VZCZCXRO9062
OO RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHIK RUEHLZ RUEHROV
DE RUEHBS #1074/01 1981208
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 161208Z JUL 08
FM AMEMBASSY BRUSSELS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 7701
INFO RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 BRUSSELS 001074 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PREL BE
SUBJECT: KING ALBERT BRINGS THE POLITICIANS TOGETHER AND 
WHY AGREEMENT ON BRUSSELS-HALLE-VILVOORDE IS IMPORTANT TO 
BELGIAN POLITICIANS 
 
REF: BRUSSELS 1071 
 
¶1.  (SBU)  SUMMARY:  After Prime Minister Yves Leterme's 
surprise resignation late July 14 (reftel), Belgium is still 
in a state of limbo as King Albert II continues to play his 
intermediary role in the complex Belgian political process. 
King Albert is discussing with all the political factions 
what the next steps should be in resuming institutional 
reform talks.  He would like to come to some agreement as 
soon as possible, but certainly before he has to address the 
nation on Belgium National Day July 21. 
Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde (B-H-V), an issue of key importance 
to politicians and one with origins back to the original 
linguistic divide of 1962-63, may be the most difficult to 
resolve.  END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2.  (SBU)  According to the Belgian constitution, the monarch 
does not have decision-making powers.  His ministers are the 
responsible parties of government.  In dealing with PM Yves 
Leterme's unexpected resignation, King Albert finds himself 
in the role of a sounding board who listens to all and brings 
the various parties together and gets them to talk to each 
other.  He acts as the go-between who will only accept the 
resignation if he determines the situation deadlocked. 
 
¶3.  (SBU)  There are several factors politicians must 
consider in Leterme's proposal to move the institutional 
reform discussions to the regional level.  First, there are 
three regions -- Flanders, Wallonia, and Brussels -- two of 
which are Francophone.  Thus, to balance talks, there must be 
a way to bring in another Flemish representative agreeable to 
all sides, and they must also consider political party 
representation.  Second, they all must agree on a format for 
the talks.  Third, there must be concurrence on issues to 
discuss; will B-H-V be on the agenda?  Who will determine the 
scope of the discussions?  Fourth, is there an assurance from 
the parties they are willing to bargain in good faith? 
Fifth, will there be a new deadline established? 
 
B-H-V 
----- 
 
¶4.  (SBU)  One of the most contentious and complex issues is 
that of Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde (B-H-V).  Today Brussels, 
the country's third region, is bilingual, but its population 
is 85 per cent Francophone.  Below is a history and 
explanation of this issue which is so important to Belgian 
politicians. 
 
Historic Overview 
----------------- 
 
1962-63: Belgium's linguistic border was established. Along 
with other municipalities along this border, six Flemish 
Brussels suburbs obtained special language status: i.e., 
inhabitants could request services and official documents in 
French.  The country was divided into four language regions: 
the Dutch-language region, the French-language region, the 
German-language region and the bilingual Brussels region. 
The respective languages became official languages of the 
region, thus, the official language became compulsory for all 
administrative proceedings and documents.  In Brussels, 
French and Dutch are equally official.  (Note:  The 
Constitution guarantees free individual use of languages. 
End Note.).  The country remains sub-divided into nine 
provinces, including the bi-lingual Brabant province with 
Brussels as its capital.  The Brussels electoral district 
remains unchanged; i.e., the bi-lingual Brussels 
arrondissement, together with the Flemish Halle and Vilvoorde 
arrondissements.  (Arrondissements are administrative 
subdivisions of a province.) 
 
1968 and 1987:  In landmark rulings the European Human Rights 
Court established that dividing up the country into 
unilingual regions was not unlawful discrimination and that 
the way the electoral districts were organized was not 
discrimination against a language minority living in a given 
language region. 
 
1970: The division of Belgium into four language regions was 
enshrined in the Constitution. Special majorities in 
Parliament were then required to change the limits of the 
language regions. 
 
1980 and 1989:  Flanders, Wallonia and Brussels became 
economic regions of Belgium. 
 
 
BRUSSELS 00001074  002 OF 003 
 
 
1988: The constitution was again amended, making it more 
difficult to change the status of the municipalities with 
language privileges, including the six Brussels suburbs. 
 
1995: The Brabant Province was split into two separate 
entities: the Flemish Brabant Province and the Walloon 
Brabant Province.  The bilingual Brussels region was no 
longer part of a province. No amendments were made to the 
electoral districts. 
 
2002:  The Verhofstadt government decided on an amendment to 
the electoral code.  The number of electoral districts was 
reduced.  The electoral districts from then on coincided with 
the provinces, except for Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde. 
 
