Migration certainly is a hot political topic. Where the political left sees refugees from wars and natural disasters, the right sees potential criminals and a more restrictive culture. Donald Trump and the Brexit are (at least partially) consequences of people being afraid of the changes within the country.
In 2016, the UN drafted up a text on how to regulate and co-ordinate how their members could go about handling migration in a decent matter. It's non-binding, so it's more a framework and guidelines than an actual rule.
Nonetheless, it wasn't much of a surprise that Donald Trump's USA chickened out and proclaimed it was inconsistent withU.S. his personal immigration and refugee policies. Despite being heavily contested, the USA isn't alone. Bulgaria and Slovakia also pulled out. And Belgium...is a special case.
I know that it's more fun (and more important on world scale) to talk about the US, but I feel I should explain a few things about my country (fellow Belgians: feel free to correct or add comments
). Up until a week ago, our federal government consisted of the following political parties: N-VA, MR, open VLD and CD&V. It's a "center right" government, though on US terms it'd probably still be left-leaning. MR and Open VLD mostly cater to the middle class. CD&V is about as centered as a centered party can be: always looking to please "the people", their opinion is pretty much what that friendly uncle of yours might say. N-VA is...it's not exactly a traditional rightwing party, but other than a party that's openly racist (Vlaams belang) they're the closest thing to it. All the parties have mutually agreed never to form a government with Vlaams belang, no matter how many votes they get. During the last federal government elections, N-VA was (IIRC) the largest party on flemish side*.
In spring of this year, our government reviewed the UN migration pact. Nobody (including N-VA) saw a problem with it, so our prime minister - Charles Michel of the MR-party - promised in name of our country that we'd approve the pact in Marrakech in december.
Opinions on how to word it might differ, but the fact is that since a couple weeks, N-VA strongly disapproves of the pact. Like Donald, they fear all sorts of consequences (mass migration! women forced in burqa! Mass unemployment!), but suggest more than that they actually say. Their arguments are in the trend of "if it's non-binding, then what's the harm in not signing it?".
As said: they represent a significant part of the votes, so our prime minister couldn't simply ignore it. But it was pretty clear from almost the start that neither side would budge. All the other parties (as well as everyone but Vlaams belang on the opposition) are in favor. Oh, and there are new federal elections in June, which undoubtedly also a factor.
That also causes another weird situation: neither side wants to be held responsible for crashing the government. The way I'm telling the story, it's pretty obvious that N-VA is responsible (they caused this crisis, and missed their opportunity to properly voice their concerns). They, on the other hand, try to frame it differently. "We give in so much, but when we ask for something it's suddenly denied!". And "We don't quit. It's just that when Michel goes to Marrakech to sign the deal, we consider ourselves fired from the government".
Assholes.
In any case: whether you want to blame the N-VA for this mess or not, we are now in a pretty strange situation. It apparenly IS possible and legal to have a government that doesn't represent the majority of voters. It's just that for every potential law change, enough political parties have to be found to agree to it. For the UN migration pact, that was fairly easy (as said: everyone but N-VA and Vlaams belang were on board). But the rest of the political agenda can get pretty strange. Opposition parties like Groen (who mainly focus on the environment) now say things like "yyyyesss...we MIGHT help getting some climate laws getting passed, but we don't want to be pinned down as a party only caring about the environment". This situation clearly isn't what N-VA had in mind and are now claiming/complaining/demanding** that parlement should intervene. The remaining government, however, does something I would describe as "nah na naaaaah...you've quit, so your opinion is but an opinion". N-VA pouts that the parties are "holding a coup", but it's a matter of perception on whether you believe that or not.
In closing comments...that migration pact is slowly shifting to the background. Is it signed? Yes. In name of our country? Yes. So does that mean that N-VA has nothing? I...honestly don't know.
What I do know is that this is all a war for perception. The brexit came out of nowhere. Trump's election came out of "extremely unlikely". And while I can say that N-VA is really neither (heck...their chairman - Bart De Wever - is mayor of Antwerp), I fear that our country is also starting to get far more polarized than it should have been.
EDIT: okay...ten days later, and this minority government ("minderheidsregering") is no more. And the whole "who is to blame?" question is even weirder than it was. I'll get to that.
First off: remember that we were scheduled for an election in May. I initially thought that a fall of the government would just speed things up, but apparently that's against the constitution. That may be, but that puts us in the situation of either having an early election for the massive length of 4-5 months, or just faffing along without a government. Knowing our country, it'll most likely be the latter. That's not even a joke: we hold (held?) the world record of forming a government. And with nearly 2 years without a government, what is 5 months really?
...except that forming a government can then only start AFTER election in May.
