Belgian politics. A topic to be approached with some trepidation. And with the proviso that if you think you have grasped it, then you most likely have not. But still the country’s goings-on are rich in juicy pickings.

Since 2007, the last round of elections, the government is either about to fall or the country is in care-taker status. The King’s sole job, it appears, is to hear prime ministerial resignations (Yves Leterme has thrown in the towel three times since taking up power in early 2008)  and plead with various people to start talks about  reform.

Politicians exchange insults across a linguistic divide. Stereotyping thrives. Poorer French-speaking Walloons are all addicted to state help; Richer Dutch-speaking Flemings are high-handed and intent on breaking up the state.  There are three regions. There are also three language communities. And minefields of local governments and parliaments. There have been five state reforms since 1970.

And then there is the fact that political parties only stand for election on one side of the border. This tends to make them concentrate on local issues and make wild electoral promises. Not helpful when it comes to forming a coalition government with similarly locally-bound parties from the other side .

Lastly there is Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde – the messy heart of  it all. (BHV – the acronym alone instills a small horror in foreign journalists – and I am only dipping my toe in the murky waters here).

Brussels and the Flemish towns of Halle and Vilvoorde  are one voting constituency that extends over both Dutch-speaking Flanders and the bi-lingual capital. This means that francophone residents in Halle and Vilvoorde may choose between voting for Dutch-speaking or French-speaking parties. The court in 2003 said the BHV set-up breaches the constitution.

The issue, for long a political hot potato has been become an increasing source of bitterness as more Francophones settle in the area. (From my outsider’s point of view, it seems French speakers should make an effort to learn the language when moving to Dutch-speaking areas. However, Flemish politicians are equally abrasive in the way they go about ensuring the primacy of their language.)

The discussion on finding a solution is shrill on both sides. But is compounded by the French-speaking politicians’ belief that further state reform, dealing with BVH,  is also a way for Flemish parties to cede more federal rights to the regional level, hastening the demise of the Belgian state.

All this is accompanied by some febrile reporting on the part of the domestic media. I am thinking particularly about Le Soir here (I don’t speak Dutch unfortunately so I can’t judge how the ‘other side’ reports).

With Belgian elections upon us again – on Sunday 13 June. It is this constitutional debate that is dominating once more. And not, it might be noted, important issues such as the country’s soaring debt.

The BVH stand-off, which led to the collapse of the government in April and this early election, has left some wondering whether the Belgian state will even exist when the country takes over the EU presidency on 1 July.

But fears that the country will break up into two separate regions are greatly exaggerated, according to Philippe Van Parijs, an academic and part of the Pavia Group of academics proposing electoral reform for Belgium.

Kindly agreeing to have an ‘explain-Belgium’ lunch (it was lengthy) with myself and other potentially confused journos the other day,  he noted that tensions between the two sides today are relatively mild when put in an historical context. In the 1960s, there were riots over the language issue.

The jewel in the battered crown

And on a more prosaic note still, Van Parijs says the country will not split because of Brussels. Everyone wants the EU capital. Neither side will give it up. “So we are stuck together.” An inglorious stalemate.

Van Parijs believes the country will eventually end up as a federation, largely due to the language situation compounding the separateness of the communities.  The country was formally separated into Dutch and French speaking areas in 1963.  The two sides are not divided by religious or cultural differences, he says.

Outsiders always puzzle over the language situation. Why aren’t all Belgians fluent in both French and Dutch? Why isn’t education bilingual from  day one? According to Van Parijs, it is not a myth that the Flemish generally speak French better than Walloons speaks Dutch. He says that it is because the “infrastructure” for speaking French is there in Flanders due to the French language’s dominance for so long. The same is not true of Wallonia.

In addition, there are practical problems. To learn and maintain a language you need to speak it and be motivated to speak it. Difficult when you are not surrounded by it.

And what about this weekend? Polls indicate that the Flemish separatist party N-VA is set to do well. Coalition talks are therefore likely to be difficult and lengthy once more. After the 2007 elections, almost 300 days passed before a government saw the light of day.

The Pavia group, for its part, recommends creating a national constituency. One tenth of the 150 seats in the lower chamber of the national parliament would be elected on a nationwide basis. This, the group argues, would force parties to curb their tendencies for wilder election promises and behave more constructively.

Given that it is election time, the group’s ideas are once more in the air. Lengthy coalition talks may see them seriously considered.