – except if the PS would join in a later phase – the attempt has been marred by incidents, blunders, internal bickering between the three and too much selfies hiding too futile content.

 

 Which leaves now an atmosphere of fin de régime (the image shows the arrest of Louis XVI on 22 June 1792 in the village of Varennes, a few miles from the border with the then Austrain 'pays belgiques' to which he was fleeing), wherein everybody dances his last waltz to avoid thinking about the bad events that begin to thunder outside. The bad conclusions, after fifteen months of failed attempts even to start formal negotiations, are these. A majority of French-speaking parties refuses any coalition with the Flemish nationalist N-VA, without which no viable stable majority in Flanders can be created. They do so because they consider the N-VA to be too much to the right and because they fear an eventual separatist agenda. The N-VA has formally always said it is ready to speak even with the French-speaking left (Greens and socialists) and seems after its defeat in 2019 cornered by the extreme right into avoiding a role in the opposition. But it may also play a subtle game of just not trying to be the savior of Belgium (which, by the way, from its not always so strongly voiced separatist point of view seems logic, but never expect everything to be logic in Belgian politics).

 

 In one word: there is simply no longer political room for a new Belgian federal government that would have a majority, however slightly, in both language groups of the country. And after the failed experiments with governments in minority support in one part of the country – especially the last one of Charles Michel – few or even no parties are willing to accept a role in a federal government without being part of a majority in their own language group.

 

 Journalists and pundits blame the short-sighted politicians, which is of course the most stupid argument to use in an already fragilized democracy. They forget – rather shortsightedly - about the election result of 26 May 2019, the most polarized ever in 190 years of Belgium’s democratic history (see our article in March ). New elections might therefore seem the best option to break the stalemate. But all (notoriously unreliable) polls in Belgium register a lot of frustration among the electorate, about the bad soap of the formation and about the many mishandlings of corona. They announce a radical strengthening of the already boosted extremes, again to the right in Flanders, again to the left in French-speaking Belgium.

 

 In a democracy the voters are always right, even when they are wrong. If the present stalemate continues, or if new elections strengthen the antagonism between the voter’s expectations in north and south, the federal government might just rot away until the point is reached that it seems better that the regions take over its competences. That is the slow march to de facto separatism. The latter is the elephant in the room, at the latest since Flemish nationalists and the extreme right – both in principle striving for an independent Flanders – obtained together 43,5 % of the Flemish votes in the elections of 2019. In Yugoslavia, after the death of dictator Tito in 1980, it took ten years (still as communist dictatorship, so surely far from wholly comparable) for the federal government to paralyse and finally decompose.

 

 Logic then says: why not take the bold step instead, write off Belgium in one stroke and start again with independent Flanders and the rest? After more than two hundred years of language strife and more than hundred years of growing antagonism, why not consume the divorce? It could at least break the infernal circle of antagonisms that constantly reinforce each other across a 57 years ago officialized language barrier. And thanks to the existence of the European Union, its participation in a common defence (Nato), its many common policies (including migration, most of the economics and environmental rules) and its euro, the threshold to change borders has significantly been lowered, even compared with only a quarter of a century ago.

 

 There is of course the almost miraculous example of the soft split of Czechoslovakia in 1992. It is not excluded that it could happen as smoothly in Belgium, but potholes are many all along the bumpy road. Even large number of politicians of the Flemish nationalist N-VA dither to advocate openly what is officially demand number one in their party program, as they are not sure the Flemish voter will follow.

 

 Separating Flanders from Belgium – with 6,6 million inhabitants (more than eleven EU-members) and an economy quite close to the German one – seems illusory simple (probably also in the mind of many Flemish voters). But what would remain of Belgium would face a considerable financial loss and would not be sure how to go on: as an independent country on its own, split-up in at least three parts (Brussels, Wallonia and tiny German-speaking Ostbelgien, that might opt for Germany), or choosing as a whole (or without Ostbelgien) to become part of France. It is not even improbable that part of Luxemburg province (200.000 inhabitants) might opt for the Grand Duchy. Besides, Belgian nationalism may never have been a strong emotion in the north (because of a long history of language-discrimination in the past), it surely is in the French-speaking part of the country.

 

 All this makes good stuff for irrational moves – surely in the knowledge that a rational separation like in Czechoslovokia would need, o irony, a dialogue between the two big parties, so PS and N-VA.  Such irrationality could strike against the background of a public debt that, due to the corona-crash, is going to rise above 120 % of gdp. Besides, taking into account the result of 2019, for the moment the minds in Flanders on independence seems at best split fifty-fifty, which puts it on the same road as Quebec in the last decades of the 20^th century and Catalonia since 2009 towards an everlasting and maybe never fulfilled dream of independence that paralyses all other policies. Ask Oriol Junqueras, deputy chief minister of Catalonia when he was arrested on 2 November 2017, and now nearing his thousand days in prison.