So what has really happened? Well...representing a minority of votes, it's obvious that the government had to change their tune a bit. Vlaams belang isn't an option, N-VA obviously not eager to backtrack on their earlier departure and every center political party in the government, it's only obvious that some leftist ideas are brought out of the fridge ("hey...perhaps keeping global warming under control shouldn't be the very last of our priorities?" /sarcasm). Result: N-VA claimed they "knew" that it was the correct course to bail out, Groen, PS and SP-A (basically the leftist parties) are highly skeptical of this sudden shift, and of course there's that Marrakech thing. Granted: our media would've forgotten about it, but y'know...you can always count on rightwing hooligans to eat up misinterpretations and protest against what the treaty was never about by riotting in Brussels. Well...at least they had the decency to do it in the Europa-zone (while it's in the same street, it's pretty separated from our government).
And then Open VLD made a move. While Charles Michel (MR) was seeking agreement with said lefties, Gwendolyn Rutte (chairwoman of open VLD; basically the Flemish counterpart of MR) twittered that it was never the intention to change anything on what the government initially agreed upon.
*sigh*
I'm all in favor of women in politics, but honestly...this is a stupidity of Brexit-calibre. While Michel tries to find common ground with the opposition, she basically shouts off the rooftops that the only reason said opposition is needed is to help out a government plan that they've been opposing for the last four years. Yes...OF COURSE they'll be eager to help out!
Result: the opposition (SP-A) files a motion of distrust, Charles Michel offers the resignation of the government to the king and that's that of our government. RIP.
So...who's to blame? Well, take your pick: everyone blames most if not every other party (it's just more fun because unlike in the US, there are more than two parties involved ). And everyone's fighting for the narrative.
At this point, I've got no clue what's going to happen. New elections? Another government? Hard to say. Nobody really knows. But wait...you might have recalled me mentioning "the king". That's right: Belgium is a monarchy! We have a king. A king that shakes hands, is part of the furniture when new buildings have to be inaugurated and is the poster child for post stamps, tourists and...erm...other ceremonial ceremonies. He doesn't have political power, of course, because democracy. But for matters like this, it's at least something to cling to.
Our king - Philippe - now has to meet everyone and makes sure everyone calms down enough and do some co-ordination. No idea whether he can order new elections, but I'd say he holds the most influence as of now.
*that's another weird and potentially unique system: Flemish voters can only vote on Flemish parties, Wallons only on French parties. And with our country consisting of roughly 60% Flemish and 40% French people (I'm excluding Brussels here, which...erm...is more or less a mishmash of both), it's virtually impossible to create a government that represents the majority of people, unless they consist of a multitude of parties. In this case: MR was the only Wallonian party, which brings tensions in itself. But in an almost ironical twist: in this situation, these tensions aren't an issue...at all!
**take your pick, depending on YOUR political view
In 2016, the UN drafted up a text on how to regulate and co-ordinate how their members could go about handling migration in a decent matter. It's non-binding, so it's more a framework and guidelines than an actual rule.
Nonetheless, it wasn't much of a surprise that Donald Trump's USA chickened out and proclaimed it was inconsistent with
I know that it's more fun (and more important on world scale) to talk about the US, but I feel I should explain a few things about my country (fellow Belgians: feel free to correct or add comments
). Up until a week ago, our federal government consisted of the following political parties: N-VA, MR, open VLD and CD&V. It's a "center right" government, though on US terms it'd probably still be left-leaning. MR and Open VLD mostly cater to the middle class. CD&V is about as centered as a centered party can be: always looking to please "the people", their opinion is pretty much what that friendly uncle of yours might say. N-VA is...it's not exactly a traditional rightwing party, but other than a party that's openly racist (Vlaams belang) they're the closest thing to it. All the parties have mutually agreed never to form a government with Vlaams belang, no matter how many votes they get. During the last federal government elections, N-VA was (IIRC) the largest party on flemish side*.In spring of this year, our government reviewed the UN migration pact. Nobody (including N-VA) saw a problem with it, so our prime minister - Charles Michel of the MR-party - promised in name of our country that we'd approve the pact in Marrakech in december.
Opinions on how to word it might differ, but the fact is that since a couple weeks, N-VA strongly disapproves of the pact. Like Donald, they fear all sorts of consequences (mass migration! women forced in burqa! Mass unemployment!), but suggest more than that they actually say. Their arguments are in the trend of "if it's non-binding, then what's the harm in not signing it?".
As said: they represent a significant part of the votes, so our prime minister couldn't simply ignore it. But it was pretty clear from almost the start that neither side would budge. All the other parties (as well as everyone but Vlaams belang on the opposition) are in favor. Oh, and there are new federal elections in June, which undoubtedly also a factor.
That also causes another weird situation: neither side wants to be held responsible for crashing the government. The way I'm telling the story, it's pretty obvious that N-VA is responsible (they caused this crisis, and missed their opportunity to properly voice their concerns). They, on the other hand, try to frame it differently. "We give in so much, but when we ask for something it's suddenly denied!". And "We don't quit. It's just that when Michel goes to Marrakech to sign the deal, we consider ourselves fired from the government".
