Political Crises and Contexts of Consociational Democracy in Belgium

Abstract

While Belgium was shown as the best example of Lijphart’s model of the consociational democracy, political troubles in the country have revealed that this is not the case. In fact, what is happening in Belgium is nothing more than the reflections of centuries of struggle and linguistic freedom efforts that have reached today. Belgium is a country where Flemings and Walloons -Flemish and French-speaking communities- live in the form of a federal government. The history of the country has been shaped by the struggles of these two language groups against each other for democratic rights. The main focus of these struggles is on linguistic freedoms. The struggles are so strong that Belgium, which began its political life as a unitary state, with the constitutional changes that were made in 1970, was separated into linguistic areas and started to apply the power sharing feature of the consociational democracy model properly. The country became a federal state as a result of the constitutional reform in 1993. Besides, constitutional amendments have been made several times in the context of language rights. Because of these changes, some argue that the system could turn into a confederation, and even reach the independence of the two sides. It is not known how long the consociational democracy, which was initially applied in order to transcend the tensioned areas of society and in order to give linguistic freedom to communities, will manage to hold the country together, however, it would be wrong to expect a separation in the near future. In this context, the subject of the study is to investigate the characteristics of the consociational model and its applications in Belgium. Its aim is to examine the relevance of the problems in Belgium to consociational democracy.

Keywords

• Belgium, consociational democracy, federation

Belçika’da Siyasi Krizler ve Oydaşmacı Demokrasi’nin Bağlamları

Abstract

Belçika, Lijphart’ın teorisyenliğini yaptığı oydaşmacı demokrasinin en güzel örneği olarak gösterilen ülkesi iken, ülkede baş gösteren siyasi sıkıntılar bunun böyle olmadığını ortaya çıkarmıştır. Gerçekte Belçika’da olan yüzyıllardır süren bir mücadelenin ve dilsel özgürlük çabalarının günümüze kadar ulaşan yansımalarından başka bir şey değildir. Belçika, Flamanlar ve Volanlar adı verilen, Flamanca ve Fransızca konuşan iki büyük toplumun federal bir devlette yaşadığı bir ülkedir. Ülke tarihi bu iki dil grubunun birbirleriyle olan demokratik hak talebi mücadeleleri ile şekillenmiştir. Bu mücadeleler dilsel özgürlükler üzerinedir. Mücadeleler o kadar güçlü olmaktadır ki, siyasi hayatına üniter bir devlet olarak başlayan Belçika, 1970 yılında federal devlete dönüşmüştür. Ayrıca dil ile ilgili haklar bağlamında da defalarca anayasal değişiklik yapılmıştır. Bu değişimlerden dolayı bazıları, sistemin konfedere bir yapıya dönüşeceğini hatta bunun iki tarafın bağımsızlığına kadar varabileceğini iddia etmektedirler. Başlangıçta toplumun gerilimli alanlarını aşmak ve topluluklara dilsel özgürlüklerini kazandırmak için uygulanan oydaşmacı model, Belçika’nın üniter devletten federal yapıya dönüşmesine neden olmuştur. Oydaşmacı demokrasinin ülkeyi birlikte tutmaya ne zamana kadar gücü yetecektir bilinmez ama yakın zamanda bir ayrılık beklemek de yanlış olacaktır. Bu bağlamdan çalışmanın konusu oydaşmacı modelin özellikleri ve Belçika’daki uygulamalarının araştırılması, amacı ise Belçika’daki sorunların oydaşmacı demokrasi ile ilintisinin incelenmesidir.

Keywords

• Belçika
• oydaşmacı demokrasi
• federasyon

References

1. Adams, M. (2014). Disabling constitutionalism.Can the politics of the Belgian Constitution be explained?. ICON, 12(2), 279–302.
2. An official website of the European Union (Eurydice). (2019). Belgium - German-speaking community. https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/belgium-german-speaking-community/main-executive-and-legislative-bodies_en adresinden erişildi.
3. Belgium.be (2020). About Belgium. https://www.belgium.be/en/about_belgium adresinden erişildi.
4. Bilgin, F. K. (2012). Belçika'da ulusal kimlikler ve federalizmin gelişimi. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 67(1), 1-47.
5. Billiet, J., Maddens, B., & Frongnier, A.-P. (2006). Does Belgium (still) exist? Differences in political culture between Flemings and Walloons. West European Politics, 29(5), 912-932.
6. Bogaards, M., Ludger, H., & Lijphart (2019). The importance of consociationalism for twenty- First century politics and political science. Swiss Political Science Review, 25(4), 341–356. doi:10.1111/spsr.12384
7. Calise, M. (1994). The Italian particracy: Beyond president and parliament. Political Science Quarterly, 109(3), 441-460.
8. Caluwaerts, D., & Reuchamps, M. (2015) Combining federalism with consociationalism: Is belgian consociational federalism digging its own grave?. Ethnopolitics, 14 (3), 277-295, DOI: 10.1080/17449057.2014.986866