 

 After exactly fifty years of devolution Flemish voters are no longer ready to applaud their Flemish regional government either. The big slogan of the beginning years – ‘what we do on our own, we do better’ – is no longer heard, and the big ambition of even moderate Christian democrats in those days – to develop administration practices that were nearing the efficiency of the Netherlands – has been abandoned. Flemish political and administrative culture has in a sense proven to be far more Belgian and Latin than the nationalists were ready to believe. One can indeed, if generalising is supposed to be useful, say that the Flemish are in their culture the most Latin of all European peoples that use a Germanic language, even more than that other nation with a long catholic past, Austria.

 

 All this does not bode well. The future of Belgium, more and more a worn-out country, looks grim. And the deeper economic shock of the corona-crisis still has to wash ashore into the hearts and minds. The autumn looks grey, grey, grey. It might turn black.

Towards earth via infinity

 Political pundits in Belgium were puzzled by a new twist in government negotiations, that looked in their eyes very much like a revamped old one. The (all three recently elected) presidents of the three parties that form the government Wilmès II, of whom two had already been government negotiators around Newyear, start a new search for a governmental majority. But they gave no indication for a new element, except then that the socialists had opened the road for a minority government as proposal of last resort. They hope to land somewhere around National Day (21 July), on Day 422 since the elections, at the earliest …

 

 After the two socialist party presidents, Rousseau and Magnette, had after five weeks of discreet negotiations concluded on Monday that a minority government of the three traditional political families was the best option to form a new Belgian federal government, it took some time to clarify how far they had already reached consensus on that idea. The fact that they deposed the execution of their report into the hands of the present liberal prime minister Sophie Wilmès, who refused to pick up the hot potato, did not bode well.

 

 Interesting was that Bart De Wever of the N-VA, one of the main candidates for eventual support to get a new government started, also asked Sophie Wilmès to take the initiative (albeit for a genuine majority government). In the end the socialists seem to have hoped that by abstaining, the Greens or N-VA would have helped the tripartite-government through its initial confidence vote, after which it could – since the constitutional reform of 1993 – only be voted away by a no-confidence vote by all opposition parties together (in a coalition of extreme-right and extreme-left and all the other ones) leading to a new government or new elections.

 

 But Wednesday afternoon news came out that the three presidents of the parties that have ministers in the government Wilmès II, have agreed to take the initiative, after a discussion with the prime minister. Egbert Lachaert (Open VLD), Joachim Coens (CD&V) and Georges-Louis Bouchez (from left to right on the picture) afterwards all announced that they would first try to enlarge the present coalition – with only 38 seats for the three parties in the Parliament out of 150 – to obtain an effective majority (of at least 76).

 

 The new thing is that they stressed that they too might seek a minority government if this attempt fails, but not necessarily in the same composition as the socialists proposed. It was not immediately clear if the three really had a new idea in mind, and surely none of the observers detected immediately one. Anyhow the three will take their time until at least 21 July. Although they did not exclude that it might become September.

 

 

 

 

Sniff sniff, who’s there?

The sober tweets of the party-presidents, without images, Magnette not even in his own name, and with a minimum of what is called ‘engagements’ in twitter-statistics.

 Timid attempts to form a new Belgian government, 386 days after the last elections, ended yesterday in a timid report on recent very tentative talks. It ended also on a refusal of the present prime minister Sophie Wilmes to pick it up as an eventual ‘formateur’ of a government that would succeed hers. If nothing follows, time might now be running out quite rapidly.

 

 Two extremely sober tweets of two party presidents around 17 hours yesterday were the only official confirmation of what was leaked in the media a few hours before. The two socialist party presidents, Paul Magnette (PS, French-speaking) and Conner Rousseau (SP.A, Flemish), who since 8 May had taken the initiative to sound out the other parties (except the extreme-left and the extreme-right) about the prospects of a new government, announced that they had presented their report to the present prime minister Sophie Wilmes and had had a ‘productive meeting’ with her. Only Rousseau gave a short interview to one journalist afterwards.

 

 Wilmès did not communicate officially, but the media learned almost immediately from her party-president, Georges-Louis Bouchez, that ‘you only designate a formateur when there is a formula for a coalition and in this case it is not visible yet.’ The content of the report itself was not leaked, but according to some media it indicated a coalition of the three traditional parties (socialists, liberals and Christian democrats) on both sides of the language border as the best solution.

 

 The problem with that coalition is that it does not have a majority in the parliament, only 71 of the 150 seats. The only possibilities for support outside are the Flemish nationalists of N-VA (24 seats) or the Greens (FR and NL, together 21 seats). The difficult choice between one of these partners, which hampered all talks up to now, might in that way be avoided. But it is unclear how far both external partners have agreed with this scenario, and whom of them will give the necessary support to install the government with a majority. A simple abstention by one of these groups might be enough.

 

 The next days will make clear if something will follow. The rejection of a central role by Wilmès does not bode well. Nor does an incident yesterday within the Flemish Greens, where the group leader in the Flemish Parliament proposed an all parties-coalition, including Greens and N-VA, but was immediately rebuffed by his party president.  

 

 Meanwhile anger among the population is rising steadily after the bad decisions and communications in the last phase of the corona-crisis, after more and more revelations about mishandlings of the crisis, and after testimonials – including from one federal minister – about the difficulties to overcome the fragmentation of powers in an institutional landscape ravaged by six ad hoc institutional reforms over the last fifty years. The anger on the economic recession might follow soon.