United States Institute of Peace • www.usip.org • Tel. 202.457.1700 • Fax. 202.429.6063

UNITED STates institute of peace

© USIP 2011 • All rights reserved.

“The political elites of a 

country that used to serve 

as a model for multiethnic 

societies in war-torn countries 

are now exploiting linguistic 

and cultural differences and 

stirring up tensions to advance 

a parochial political agenda.”

February 1, 2010 

Belgium, from Model to Case Study 

for Conflict Resolution

Summary

•	 Since 2007, Belgium has displayed a rather surreal degree of political chaos. Belgian politicians 

have provoked three cabinet resignations, 24 “royal” mediators, and more than 420 days of 

coalition formation. With the rise of Flemish nationalism and intercommunal tensions, the 

country seems to suffer from an intractable ethno-linguistic conflict.

•	 The maximum degree of reform Walloon parties can settle with is by far insufficient to Flemish 

nationalists, whose package of demands is considered unacceptable in Wallonia.

•	 One way forward is the creation of a nation-wide electoral district for federal elections in 

which every Belgian, regardless of residence, can vote for Flemish and Walloon candidates.

As two Belgians working on conflict resolution at the U.S. Institute of Peace, we were used to 

receiving numerous questions from colleagues about Belgium’s federalism, constitutional arrangements and language and education policies. In the literature on peace and conflict, Belgium’s 

creative yet complicated institutional arrangements and policies often serve as a model for 

multiethnic states emerging from armed conflict. 

Yet lately colleagues have stopped asking those questions and mostly inquire about the 

country’s internal tensions, as news about Belgium’s entrenched political impasse has reached this 

side of the Atlantic. The political elites of a country that used to serve as a model for multiethnic 

societies in war-torn countries are now exploiting linguistic and cultural differences and stirring up 

tensions to advance a parochial political agenda.

Since 2007, Belgium has displayed a rather surreal degree of political chaos. Belgian politicians 

seemed to be on a merry-go-round. They have provoked three cabinet resignations, 24 “royal” 

mediators, and more than 420 days of coalition formation. With the rise of Flemish nationalism and 

intercommunal tensions, the country seems to suffer from an intractable ethno-linguistic conflict.

Polarized Narratives along Linguistic Divisions

After the June 2010 elections, two political parties arose as the undisputable victors and indispensable heavyweights for the next coalition government: The “New Flemish Alliance” (NV-A), a young 

Flemish nationalist, right-wing party with secessionist tendencies, eager to implement a thorough 

constitutional reform that would lead to a more autonomous Flanders; and the “Socialist Party” 

(PS), a traditional leftist party with long-standing roots in Walloon society that is lukewarm toward 

institutional change and wants to preserve a strong federal state level.

Jonas Claes

E-mail: jclaes@usip.org

Phone: 202.429.1982

Valerie Rosoux

E-mail: vrosoux@usip.org

Phone: 202.429.4711

peaceBrieF79
© USIP 2011 • All rights reserved.

Belgium, from Model to Case Study for Conflict Resolution

page 2 • PB 79 • February 1, 2011

The Flemish nationalists argue that the current political impasse demonstrates that the existing 

consensus democracy within a federal structure is outdated. In their view, the Walloons refuse to 

assume responsibility for their economic destiny and systematically reject Flemish proposals vital 

to improving governance. Walloon parties, on the other hand, caution that the Flemish proposals 

would dismantle the solidarity system between the two communities. In their view, these plans 

and the increasingly nationalist rhetoric of the Flemish indicate that they are paving the road for 

secession, a move opposed by the majority of the Belgian population.

In this regard, it is interesting to note that whereas previous constitutional reforms were driven 

by broadly shared societal concerns, the current push for reform is driven by Flemish political 

elites. This elite has eloquently pulled the Flemish population into an awkward nationalist momentum, triggering a Belgian identity crisis, antagonizing the Belgian population and eventually 

turning institutional reform into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Belgium: A Case for Conflict Resolution

The negotiation process in Belgium faces significant challenges. After many months of tense 

closed-door negotiations and mudslinging in the media, the mutual trust has dissipated, reducing 

the parties’ willingness to compromise. Moreover, the maximum degree of reform Walloon parties 

can settle with is by far insufficient to Flemish nationalists, whose package of demands is considered unacceptable in Wallonia.

The presence of sufficient political will also remains questionable. A successful agreement 

could remove identity politics—Flemish nationalists’ electoral bread and butter—off the political 

agenda. On their end, Walloons never requested reform, and thus regard any concession as a 

political loss. Most concerning is the absence of common goals between the parties. For the N-VA, 

ideological impulses at times overtake their pragmatism. Many Flemish nationalists view decentralization or independence as a goal in itself, rather than an effective tool to improve governance. 

Walloons, meanwhile, often negotiate with a short-term mindset, are fearful of Wallonia’s future 

and reluctant to search for sustainable solutions for their deprived position.

A Typically Belgian Outcome

The current political crisis is unlikely to result in any revolutionary change. Given the mutual stakes 

in the capital, strong levels of integration and interdependence between both communities and 

unitary sentiments within society, Belgium will most likely muddle along, and slowly dismantle its 

federal structure and increase the power of it communities, Flanders and Wallonia.

Intuitively, the exclusion of the most radical elements from the negotiation table, particularly 

the N-VA, may seem like a way out. This would facilitate the mediators’ efforts to bridge positions 

and form the urgently needed government. It is ironic how the N-VA’s electoral success has put the 

party in a position requiring it to strike a deal with opponents they want to distance themselves 

from, and to take a responsible leadership role within a federal state structure the party prefers 

to dismantle. Yet inclusiveness is key in any negotiation situation. Excluding less moderate voices 

would undermine the legitimacy of any future agreement, particularly given the electoral success 

of the N-VA in Flanders.

One way forward is the creation of a nation-wide electoral district for federal elections in which 

every Belgian, regardless of residence, can vote for Flemish and Walloon candidates. Even during 

national elections the Walloon and Flemish parties can only campaign within their respective 

Dutch or French-speaking electoral districts when running for positions which would require them 
© USIP 2011 • All rights reserved.

USIP provides the analysis, training and 

tools that prevent and end conflicts, 

promotes stability and professionalizes 

the field of peacebuilding.

For media inquiries, contact the office 

of Public Affairs and Communications, 

202.429.4725

About This Brief

Jonas Claes is a (Flemish) program 

specialist in USIP’s Center for 

Conflict Management. Valerie 

Rosoux is a (Walloon) Jennings 

Randolph senior fellow at USIP 

in Washington DC. In this Peace 

Brief, these Belgian scholars 

analyze the current political crisis 

in Belgium from a conflict resolution perspective. 

to represent the entire country. A national circumscription will incentivize national politicians to 

adopt an inclusive Belgian mindset when campaigning throughout the entire country, suppress 

nationalist rhetoric and formulate a policy agenda that suits the country as a whole.

The existence of such a nation-wide constituency became visible during recent demonstrations in Brussels, organized by half a dozen politically engaged youth on Facebook. Up to 50,000 

protesters convened in the Belgian capital to demand an end to the political impasse. A few days 

earlier, 40 artists from all over Belgium sold out the Royal Flemish Theater for an event calling for a 

constructive dialogue and protesting the exclusive nationalist tendencies.

Decentralization is unavoidable, and perhaps even necessary for Belgium’s future welfare. But 

the infusion of identity-based and exclusionary arguments into political negotiations about state 

reform is detrimental and has no place in a social welfare state at the center of Europe.

Belgium, from Model to Case Study for Conflict Resolution

page 3 • PB 79 • February 1, 2011