9. Cook, B. A., & Keleher, E. P. (2019). Belgian revolution. Salem Press Encyclopeda içinde. Erişim adresi: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ers&AN=89160423&lang=tr&site=eds-live&authtype=ip,uid
10. De Belgische Kamer van volksvertegenwoordigers. (2020). The Belgian constitution. https://www.dekamer.be/kvvcr/pdf_sections/publications/constitution/GrondwetUK.pdf adresinden erişildi.
11. Delmartino, F. (1988). Regionalisation in Belgium, evalutaion of an ongoing instutional crisis. European Journal of Political Research, (16), 381-394.
12. Deschouwer, K. (2004). Ethnıc Structure, Inequalıty and Governance of the Publıc Sector in Belgıum. Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development.
13. Deschouwer, K., & Reuchamps, M. (2013). The Belgian federation at a crossroad. Regional and Federal Studies, 23(3), 261-270.
14. Electionarium (2019). Belgium federal election results: Conventional parties lose ground https://electionarium.com/2019-belgium-federal-election-results/ adresinden erişildi.
15. European Parliament (2019). 2019 European election results. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/election-results-2019/en/national-results/belgium/2019-2024/ adresinden erişildi.
16. Federation Wallonıe-Bruxelles (2020). From a unitary state to a federal state. https://www.pfwb.be/en/its_structure adresinden erişildi.
17. Grabenwarter, C., Paczolay, A., & Peters, A., (2012). European commıssıon for democracy through law (Opinion No. 679 / 2012). Council of Europe web sitesinden erişildi: https://www.venice.coe.int/WebForms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD%282012%29010-e
18. Guelke, A. (2012). Politics in deeply divided societies. Cambridge: Polity Press.
19. Hendriks, F. (2004). Belgium: Federalism and subnational democracy in a divided country. J. Loughlin (Ed.), Subnational democracy in the European Union challenges and opportunities içinde (ss. 289-316). New York: Oxford University Press.
20. Hooghe, L. (2004). Belgium hollowing the centre. U. M. Amoretti & N.G Bermeo (Eds.), federalism and territorial cleavages içinde (ss. 55-92). London: JHU Press.
21. Huyse, L. (1981). Political conflict in bicultural Belgium. A. Lijphart (Ed.), Conflict and Coexistence in Belgium : The Dynamics of A Culturally Divided Society içinde (ss. 107-126). Berkeley: University of California Berkeley.
22. Kelleher, S. (2005). Minority veto rights in power sharing systems: Lessons from Macedonia, Northern Ireland and Belgium. Adalah’s Newsletter, (13), 1-8.
23. Lardeyret, G. (1995). Orantılı temsile ilişkin sorun. (M. Turhan. Çev.), L. Diamond & F. M. Plattner. (Ed.), Demokrasinin Küresel Yükselişi içinde (ss.199-205). Ankara: Yetkin Yayınları.
24. Lecours, A. (2001). Political institutions, elites, and territorial identity formation in Belgium. National Identities, 3(1), 51-68.
25. Legal Dictionary. (2020). Definition of federal government. https://legaldictionary.net/federal-government/ adresinden erişildi.
26. Lehmbruch, G. (1975). Consociational democracy in the international system. European Journal of Political Research, 2, 377-391.
27. Leruth, B. ( 2013). As questions abound about the monarchy’s role, Belgium’s new King Philippe must now convince the public of his legitimacy and credibility. Erişim adresi: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2013/07/25/belgium-new-king/
28. Lijphart, A. (1969). Consociational democracy. World Politics, 21(2), 207-225.
29. Lijphart, A. (1977). Democracy in plural societies: A comparative exploration. London: Yale University Press.
30. Lijphart, A. (1984). Çağdaş demokrasiler: Yirmibir ülkede çoğunlukçu ve oydaşmacı yönetim örüntüleri. (E. Özbudun & E. Onulduran, Çev.). Ankara: Yetkin Yayınları.
31. Lijphart, A (1985). Power-sharing in South Africa. Berkeley: University of California.
32. Lijphart, A. (1989). Democratic political systems types, cases, causes, and consequences. Journal of Theoretical Politics January, 1, 33-48.
33. Lijphart, A. (1995). Yeni demokrasiler ıçin yeni tercihler (M. Turhan. Çev.). L. Diamond & F. M. Plattner. (Ed.), Demokrasinin Küresel Yükselişi içinde (ss. 185-198). Ankara: Yetkin Yayınları.
34. Lijphart, A. (1998). Consensus and consensus democracy: Cultural, structural, functional, and rational-choice explanations. Scandinavian Political Studies, 21(2), 99-108.