Assholes.
In any case: whether you want to blame the N-VA for this mess or not, we are now in a pretty strange situation. It apparenly IS possible and legal to have a government that doesn't represent the majority of voters. It's just that for every potential law change, enough political parties have to be found to agree to it. For the UN migration pact, that was fairly easy (as said: everyone but N-VA and Vlaams belang were on board). But the rest of the political agenda can get pretty strange. Opposition parties like Groen (who mainly focus on the environment) now say things like "yyyyesss...we MIGHT help getting some climate laws getting passed, but we don't want to be pinned down as a party only caring about the environment". This situation clearly isn't what N-VA had in mind and are now claiming/complaining/demanding** that parlement should intervene. The remaining government, however, does something I would describe as "nah na naaaaah...you've quit, so your opinion is but an opinion". N-VA pouts that the parties are "holding a coup", but it's a matter of perception on whether you believe that or not.
In closing comments...that migration pact is slowly shifting to the background. Is it signed? Yes. In name of our country? Yes. So does that mean that N-VA has nothing? I...honestly don't know.
What I do know is that this is all a war for perception. The brexit came out of nowhere. Trump's election came out of "extremely unlikely". And while I can say that N-VA is really neither (heck...their chairman - Bart De Wever - is mayor of Antwerp), I fear that our country is also starting to get far more polarized than it should have been.
EDIT: okay...ten days later, and this minority government ("minderheidsregering") is no more. And the whole "who is to blame?" question is even weirder than it was. I'll get to that.
First off: remember that we were scheduled for an election in May. I initially thought that a fall of the government would just speed things up, but apparently that's against the constitution. That may be, but that puts us in the situation of either having an early election for the massive length of 4-5 months, or just faffing along without a government. Knowing our country, it'll most likely be the latter. That's not even a joke: we hold (held?) the world record of forming a government. And with nearly 2 years without a government, what is 5 months really?
...except that forming a government can then only start AFTER election in May.
So what has really happened? Well...representing a minority of votes, it's obvious that the government had to change their tune a bit. Vlaams belang isn't an option, N-VA obviously not eager to backtrack on their earlier departure and every center political party in the government, it's only obvious that some leftist ideas are brought out of the fridge ("hey...perhaps keeping global warming under control shouldn't be the very last of our priorities?" /sarcasm). Result: N-VA claimed they "knew" that it was the correct course to bail out, Groen, PS and SP-A (basically the leftist parties) are highly skeptical of this sudden shift, and of course there's that Marrakech thing. Granted: our media would've forgotten about it, but y'know...you can always count on rightwing hooligans to eat up misinterpretations and protest against what the treaty was never about by riotting in Brussels. Well...at least they had the decency to do it in the Europa-zone (while it's in the same street, it's pretty separated from our government).
And then Open VLD made a move. While Charles Michel (MR) was seeking agreement with said lefties, Gwendolyn Rutte (chairwoman of open VLD; basically the Flemish counterpart of MR) twittered that it was never the intention to change anything on what the government initially agreed upon.
*sigh*
I'm all in favor of women in politics, but honestly...this is a stupidity of Brexit-calibre. While Michel tries to find common ground with the opposition, she basically shouts off the rooftops that the only reason said opposition is needed is to help out a government plan that they've been opposing for the last four years. Yes...OF COURSE they'll be eager to help out!
Result: the opposition (SP-A) files a motion of distrust, Charles Michel offers the resignation of the government to the king and that's that of our government. RIP.
So...who's to blame? Well, take your pick: everyone blames most if not every other party (it's just more fun because unlike in the US, there are more than two parties involved
). And everyone's fighting for the narrative.At this point, I've got no clue what's going to happen. New elections? Another government? Hard to say. Nobody really knows. But wait...you might have recalled me mentioning "the king". That's right: Belgium is a monarchy! We have a king. A king that shakes hands, is part of the furniture when new buildings have to be inaugurated and is the poster child for post stamps, tourists and...erm...other ceremonial ceremonies. He doesn't have political power, of course, because democracy. But for matters like this, it's at least something to cling to.
Our king - Philippe - now has to meet everyone and makes sure everyone calms down enough and do some co-ordination. No idea whether he can order new elections, but I'd say he holds the most influence as of now.
*that's another weird and potentially unique system: Flemish voters can only vote on Flemish parties, Wallons only on French parties. And with our country consisting of roughly 60% Flemish and 40% French people (I'm excluding Brussels here, which...erm...is more or less a mishmash of both), it's virtually impossible to create a government that represents the majority of people, unless they consist of a multitude of parties. In this case: MR was the only Wallonian party, which brings tensions in itself. But in an almost ironical twist: in this situation, these tensions aren't an issue...at all!
**take your pick, depending on YOUR political view
