A Conversation with Frank Vanhecke

I met with Frank Vanhecke at the Brussels headquarters of the Flemish separatist party Vlaams Belang. The suite of offices, on an upper floor of a commercial building in an office district, actually was rather difficult to find, and some parts of the building were in need of refurbishing. But the suite was businesslike and unremarkable. Frank Vanhecke and I spoke in one of the offices, where our conversation ranged over the history and nature of the Flemish secessionist movement to which he has dedicated most of his life. He is well known as a spokesman for the Flemish separatist movement; he was its chairman for 12 years, and is a member of the European Parliament. An earlier interview in JSR was with Kirkpatrick Sale, whose self-identification is on the left, but who is a central figure in a coalition of American secessionist movements. Vanhecke, on the other hand, is unambiguously on the right, and the Flemish movement he represents is much closer than its American counterparts to having significant political effects. The Catholic concept of subsidiarity, which guided the Distributist movement of the early to mid-twentieth century, is also visible here, as we can see near the end of the conversation. But is Vanhecke—is the movement he represents—radical? Is secession inherently radical? What does radical mean in the context of what could also be seen as a political party of the bourgeoisie?

Arthur Versluis [AV]: Part of the purpose of this interview is to get a sense of your observations on the history of Vlaams Belang and the Fleming secessionist movement. So originally it was the Flemish National Party . . .

Frank Vanhecke [FV]: It is a little more complicated than that, because originally—let’s say in the end of the fifties—there was a Flemish Nationalist Party, called Volksunie, People’s Union, which after some very difficult years became quite successful and to which most of the founders of the later Vlaams Belang belonged. I myself was, from 13 or 14 on, a member of the youth organization of this Flemish Nationalist Party called Volksunie.

[Interrupted by a brief phone call.]

In fact we were all members at that time of the Volksunie, People’s Union, which took part in the virgin government coalition. In our opinion, at that time they did this without even a promise of Flemish reunification becoming a reality. So we thought this Flemish Nationalist Party was becoming a party like all of the others—firstly. Secondly, this Flemish Nationalist Party, since the Vietnam War had, in our opinion, a very leftist tendency, and we were at that moment, we still are, a right-wing political people, right-wing political ideas. So in October 1977, we made a new party—the Flemish National Party, VNP—which for the first time in history defended the idea of complete Flemish independence. So we no longer advocated a federalist country known as Belgium but an independent Flemish state, first of all. Secondly, the new party considered itself to be a clearly defined party with right-wing ideas as opposed to what we call the left wing of Volksunie.

So [in] October of 1977, the same October, a second party was founded—Vlaams Blok—with in fact almost the same program, it was only a difference of opinion about leadership. And only the year after, December of’78, those two parties which were, in the elections, without hope of obtaining a seat did not meld together but had an electoral agreement cartel under the name Vlaams Belang. And, to our surprise, the Flemish People’s Party—Vlaams Blok back then, which was a lot stronger, had a lot more money, was far better organized than the much smaller group to which I belonged—did not get any seats, but our party gained one seat in Antwerp with the founder of our party Karel Dillen.

So this of course changed everything and after a few years, the VNP took over the name Vlaams Belang—stole the name Vlaams Belang, more or less—and became the Vlaams Belang, which still was a very electorally...