Belgium ends its love affair with Europe

Date: 06/03/1997

SINCE the signing of the Treaty of Rome in 1957, the Belgians have been the Europeans par excellence.

Chosen as the provisional host to the institutions of the European Common Market, they allowed entire neighbourhoods of their small capital to be remodelled to suit the ambitions and whims of the European architects.

They even went so far as to question whether the real symbol of their city was the Atomium, landmark of colonial grandeur and industrial achievement, or the Berlaymont maison de verre, the headquarters of the European Commission.

Since those early days, most Belgians have consistently endorsed the European idea. Their only reluctance, until recently, appeared limited to a benign form of jealousy of these well-paid Eurocrats who showed the thickness of their wallets on their Euro car number plates and were accused of pulling down traditional town houses and driving up rents.

The construction of Europe came at the right time for Belgium. In 1960, the country lost its central African empire and considerably shrank its international horizons. Its economy was also hit by a dramatic depression. In the big strikes of that year, the old industrial regions of Wallonia underwent fierce explosions of violence and anger over the discovery that the golden age of coal had gone for ever.

In a country which, since its birth, has been aware of the deepness of the fractures in its midst and desperately seeks consensus, Europe was the only grand design that united all political families and the two communities.

The Socialist Paul-Henri Spaak, the Liberal Jean Rey and the Catholic Gaston Eyskens were key actors in the building of the Community. To many young students born in the politically Kennedyesque mood of the Sixties, Europe was the new frontier which opened a breathing space in a country everybody sensed was moving fast towards linguistic or communal bickering.

For years, Belgians seemed to most of their neighbours to be 'automatic Europeans', muttering 'Europe' as children when others were learning to say 'la France' or 'España'.

The historical ambiguity and fragility of Belgium's national feeling and sense of shared destiny, and the assertion of Flemish and - to a lesser extent - Walloon nationalism, promoted Europe to the status of an ersatz fatherland which confirmed the decline of the traditional European nation-state under the pressure of supranationalism and regionalism.

But that was yesterday. Indeed, on a continent where the words Brussels and Maastricht increasingly inspire fear and loathing instead of peace and love, Belgians are no longer an exception.

Although anti-European feelings do not run as high as in Scandinavian countries or in 'Little England', doubts constantly emerge about the pace and the nature of European construction, although most Belgians still see it as inevitable.

The question remains as to whether Europe is criticised because there is too much or too little of it.

Recent Eurobarometer surveys have charted the erosion of Belgians' 'Europhilia' - no sharp downturn, just a drop in percentage points that indicates more of a malaise than a divorce.

The reasons for this introspective mood are manifold and not typically Belgian. The economic situation is the most obvious. Europe had been seen - and had been sold by its PR promoters - as the best and only gateway to economic prosperity. But since the implementation of the Maastricht Treaty, the word 'Europe' is now more often associated with the dark clouds of economic change and hardship than with luminous growth.

As most national politicians tend to shift their own responsibilities on to Europe's back, the European Union is perceived as the chief villain in a drama taking place against a backdrop of factory closures, rising unemployment registers, delocalisations and strict competition rules.

The European model of economic growth and social cohesion, which was hailed in the Delors years as politically and ethically superior to the American version, is cracking under the assault of privatisation and globalisation.

The Commission, which was seen as a countervailing power for the unrestrained forces of the market, is regarded by many as assuming the leading role in the imposition of this new world economic order.

With its generous welfare system and the prominent role played by the social partners in the elaboration of its economic policy, Belgium was the quintessential example of that European model.

Now its system of public subsidies and cosy social deals is perceived to be threatened by the very Europe that should have been its saviour.

In the public's mind, more global causes or the recognition of Belgium's own mistakes and mismanagement are often brushed aside, with most of the blame attributed instead to the government's determined efforts to respect its commitment to meet the 1999 deadline for the introduction of the single currency, to the 'free-market fundamentalisms' of the European Commission, or to the perceived failure of social Europe.

The latest example of this widening gap and misunderstanding between part of the population and its rulers has been the closure of the Forges de Clabecq steelmaking plant in the depressed region of western Brabant Wallon. The tens of thousands of protesters who marched through the streets of Tubize earlier this year were not much different from the hundreds of thousands of French who, in the 1995 winter of discontent, chanted anti-Maastricht slogans.

In Belgium, however, the whole debate about Maastricht criteria is fuelled by other factors.

Premier Jean-Luc Dehaene's government has vowed to sit in the first row of the European classroom and has seized the right to govern by decree to push the country through the eye of the needle.

In a country shocked by the Dutroux horrors and angered by the Agusta and Dassault kickback scandals, this single-minded pursuit of the EMU goal has only reinforced the feeling that politicians do not care about the mood and interests of their citizens.

Perhaps more than others in Europe, Belgians have been losing faith in their democratic institutions. Politicians, judges, police officers and journalists have all been severely damaged by the torrent of mistakes, lies, negligence and crimes which unfolds in the public eye day after day, and people have not found in the European ideal the way to sublimate their feelings.

Indeed, whereas for a long time the idea of Europe was linked to the deepening of democracy, it is now increasingly confused with arbitrariness, irresponsibility and arrogance.

The 'mad cow' saga has further blackened the picture. The institutional games of the European Parliament and the defensive posturing of the Commission have perilously compromised the whole concept of Union accountability.

Nor has Europe cured the Belgian communal disease. The powers of the regions have increased in parallel to the transfer of sovereignty to the supranational level, but this process has not tamed the ideologues of spätnationalismus (late nationalism).

Nostalgics who hanker for a unitary Belgium, as well as backers of the current federalist set-up, acknowledge that separatism in one form or another has not been eliminated from the political agenda. Radical nationalists are not happy either. Europe, which had been seen by regionalists as an ally, is sometimes seen now as an enemy.

By giving so much power to Brussels, say critics, the European Union deprives all aspiring builders of new micro-states of most attributes of national sovereignty except for the waving flags and some form of fiscal and social devolution.

European rules on public tender and competition, as well as growing opposition to discrimination on the basis of language or ethnicity, are an irritant for regional authorities yearning to be kings.

Citizens of small countries are accustomed to being the disposable pawns of history, but the feeling of powerlessness which pervades Belgian society encapsulates many of the issues of democratic deficit and economic upheaval which are at the heart of the EU's current predicament.

Despite all this, there are few in Belgium who would turn their backs on closer European integration. Dehaene's government is still in the vanguard of those campaigning for a stronger Union and while he may be more enthusiastic than many of his fellow citizens, most are prepared to go along with him.

After all, the country still remains at the heart of Europe - both geographically and emotionally - and its fortunes are inextricably tied with those of its EU neighbours.