Comment on the "Brussels, an unwitting capital"

This article refers to the involvement of the Belgian political elites to turn Brussels into the single
headquarters of the European Parliament, today officially located in Strasbourg whereas they
meet there only once a month.

The issue on European capitals has always been tricky. Since 1950, the proposal to create the
European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), Brussels had been approved by a large majority
as the European capital. Simultaneously though, the Belgian government supported the
application of Liège, which seemed less attractive for the Europeans. The ECSC institutions were
thus located in Luxembourg, except for its parliamentary Assembly whose headquarters were
based in Strasbourg where the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe had already
installed a large assembly, but met there only four times a year. It is what the British member of
the European Parliament David McMillan Scott reminds in the article.

The current premises of the European Parliament in Brussels were built from 1988 onwards. As
a matter of fact, beyond the Single European Act, the treaty of recovery for the European
economic integration in 1986, the European Parliament played a major role in the negotiation of
300 European guidelines aiming at creating a single market. In such a context, its interactions
with the European Commission and the European Union Council in Brussels gathering the
Ministers strengthened; and a Convention Center was set up in Brussels, to shelter the European
Parliament informally. In 2008, the Parliament held its first plenary session in Brussels, versus in
Strasbourg, where the ceiling of the assembly had partially collapsed.

In 2014, the European Parliament voted for a resolution aiming at identifying its headquarters by
itself, which is now established by the European treaties. However, France and a minority part of
the members of Parliament refuse to leave Strasbourg due to the symbol that this city stands. As
David McMillan SCOTT reminds, Strasbourg shelters the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council
of Europe as well as the European Court for Human Rights, which are both bodies of the Council
of Europe and not the European Union.

Since then, groups in favor of Strasbourg met frequently during the monthly sessions. They
assert that the relinquishment of Strasbourg would trigger a 600 million euro loss (equivalent to
the construction costs of the Strasbourg headquarters) which would be difficult to resell for any
another purpose. They add that the Brussels headquarters could be easily sold for over than 600
million to the European Commission which would need them.

On the other hand, the Brussels defenders try to get well organized by stating that both the
annual financial (180 million euros) and environmental (19.000 tons of CO2) cost is outrageous.

In Brussels, the involvement is slow to set up because the leaders of the campaign in favor of
single headquarters based in Brussels have few contacts with the local politicians.

This headquarters battle shows that the territorial dimensions of the European integration are not
limited to a matter of borders and outskirts, but also to the creation of a strong center which
would be both symbolic and easy to access.