Mississippi River Decomposer

status and future of Brussels: how to reconcile the points of view?

Minister-President of Flanders, Mr Kris Peeters, recently said in an interview Soir that Flanders will never let go Brussels, which is its capital and it constitutes an important added value . He added that the CD & V does not want to split Belgium, but a profound reform of the state granting more autonomy to regions and communities. This allows Mr. Peeters to say that Brussels is "the capital of Flanders," is that it is the capital of the Flemish Community, as it is also that of the French Community.

But the situation of French and Dutch is not the same, the fact that the Community and the Flemish Region merged into one institution, having one government and one parliament, both established in Brussels. This is the reason why Flemish parties in the '70s, claimed priority to the creation of Communities, while the Walloons claimed especially the institution of Regions. With this concept of "Communities" without specific territory, responsible for matters relating to individuals (education, sports, etc.), the Flemings could retain influence in Brussels, even though they constitute about 10 to 15 % of the population .. In addition, after a "put on ice" for ten years from the creation of the Brussels-Capital Region, the Flemish parties were granted an over-representation policy, both in parliament in Brussels that the colleges of the 19 municipalities.

For the Walloons, the situation is quite different. Not only the Walloon Region and French Community have not merged, but the latter alone has established his "capital", its government and parliament in Brussels, Namur Walloon preferring to choose as the capital of Wallonia. It is as if the Flemish Region had not established its capital in Brussels, but Ghent and Antwerp.

It seems that although clearly marking their difference from Brussels, the Walloon leaders do not want more "drop" it and postulate the creation of a Federation Wallonia-Brussels, prelude a possible state of the same name in case of Flemish independence. It seems he is in this spirit that Mr. Rudy Demotte was wearing two hats, that of minister-president and the Walloon Minister-President of the French Community, creating between the two institutions not a merger as in Flanders, but in some areas of synergy. Under the famous "Plan B", some as Mr. Di Rupo even want this new state without Flanders retains the name and attributes of Belgium.

Therefore, the question that arises is a co suivante.En outside of Brussels in Flanders and Wallonia - which could be associated Brussels Francophone community - what other solution could be found for Brussels, which would have both the approval of the Flemish, Walloons and Brussels?

After the formal declarations of the Minister President of Flanders, one can not evade this question makes more difficult an amicable divorce, however, seems to us indispensable. In this regard, we can not compare Belgium and Czechoslovakia, because the latter did not include a central capital disputed between the Czechs and Slovaks.

Let us open the debate, hoping that users will be likely to send us feedback.