Belgium to split?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by culloty82

The Belgian league is fairly short on teams from French-speaking areas, with only Anderlecht, Standard Liege, Charleroi and a newly-promoted club Eupen from Brussels-Wallonia. There were stories a few years ago that the levels below the Second Division would be regionalised, but doesn't seem to have happened yet

---

Although Anderlecht is in Brussels, they have fans all over Belgium, and I think more in Flanders than Wallonia.

Eupen is a German-speaking town on the border.

It'd be fairly interesting if Belgium were to break up but it seems to pose more questions than anything.

Although Brussels is mainly French-speaking, it is surrounded by Flanders. It would, in effect, be an exclave/enclave (I can't remember the right word) of Wallonia but would the Flemish accept that? Or would the EU try to make it's own independent city-state to protect the EU's operating infrastructure?

Of the few Belgians I know (all French-speaking ones), they seem to dislike Dutch/Flemish things and have more of an affinity to French culture. I'd imagine those people would rather become a part of France than have their own country. Is it different with other Walloons?

Also, what would happen to the small German-speaking region, about c. 70k. Would they be given independence or would they want to be part of Germany?

If Belgium does split, can we look forward to threads on the Walloon “foot.wa” site where supporters of a French-speaking OWC (Notre P’tit Pays, maybe?) ask whether it’s fair that the makey-uppy state down the road is poaching all their best underage players?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peadar1987

And would the leagues split? It seems to me like the situation is radically different to that in say, Montenegro, where independence was seen as freedom from Yugoslavia. Having the majority declare that Wallonia was no longer part of the country would be different. Would FIFA allow the leagues to remain unified, or demand a split?

---

The case for Wollonian and Flemish Nationalism is a hell of alot stronger than for Montenegrian Nationalism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rasputin

The case for Wollonian and Flemish Nationalism is a hell of alot stronger than for Montenegrian Nationalism.

---

.....purely on the basis that the referendum was only narrowly passed in Montenegro?

You've got to remember that there are a lot of ethnic Serbs who settled in the modern Montenegro during its time as part of Yugoslavia and again immediately following the break up when they fled Kosovo, Bosnia and Croatia. This significantly impacted the referendum vote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rasputin

The case for Wollonian and Flemish Nationalism is a hell of alot stronger than for Montenegrian Nationalism.

---

Montenegro was independent before WWI. Have Flanders or Wollonia ever been independent?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

.....purely on the basis that the referendum was only narrowly passed in Montenegro?

---

Not really, more so on the most common bench marks academics use to denote a peoples "Nationalism" or "Nationality".
Such as Language and cultural practices and ethnicity etc.
From my limited knowledge of Montengrian Nationalism it seems to have been formed due to some brief historical incidents which helped forment an insular identity of a region that was largely accepted as just another province of Serbia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Schumi

Montenegro was independent before WWI. Have Flanders or Wollonia ever been independent?

---

Depends how one defines "independance".
One could argue that Flanders received a level of autonomy during the reign of the NAZI's.
Or it could be argued that long before Nation states were formed the people of Flanders were "independant" such as rabid Irish Nationalists do harking back to the pre-plantation days.
Either way its largely irrelevant whether it was once independant or not because in the wider context many more influential factors are taken into account on the forming of a National consciousness.

This was written when the SNP won the Scottish election, but it seems no-one knows what would definitely happen:

http://euobserver.com/9/23197

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peadar1987

Can anyone recall if there has ever been a case where the majority in a government has elected to cut adrift a region of the country who don't particularly want to go? I can't offhand

---

There was a referendum in the Netherlands Antilles about their status - each island voted on what it want, and one (Sint Eustatius) voted to stay within the Netherlands Antilles whereas all the rest voted to become part of the kingdom of Holland. So Sint Eustatius basically voted to remain part of a country that the other islands all voted to dissolve. It's the only thing I can think of that comes close. The country gets dissolved in October.

Yes, the most boring crisis ever is still rumbling on three months later, Friday seeing the talks breaking down when the Francophone leader handed his resignation in to the King. The Dutch have also gone three months with the government, and yesterday long-time friend of foot.ie, Geert Wilders stormed out of coalition negotiations. Then again, would anyone notice the difference if we had no-one in charge !

A bit of a running gag at this stage, but yesterday Belgium celebrated one year without a government. The regional set-up is the reason it's working so well, so Spain or Germany could get away with it, but we'd collapse within days.