Who do they think they are?

The Wall Street Journal writes of the gradual disintegration of Belgian national identity. But they suggest Belgium isn't about to split apart: it would upset the debt markets, most Belgians "say they don't want the headache", and no one can agree how to divide Brussels.

Of more interest is the comment by the (unelected) European Commission.

On Thursday, the European Commission felt obliged to deny reports in a Belgian newspaper that it had formally warned Belgium that its no-government act has gone too far.

The Commission “has full confidence that the current caretaker government will take the necessary decisions in the current context,” the EU executive said.

Remarkably, the official chose to add:

The Commission also has confidence in the democratic process in Belgium.

What do they mean? That Belgian "democracy" is responsive and vibrant? Hardly. Not that the Commission would be likely to welcome that anyway. Look at Finland, keeping its electorate on side by demanding collateral for doomed lending to Greece - and getting it, thereby probably bringing forward chaos and writedowns for German and (especially) French banks.

Maybe the Commission just mean that Belgian "democracy" is so weak that the caretaker government will be compliant? Unlike some Irish governments. And we know how the Commission stamped on Irish displays of democracy.

To the unelected Commission, democracy is just a figleaf for their dictatorial powers. Why do they think we would accord their opinions on democracy any respect at all?