35. Lijphart, A. (2004). Constituonal design for divided societies. Journal of Democracy, 15(2), 96-109.
36. Lijphart, A. (2012). Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. London: Yale University Press.
37. Mnookin, R., & Verbeke, A. (2009). Persistent nonviolent conflict with no reconciliation: The Flemish and Walloons in Belgium. Law and ContemporaryProblems, 151-186.
38. Morris, M. H. (2006). Cooperative federalism. Encyclopedia Federalism içinde. Erişim adresi: https://encyclopedia.federalism.org/index.php/Cooperative_Federalism
39. Munro, A. (2020). William-Riker. Encyclopædia Britannica içinde. Erişim adresi: https://www.britannica.com/biography/William-Riker
40. NVA. (2020). The N-VA's ideology and purpose. https://english.n-va.be/frequently-asked-questions#belgium adresinden erişildi.
41. Pales, Z. (2011). Belgium as a crucial yest of consociationalism:The 2007-2011 political crisis. Belgium as a Crucial Test of Consociationalism:The 2007-2011 Political Crisis. Central Eurepoan Universty Budapest
42. Parlament der Deutschsprachigen gemeinschaft Belgiens. (2020). Parlieament-fields of competences. http://www.pdg.be/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-3999/7181_read-41464/ adresinden erişildi.
43. Pathak, B., & Singh, S. P. (2010). Glimpses of Europe: A crucible of winning ideas, great civilizations and bloodiest wars. New Delhi: Gyan Publishing House.
44. Pınar, M. Ç. (2001). Kültürel bir ayrışma örneği olarak Belçika. Mülkiye Dergisi, XXV(226), 283-288.
45. Poirier, J. (2002). Formal mechanisms of intergovernmental relations in Belgium. Regional & Federal Studies, 12(3), 24-54.
46. Quade, L., Q. (1995). Orantılı temsil ve demokratik devlet yönetimi ( M. Turhan. Çev.). L. Diamond & F. M. Plattner. (Ed.), Demokrasinin Küresel Yükselişi içinde (ss. 207-214). Ankara: Yetkin Yayınları.
47. Reid, A., & Musyck, B. (2000). Industrial policy in Wallonia: A rupture with the past? European Planning Studies, 8(2), 183-200.
48. Riegert, B. (2007). Belçika’da siyasi kriz derinleşiyor. Erişim adresi: https://www.dw.com/tr/bel%C3%A7ikada-siyasi-kriz-derinle%C5%9Fiyor/a-2759928
49. Rivera, R. (2017). The wacky world of Belgian politics. Erişim adresi: https://brussels-express.eu/wacky-world-belgian-politics/
50. Sander, O. (2013). Siyasi tarih ilk çağlardan 1918'e. Ankara: İmge Kitabevi.
51. Schmidt, M. G. (2002). Demokrasi kuramlarına giriş (M. E. Köktaş, Çev.). Ankara: Vadi Yayınları.
52. Schneckener, U. (2002). Making power-sharing work: Lessons from successes and failures in ethnic conflict regulation. Journal of Peace Research, 39(2), 203–228.
53. Senate.be (2019). De Belgische grondwet. https://www.senate.be/doc/const_nl.html adresinden erişildi.
54. Swenden, W., Brans, M., & Winter, L. (2006). The politics of Belgium: Institutions and policy under bipolar and centrifugal federalism. West European Politics, 29(5), 863-873.
55. Swenden, W., & Jans, M. (2006). ‘Will it stay or will it go?’ Federalism and the sustainability of Belgium. West European Politics, 29(5), 877-894.
56. Toharudin, T. (2010). Individualism, nationalism, ethnocentrism and authoritarianism. https://www.rug.nl/research/portal/files/33279492/01_c1.pdf adresinden erişildi.
57. trthaber.com (2020). Belçika'da hükümet krizi ülke krizine dönüşüyor. https://www.trthaber.com/haber/dunya/belcikada-hukumet-krizi-ulke-krizine-donusuyor-461411.html adresinden erişildi.
58. Vlaams Belang. (2020). Vlaams belang. http://www.vlaamsbelang.org/57/2/ adresinden erişildi.
59. Vos, L. (1998). The Flemish national question. K. Deprez, L. Vos (Ed.), Nationalism in Belgium Shifting Identities, 1780-1995 içinde (ss. 83-95). London: Macmillan Press.
60. Van der Wee, H. vd. (2020). Federalized Belgium. Encyclopædia Britannica içinde. Erişim adres: https://www.britannica.com/place/Belgium/Federalized-Belgium
61. Witte, E., Craeybeckx, J., & Meynen, A. (2009). Political history of Belgium from 1830 onwards. Brussels: Academic and Scientific Publishers nv.
62. World Population Review. (2019). Belgium population 2019. http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/belgium-population/ adresinden erişildi.
63. Zolberg, A. R. (1974). The making of Flemings and Walloons: Belgium: 1830-1914. The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 5(2), 179-235.