2003: The Constitutional Court ruled that it is not within 
its jurisdiction to voice an opinion regarding the need to 
divide Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde.  However, keeping it 
unchanged would mean discrimination for those who contest 
seats in Halle and Vilvoorde, because they would have to 
compete with Francophone candidates from Brussels.  The Court 
argued that this discrimination had to be addressed before 
the end of the four-year legislative term. This deadline was 
circumvented by advancing the general elections from June 24 
to June 10, 2007. 
 
¶5.  (SBU)  Elections for the federal House and Senate and for 
Representatives to the European Parliament. Halle and 
Vilvoorde are already part of the Flemish Brabant electoral 
district for the regional parliament elections.  In the 
2007 general elections, 78,352 votes were cast on Francophone 
tickets in Halle and Vilvoorde, amounting to 22 percent of 
the total vote.  In the 2004 regional elections -- in the 
absence of national Francophone heavyweights -- the Union des 
Francophones (UF) ticket garnered 43,391 votes in the 
Brussels periphery.   As the percentages show, the 
Francophone vote matters for politicians both in Brussels and 
in Flanders.   Moreover, the municipalities with special 
language status of the Brussels periphery all have 
Francophone majorities in the local councils, and, 
consequently, Francophone mayors and aldermen. 
 
¶6.  (SBU)  The Flemish demands are twofold. If a separate 
Flemish Brabant electoral district would be made including 
Halle and Vilvoorde, no Flemish candidate would stand a 
chance of getting elected for the federal House and Senate in 
Brussels.  Therefore, the Flemish parties not only want to 
split the B-H-V electoral district, they equally seek to 
obtain a system whereby votes obtained in Flemish Brabant and 
Brussels can be pooled, guaranteeing the election of 
Flemings in the Brussels electoral district.   This pooling 
system would also apply between Brussels and Brabant Walloon. 
 
¶7.  (SBU)  The Francophones want the status-quo, but they 
have many matching demands, including a Brussels capital 
region reaching far beyond the current 19 municipalities. The 
strictest minimum would be joining Sint-Genesius-Rode to 
Brussels, whereby a "corridor" would be established between 
Brussels and Wallonia. But ceding one single Flemish 
municipality to Brussels would lead to an emotional outcry in 
Flanders, and dearly cost the Flemish mainstream parties. A 
compromise would more likely include additional financial 
means for the Brussels capital region, which has the highest 
unemployment of any region in the country. Another 
Francophone demand is for the Flemish Interior Minister to 
nominate the three recalcitrant Francophone mayors of 
Linkebeek, Wezembeek-Oppem and Kraainem who violated the 
language laws on the occasion of the 2006 municipal 
elections. The Francophone parties have in the past also 
demanded ratification of the Council of Europe Framework 
Convention on the Protection of National Minorities. Other 
Francophone demands that may be considered are a nationwide 
electoral district for a selected number of parliamentarians, 
or a federal Senate composed of an equal number of Flemish 
and Francophone members. 
 
¶8.  (SBU)  A constitutional amendment is not required to 
change the status-quo, but what is necessary is an amendment 
to the electoral code.  It can be adopted by a plurality in 
the two houses of the federal parliament. A draft bill on 
B-H-V sponsored by the Flemish parties was adopted by the 
House Interior Committee in November 2007.  The Francophone 
Community Parliament immediately started a conflict of 
interest procedure, stalling further action during a 120-day 
period.   At the end of this period, a new such proceeding 
was started in May 2008 by the Francophone Community 
Commission of the Brussels regional parliament (COCOF). This 
 
BRUSSELS 00001074  003 OF 003 
 
 
gave Leterme extra time to seek a political compromise on the 
issue. In theory, these legal stalling maneuvers could be 
continued until 2009.  The Council of State has argued that 
cutting up the B-H-V district would not be unconstitutional, 
but the Council made reservations concerning a pooling system 
which would be more advantageous for Flemish candidates than 
for Francophone candidates. 
 
¶9.  (SBU)  In addition, there is a bilingual 
Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde judicial district and adjustments to 
this district may become part of the political deal.  It is a 
real issue; due to the Constitutional Court ruling, future 
general elections could at any time be challenged in court if 
no action is taken. However, validating general elections is 
the exclusive jurisdiction of Parliament. The constitutional 
scholars are not in agreement about the legal pitfalls if 
general elections were held without B-H-V being solved. 
 
¶10.  (SBU)  COMMENT:  Leterme's resignation may be a clever 
political ploy to buy time in the face of an impossible 
deadline.  Leterme is still very much involved in the 
process, and with the King could work out a way to 
restructure and restart the institutional reform talks.  King 
Albert seems to agree with Leterme that the regions should be 
involved and a new format for talks is necessary.  They hope 
that some agreement can be reached, even if B-H-V remains an 
issue, before King Albert addresses Belgium on their July 21 
National Day.  END COMMENT. 
 
FOX 
.