Commonsense sovereignty: a practice theory of Flanders’ paradiplomacy to the European Union

ABSTRACT

European regions implement up to 70% of EU legislation, yet they are generally considered ‘objects’ rather than ‘subjects’ of European governance. This article proposes an original conceptual framework derived from practice theory in IR for the analysis of regional paradiplomacy in multilateral institutions. Through a case study of the Delegation of Flanders to the EU based on interviews with Flemish and Federal members of the Belgian Permanent Representation, this research contributes to the literature on paradiplomacy by critically examining the commonsense acceptance that sovereign authority can be delegated to substate actors while the unity of sovereign political representation must remain unchallenged. The analysis therefore shows that regional strategies of engagement with the EU are not only determined by formal institutions but are also shaped by taken for granted understandings of sovereignty which set the standards of competent diplomatic practice and inclusion for substate representatives.

KEYWORDS:

• Sovereignty
• Paradiplomacy
• European Union
• Practice Theory
• Flanders
• Belgium

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Professor Justin Massie, Professor Frédéric Mérand, Professor Stéphane Paquin, and my long-time collaborator Charles Berthelet (MA, Political Science) for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this research project. I also thank the Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire sur la diversité et la démocratie (CRIDAQ) of l'Université du Québec à Montréal for funding my travel costs for in-person interviews in Brussels and Antwerp, as well Professor David Criekemans for putting me in contact with the Flemish Delegation to the EU. Moreover, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the members of the Flemish Delegation, the Flanders' Chancellery and Foreign Office, and the Belgian Permanent Representation to the EU for kindly agreeing to participate in this research. Finally, I extend my thanks to Dietlind Stolle, my colleagues from the POLI700 Research seminar at McGill University (Fall 2023), the anonymous reviewers, and the journal editor for their constructive feedback on the latest version of this article.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 The regions and communities each have an elected parliament and executive. The regions are responsible for ‘territory-bounded competences’ (such as infrastructure and employment, some of which are shared with the federal level), while communities manage ‘person-bounded competences’ (such as culture and education) and therefore cut across the regions (Reuchamps and Onclin 2009).

2 At its foundation in 1830, the Kingdom of Belgium was a unitary francophone state which awarded limited political and linguistic rights to its majority Flemish population, earning it an international reputation as a primarily “francophone” country (Lacey, 2017; Van Dam, 1997). This historical predominance explains the “political regionalism” seen in Wallonia today, which differs from Flemish nationalism despite a shared concern for regional autonomy. To this day, Francophone Walloons tend to feel a strong cultural and linguistic attachment to the Kingdom of Belgium, and their political allegiance is often split between three governmental entities: the Walloon region, the Belgian Federal state, and the French community, the latter of which was renamed Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles in 2011 to reaffirm the cross-cutting identity and linguistic ties linking the Walloon and Brussels-Capital regions (Moscovitz, 2020). To compensate for the lack of institutional integration between Wallonia, Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles, and the Francophone Community Commission of the Brussels-Capital Region, the three entities entered into an agreement in 2008 creating the public organisation Wallonie-Bruxelles International, which coordinates and facilitates the conduct of external and EU affairs on behalf of “la Belgique francophone” (Francophone Belgium).

3 More on this in the conclusion.

4 The department has since been renamed the Flanders Chancellery & Foreign Office.

5 This research was granted an ethics certificate by the CIEREH (Interdisciplinary committee for research with human beings) of l’Université du Québec à Montréal.

6 The Permanent Representation of Belgium to the EU comprises the Flemish Delegation, the Wallonie-Bruxelles Delegation (which represents Wallonia and the French community, or Fédération-Wallonie Bruxelles), the Brussels-Capital Delegation and the German-speaking Community Delegation.

Additional information

Funding

Fieldwork and interviews for this research were funded by the Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire sur la diversité et la démocratie (CRIDAQ) de l'Université du Québec à Montréal, as well as by the Fonds de recherche du Québec - Société et Culture.