The Flemish Terminator

Weltwoche: Your goal is a sovereign, independent Flanders. As a Swiss, whose country has a centuries’ old history of carefully tailored cooperation of demographically various and economically unequal parts we wonder, why do you want a divorce from your fellow citizens in the south?

Tom Van Grieken: Because unlike Switzerland there is nothing carefully tailored about the way Belgium functions. There are many great democratic unbalances. For example: despite the fact that in the federal elections of 2019 Vlaams Belang got 170.000 votes more than the Walloon socialists, we ended up with two parliamentary seats less.

Flanders leans more to the right, Wallonia more to the left. We not only speak different languages, have different public cultures, we also have very different political views. As democrats, we believe that Wallonia as well as Flanders have the right to be governed according to the political ideas we respectively uphold. In Belgium, that is impossible. Literally none is satisfied with the horrible compromise that is found on a federal level, often only after hundreds of days of fruitless negotiations.

Moreover, because of the complex way Belgium is structured, the Walloon parties are often dominant in the federal government. They can block any reform Flanders proposes. In the meanwhile, in Wallonia, taxpayers’ money is squandered on socialist policies, but because the social system is financed on a federal level, they have no fiscal accountability. Flanders loses via these transfers almost 13 billion euros every year to Wallonia.

Weltwoche: You say that “Belgium is a failed state”. Belgians have a long history, they were mentioned by Cesar in his “De bello Gallico” as a large confederation of tribes. In admiration he wrote, “of all the Gaulish tribes, the Belgians are the bravest”. Why do you think that a state with such ancient roots is defunct?

Van Grieken: The Belgian tribe mentioned by Caesar has nothing to do with the current Flemish and Walloon peoples. Belgium was founded in 1830 in a secession of the Netherlands. It’s not a state with a long history and was mostly internationally accepted because it functioned as a buffer state in the heart of Europe. Flanders has on a cultural, political and historical level way more in common with the Netherlands than with Wallonia.

Belgium as a state never properly functioned. Only gradually during the twentieth century the Flemish people earned the right to be schooled in their own language. It was a long political struggle against the French-speaking bourgeoisie that oppressed the Flemish language, identity and autonomy.

Weltwoche: “We want a divorce, and custody of the child,” you said. “The child is Brussels.” Would that mean that the capital of the EU would be in a Flemish state? Or would you agree to share the capital with Wallonia?

Van Grieken: Brussels is our capital, and it is a Flemish city historically, geographically and economically. The Walloon government has its seat in Namur, where the parliament of Wallonia is based as well. So, I see no need to “share” Brussels with Wallonia.

Of course, we recognize the bilingual nature of the city and would give a unique institutional status to the city, giving facilities to the French speaking community.

Weltwoche: We Swiss have a tradition of holding referendums on important topics. Why not ask your people what future they want?

Van Grieken: We absolutely sustain a referendum on Flemish independence! I’d be happy to fight that political battle. We are a great supporter of the Swiss system of referendums, and I would like to see a similar system implemented in an independent Flanders. But the Belgian constitution doesn’t recognize such referendums, so it would be of less political value to our cause. That’s why our strategy focuses on a majority in the Flemish parliament, which is an international recognized way of gaining independence.

Weltwoche: You are called a “populist”, which is a popular “label” to shame persons who mainstream politicians dislike. How would you describe yourself?

Van Grieken: A Flemish patriot. We stand for our people and their interests, and their interests alone. That’s exactly what the name of our party signifies: ‘Flemish Interests’. You can only spend a euro once, and we believe that state has first and foremost the responsibility to spend that euro to provide for and protects its citizens. Not to sustain an unsustainable socialist policy in the south of the country, not the facilitate mass migration to our country, and not to finance the endlessly complex and misfunctioning Belgian political system.

Weltwoche: What has shaped your political views, was there an event that was particularly important?

Van Grieken: I grew up in a very multicultural neighborhood. All the different immigrant groups were proud of their roots and their identity, and in school and in the public debate I constantly heard that it was perfectly fine for them to be. But somehow it wasn’t for me. The Flemish identity was something to be mistrusted and pride thereof was misplaced. That felt absurd. Migrant riots in the streets when I was a teenager were the catalyst for me to become member of the party, I am president of today. Of course, many more people, ideas and events shaped my current political views later on.

Weltwoche: What key topic for Europe is migration. You argue that Third World refugees “should be taken care of in their own region or adjacent countries” rather than “seek asylum in Oslo, or Antwerp.” How precisely you suggest for Third World countries to stop migration into Europe? And if migrants still set over to Europe, how should they be dealt with?

Van Grieken: You can help forty refugees locally with the budget spend on sheltering one in Europe. So, we should do that rather than facilitate the horrible human trafficking into Europe.

Every year we donate hundreds of million on development aid to countries who often refuse to take back illegal immigrants who entered our countries. That is absurd, of course. We say that that aid should be used as leverage to organize an effective return policy.

More than 55% of asylum seekers who enter our country don’t have the right for asylum. We must be clear: if you don’t have a right for asylum, you have no chance of staying here. That message alone will stop a lot of the influx. There are probably around 200 000 illegal aliens in our country due to the lax return policy. There is nothing humane about that. In the best case they are illegally employed and housed by slumlords, worst cast they live on criminality and on the streets.

Weltwoche: Geert Wilders, who has formed a coalition in the Netherlands, describes Islam as “not compatible with our Western values.” What is your position on Islam? Half of the children in Antwerp are Muslim. How should the Islamization of the Flemish population be dealt with?

Van Grieken: The Islamization of our country should be stopped. We propose to no longer finance Islam, nor provide Islam lessons in state education. Stopping the mass migration, often from Islamic countries, would also help not making the problem bigger than it is. We stand for the equality of men and women, for freedom of religion, for acceptance of gay people, for the separation of Church and State, … The Islamic ideology does not.

Weltwoche: Flaams Belang is predicted to win the upcoming elections but not gain a majority. If you won’t succeed in forming a government, how could your prominent voice still be heard and your impact on politics be secured?

Van Grieken: Whether or not we are part of government or part of the opposition, the bigger our party gets, the more we can impact policy. In 2018 the federal government fell over our opposition to the Global Compact for Migration, which we called the ‘Marrakesh pact’. We had three members of parliament then, not even formally a parliamentary fraction. Imagine the impact we can have with a multiple of that. Since our breakthrough in the nineties, we continually set the agenda. Especially on migration.

Weltwoche: Belgium is officially a Kingdom. What is your party’s position towards the crown? If the Flemish become independent, would you also separate from the crown?

Van Grieken: We are a republican and a democratic party. There is nothing democratic about an outdated institution as the monarchy, and the only thing that the Belgian crown still represents it the failed and money wasting state of Belgium. We want a president who is directly elected and thus democratically represents the whole of the Flemish nation.

Weltwoche: Belgium joined NATO as a founding member. What is your party’s position on the future of NATO in the security architecture of the West? Should it continue to support Ukraine in the war against Russia and welcome Ukraine as member state?

Van Grieken: We are nationalists and thus support the nationalist struggle of Ukraine against Russia. We condemned the Russian attack from day one and helped by sending and supporting humanitarian aid to Ukraine. Of course, we are and want to remain a loyal NATO-partner and advocate for close European military cooperation. But we don’t want the conflict to escalate further and to send for example Flemish soldiers to Ukraine. We hope that the weapons soon turn silent and peace negotiations can take a start.