| "Belgium on the international scene - a view from abroad". Opening speech by Karel De Gucht |
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is with great pleasure I welcome you here today in Brussels.
Tomorrow it will be exactly 175 years ago that the leading European powers signed a peace agreement in London, which brought an end to a conflict between what is now Belgium and the Netherlands. This conflict, which is often referred to as 'the Belgian question', started in a rather innocent way, in the Opera of Brussels. The audience, dissatisfied with the rule of the Dutch monarchy, took the libretto of the opera 'La Muette de Portici' a bit too seriously; They were inspired by this opera about a heroic rebellion in 17th century Naples. The revolutionary zeal spilled over from the opera building into the streets of Brussels. Young liberals and foreign revolutionaries soon joined the ranks. And the Belgian revolution had begun.
Some historians consider the Belgian revolution first and foremost as a Catholic rebellion against a protestant ruler, others see it as a more liberal, freedom-loving uprising against authoritarian rule, while still others prefer to interpret it as an expression of proletarian discontent. The major European powers at the time, however, had yet another reading. They considered it in the first place as a potentially dangerous and disturbing threat to the power balance in Europe. In their eyes, the Belgian revolution was a challenge to the European ¿ and thus world ¿ order which had been so carefully negotiated 15 years earlier, at the Vienna Congress of 1815.
None of them, however, thought it wise to intervene, and to support one of the two parties. Prussia, Russia, Austria, England and France realized all too well that a military intervention would inevitably lead to a chain reaction of violence, and the last thing they wanted, was another war on the conflict-ridden continent.
Instead, the Powers convened in London to negotiate a way out of this situation. The Conference of London became a prime example of 'conference diplomacy', or what we would call in modern terms: `multilateral diplomacy'. The outcome is well-known: the maintenance of 'l'équilibre européen', in which the independent kingdom of Belgium was given its place. France and England were the first to ratify this negotiated outcome, in January 1832, Austria, Prussia and Russia followed suit.
Excellencies,
Ladies and gentlemen,
Historical events are often used to create or to prove certain national characteristics, certain national peculiarities that make up the self-image and the self-perception of a nation. The events of 1830-1831 are no exception to this practice. The events that we commemorate today are often considered as one more illustration of the rebellious, or even anarchist character of the Belgian people. In paintings and literature, Belgians are often represented as distrusting authority, and as being creative in misleading the authorities, especially when those authorities infringe on their liberties and freedoms. Belgians are thought to have a distaste for absolute power, and a strong attachment to democracy.
In 1897 for example, the Belgian author Picard described Belgium as a country where 'l'indocilité et l'instinct d'indépendance sont solidifiés! On le retrouve dans toutes les manifestations de la vie nationale'. Not everybody, of course, shared that perception. After his first year on the Belgian throne, Leopold I for example wrote to Lord Melbourne, the Home Secretary of England: 'Everything is extremely quiet here, and there is perhaps not a country in Europe more attached to Monarchy and its Religion; there is no country in Europe where the taxes are regularly paid'. But this kind of opinion was relatively rare...
There are many other examples of self-perception that often return: the image of Belgians as being pragmatic, as being flexible - a consequence of decades of foreign occupation - or as masters at reaching compromises ¿ a characteristic often ascribed to Belgian diplomats. There is also the image of Belgium as a truly European country, which is perfectly illustrated by the fact that the very birth of an independent Belgium was intrinsically related to the maintenance of peace and stability of Europe. Manyfold are the references to Belgium as a 'microcosme européen', even recently, only one year ago, in the `Histoire des belges et de la Belgique' by the French historian Yves Manhès.
Excellencies,
Ladies and gentlemen,
The world is markedly different now than 175 years ago, and so is Belgium. Whether these national self-images are purely mythical or indeed contain some truth is a matter to be studied by historians. Nevertheless, it is a fact that some of the characteristics which I just mentioned can easily be discovered in current Belgian foreign policy, and in the role that Belgium plays in the world nowadays. I will limit myself to three examples: Belgium's attachment to effective multilateralism, to sustainable democracy and to an integrated Europe.
First, multilateralism, to which Belgium owes its independence and its place in the European state system. Multilateralism has over time become one of the main pillars of Belgian foreign policy. From a 'child' of multilateralism in 1831, Belgium has become a parent, or co-parent of several multilateral institutions. In the course of time Belgium has become a strong and convinced advocate of efficient multilateralism, a multilateralism not merely based on ad hoc conferences like in the 19th century, but - on the contrary - based on strong institutions, such as the United Nations, NATO, the European Union, or the OSCE. All these organizations, of which Belgium was a founding father, are currently going through a reform process, which will hopefully make them even more efficient. To this we have contributed and we will continue to contribute, either as active members, or as Chairman in Office in the case of the OSCE, or as a newly elected member of the Security Council for 2007-2008.
Secondly, democracy. In 1831, Belgium adopted one of the most progressive, modern and liberal constitutions of the time, containing a set of norms and values that summarized the democratic aspirations of its citizens, and that turned out to be a solid basis for peace, stability and economic growth. The promotion and protection of these democratic norms and values is one of the guiding principles of Belgian foreign policy nowadays, be it in the form of furthering the establishment of the rule of law, or by calling for more 'effective' and responsible governance. History - including Belgian history - shows that these ingredients are the fastest way to more stability and more prosperity, on a national, regional and global level. It also shows that democracy can only flourish if the means of development are available. It was by no means a coincidence that at the Conference of London, the Belgian negotiators did their utmost to make sure that the new country was economically sustainable: it needed an economic basis and infrastructure. It was the Belgian King himself who 175 years ago wrote in a letter to Lord Palmerstone: 'if our means of communication [he referred to railroads and canals] are too much limited and curtailed, we shall perish like a plant without water'. In modern terms: democracy and economic development are two sides of the same coin.
That is nowhere better illustrated than in Europe. Just as 175 years ago Belgium was important to Europe, Europe now is important to Belgium. As a 'European microcosmos', as a country located at the crossroads of Europe, Belgium is well placed to value the importance of further integration.
So, these are some important pillars of Belgian foreign policy: a strong attachment to effective multilateralism, to sustainable democracy, and to an ever more integrated and interconnected Europe ¿ Pillars that at first sight seem to fit well with some of the 'national' characteristics that go back at least 175 years. Characteristics that perhaps are part and parcel of our 'national identity', or at least, of the perception thereof.
As always, one's view on things depends on where one is standing. What I have sketched for you, therefore, is the Brussels perspective of a Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belgium talking in 2006.
I therefore look very much forward to hearing some views and impressions from our neighbouring countries and beyond.
I thank you for your attention.
|
Top page
