What if Ursula von der Leyen decided to impose a European District on Brussels-Capital?
Brussels, the seat of the European institutions, has been paralysed for the past 7 months by an internal political deadlock that is hampering its development and governance. Against this backdrop, could the idea of transforming the Belgian capital into a European District under the impetus of the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, offer an innovative solution or create a political storm?
The current formator, David Leisterh (MR-french speaking liberal party), has been unable to form a regional government, leaving the region in a situation of precarious governance coupled with a financial situation that is worsening by the day. Brussels is facing a political impasse due to linguistic and ideological divisions between the French-speaking and Dutch-speaking parties. Politicians’ egos, the search for the « stinking valet »…: is all this compatible with good governance?
The idea of a ‘European district’ for Brussels is not new, but if von der Leyen decided to impose it, it could offer several potential advantages. European funds could be used to improve transport infrastructure, thereby reducing urban congestion. Brussels would become an even more attractive hub for businesses and cultural organisations, simplifying administration for international residents and workers. Greater security would benefit this diplomatically crucial area, and the city-region could embody a model of sustainable urban development.
However, there could be many challenges and resistance to this proposal. Belgium could see this as a loss of control over its capital, requiring complex amendments to the European treaties. The balance of power between the EU and local governance would have to be carefully managed to ensure that local voices are not drowned out. It would nevertheless be a fine case of the multi-level governance so much advocated by European bodies such as the Committee of the Regions. On the other hand, funding such a project would raise questions of equity, and there would potentially be political opposition within Belgium and across Europe. Social integration could also be put to the test, with a risk of exacerbating cultural tensions.
In the current context, it is complicated to ask the opinion of the different political parties, whether they are French-speaking or Dutch-speaking. In any case, the governance of such a European district would require a mixed administration, combining local and European governance, with a commission where all levels of power would be represented. A direct European authority would be needed for issues of security, European infrastructure and specific urban planning, while ensuring local participation. Legislation would need to coordinate Belgian and European frameworks to avoid conflicts, and funding would be shared between the EU and Belgium, with specific funds for European projects.
Governance challenges include striking a balance between Belgian souverainty and European influence, ensuring the democratic representation of Brussels residents, adapting legislative frameworks, coordinating between Brussels-based institutions, and managing potential conflicts.
If von der Leyen chooses to impose this district, she would be navigating stormy political waters, requiring agreement between the EU, Belgium, and potentially the approval of other Member States. Such action would be seen as a major intervention by the EU in Belgian governance, putting the principles of subsidiarity and national souverainty to the test.
In conclusion, although the idea of a European district for Brussels could solve some of the region’s concrete and current problems, it raises many questions about democracy, sovereignty and the future of European integration. The fear that von der Leyen could impose such a reform may well bring Belgian politicians back to reality, encouraging them to move away from ego battles and focus on forming a functional government and consensus to govern Brussels in the interests of all its residents. Perhaps that’s the most important thing: getting everyone around the negotiating table, isn’t it?
