Ģ��Ӱ��

Belgium’s Battle Royal: The Fight for Linguistic Control Through Education and Policy
What are the consequences of Belgium’s stringent, region-based linguistic practices through the lens of education and linguistic human rights policies?
��

By: Brennan Cunningham
Course: LING 3545: World Language Policies
Instructor: Professor Raichle Farrelly
Nominator: Professor Raichle Farrelly
��

Figure 1
Map of Belgium By Linguistic Region

Note. Belgium’s three autonomous regions (Flanders, Wallonia, bilingual Brussels) are marked by their four ethnic and linguistic
communities (Flemish, Walloon, German, French–Dutch). Image Credit: Encyclopedia Britannica. (2026)
��

Introduction:

Belgium is a decentralized nation with three distinct, autonomous regions (Flanders, Brussels, and Wallonia) and four linguistic regions (see Fig. 1), known as linguistic communities. Historically, these regions are inextricable from their linguistic background; primary languages serve as the most important characteristic of regional identity and self-confidence, and the protection and prioritization of primary languages in their corresponding regions is paramount to the maintenance of regional autonomy. The aim of this research was to evaluate the nation’s heavily stratified language policies, separated by region, and understand how policy deployment in both educational and linguistic rights’ co texts shape membership in a diverse, multilingual society.
��

Educational Policy:

Education in Belgium is administered by the communities; that is, the major Flemish/Dutch–speaking Community in Flanders, the major French–speaking Community in Wallonia, the bilingual community of Brussels (although primarily French–speaking), and the minor German–speaking Community in eastern Wallonia were granted federal right in 1989 by the Belgian Constitution to control language use in education in each municipality under their jurisdiction (Belgian Const. arts. 127, § 1, 129, § 1, 130, § 1).��

As such, the fight for linguistic control begins through educational policy; after all, the education system is the site where the majority of an individual’s linguistic development takes place during the early portion of their life and thus begins to shape lifelong linguistic beliefs and practices. Schools within each linguistic region adhere to community practice by using the dominant language as the sole medium of instruction and offering the other official national languages as subjects, alongside other modern languages, toward the end of primary school and continuing through secondary school. Despite national multilingual status, Belgium’s regions intentionally operate their compulsory education systems in monolingual fashion and do not seek to integrate other national languages into their curricula as mediums of instruction (Vandenberghe, 2011).

In 2023’s Special Eurobarometer 540 authorized by the European Commission (see Fig. 2), survey results found that roughly 50% of respondents spoke Dutch as their primary language and 36% spoke French as their primary language. 58% of respondents favored English as their preferred second language of choice (European Commission, 2024). The emergence of English as the most common second language (L2) spoken by Belgians, including in Brussels (which maintains official Dutch and French bilingual status), is an unplanned consequence of the linguistic rift between Flanders and Wallonia. Due to the fact that English does not threaten the primary language programs in Dutch and French in their respective regions, it serves as a mediating language between the regions and a frequently-used medium of instruction language at the university level, where the Belgian Constitution does not apply. The increase in demand for programs using English as the medium of instruction has also enabled sister universities across regional lines to offer joint course programs together in English, allowing for more regional student exchange and serving as a rare instance of regional cooperation along linguistic lines (Walker, 2024).

Figure 2
2023 Eurobarometer Survey Results (Belgium)

Note. European Commission survey results. Belgium’s results (in dark blue) are compared to EU averages (in grey). Image Credit:
European Commission (2024)

Linguistic Human Rights:

There is a reality of language stratification that indicates a national–regional–minority language hierarchy in Belgium’s linguistic communities. Article 30 of the Belgian Constitution indicates freedom of language use in private life, but that public and legal matters will only be conducted in one of the national languages (Dutch, French, German) as dictated by the regional procedures of Article 4’s officially identified linguistic communities (French, Dutch, bilingual Brussels, German), implemented in 1970. Article 2 of the official English translation of the “Décret relatif aux langues régionales endogènes de la Communauté française” (Decree Relating to Endogenous Regional Languages of the French Community) indicates the French Community’s “duty to preserve them [the regional languages], (and) to promote their scientific study and use, either as a tool of communication or as a means of expression.” While measures such as the French Community’s Decree have language aimed toward securing both negative and positive rights for regional languages, no such language exists in the French, Dutch, or German-speaking Communities protecting minority languages.

Flanders sees “linguistic diversity resulting from migratory flows … most seriously as a threat and a problem” (Hambye 12). In response, they promoted integration by instituting a “civic process” for non–European immigrants, forcing social housing applicants to demonstrate that they can speak Dutch or will enroll in courses to learn Dutch. These procedures indicate the desire from the Flemish and Dutch–speaking community to marginalize minority language speakers in the hopes that they assimilate into Flemish culture. Belgium’s linguistic policies reaffirm regional sense of belonging for existing members and protect regional dialects, but either ignore the status of linguistic minorities or condemn them by way of withholding social benefits until they align with their region’s linguistic majority.

Conclusion:

Tensions between the regions and communities over language unearth shared linguistic anxieties and insecurities, reflected in similar policy decisions aimed toward securing the dominance of primary regional languages in education and formal written law at the expense of the other national languages, minority languages, and minority groups. Belgium’s non-compulsory higher education system welcoming English-medium instruction exchange programs offers insight into how multilingual medium instruction could look at the K–12 level. However, in spite of a diverse and multilingual population statistically speaking, such a reality seems impossible for Belgium given the role policy has played and will continue to play in ensuring monolingual instruction during compulsory education. Beginning with regional education systems, individuals in Belgium are taught from young to associate much more strongly with their regional identity and its language than any imagined notion of a nationally shared linguistic identity. Furthermore, newcomers and outsiders in each region are also pushed by policy to assimilate to their region’s dominant language, lowering the likelihood of a widespread multilingual push at the national level to come from any actors outside of Belgium.

References:
Encyclopedia Britannica. (2026). Ethnic and linguistic composition of Belgium [Photograph].
https://www.britannica.com/place/Belgium/Ethnic-groups-and-languages#/media/1/5926
8/750
European Commission. (2024). Europeans and their Languages. Retrieved from,
https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2979
Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles. (1990). Décret relatif aux langues régionales endogènes de la
Communauté française. Translated into English. Retrieved from,
https://gallilex.cfwb.be/sites/default/files/imports/08734_000.pdf
Hambye, P. (2009). Multilingualism and Minorization in Belgium: Odd Relationships with
“Foreign” Languages. Translated into English. Langage et société, 129(3), 29-46.
Hemelsoet, E. (2015). Whose problem is it anyway? Realising the right to education for Roma
children in Ghent, Belgium. https://doi.org/10.3828/rs.2015.1
Vandenberghe, V. (2011). Inter-regional educational discrepancies in Belgium. How to combat
them?. Educational Divergence, 6.
Walker, L. (2024). English-language education more popular among all students, including
Belgians. Retrieved from,

Brennan is a graduating senior at Ģ��Ӱ�� Boulder majoring in English Literature with minors in
Philosophy and TESOL. He enjoys watching sports daily and is considering traveling abroad or
beginning post-graduate studies in Europe in the coming year.