I think it's important to remember two things
1. Flemish nationalists want a Flemish state and the only realistic scenario where Belgium dissolves is Flanders seceding.
2. If Flanders secedes then Wallonia and Brussels would be the continuity state under internatonal law. They would remain "Belgium" and retain its EU and NATO memberships, whereas the new Flemish state would have to apply for membership of international organizations.
If Brussels then secedes from the much poorer Wallonia to become a city state Wallonia would remain "Belgium" (since Brussels is the capital of the union the EU would then have to find a way to make Brussels an instant EU member, and the same goes for NATO as its HQ is in Brussels).
There were talks between Wallonia and France to unite, or Wallonia to be even incorporated by Germany (Magnette had that idea once). Brussels is indeed a big problem, but in the case a dissolution happens, it would be a good idea to create Brussels D.C. as the capital of Europe and under juridisiction of the EU, but Wallonia probably can't survive alone so they would to France and Germany to incorporate them (most likely France).Not sure Germany wants Wallonia, but Walloons do not want to be a part of France, whether its the political elites or the common person. Because the French have a way different governance model and Walloons want autonomy...which will not be afforded by any French government.
Brussels becoming DC...with no voting rights? And just an empty shell of institutions. No thanks. Half of Brussels citizens are probably still oblivious to the entire institutional debate.
De Wever and even a lot of VBers want a velvet divorce à la Czechoslovakia. The hardline nationalist strategy (in broad strokes) is to push the socio-economic Federal institutions and Flemish political discourse so far right, and block as many federal or Francophone majority institutions (such as Brussels) that Wallonia especially wants the velvet divorce. Its not out of the question that that happens.
That's true. De Wever has said it openly. When polls indicated that PTB had 20%, he said that if Wallonia wants to be a communist state, it would be without them, but how much more they vote for the right in Flanders, how much more Wallonia will vote to the left, basically all right-wing and traditional parties who work together with N-VA will be punished for that in next electoral elections. It's complicated and a difficult country.
I think Walloons generally vote Left, and indeed vote in general, without thinking about the repercussions on the federal level though. MR lost a little but not that much. Its perhaps a bad thing but I don't think they vote left as an expression of Walloon regionalism. They are a bit oblivious of what happens in the north, and struggle to comprehend separatism. They were shocked at the VB result for example when everybody in Flanders saw it coming.
Dissolution I would say unlikely. Confederalism like e.g. Switzerland? Could be on the table for the next couple of years now that the southern (Francophone) part of Belgium and the Northern (Dutch) part, voted pretty different, the first one voting more and more towards the (extreme) left side of the political spectrum, the second one doing the opposite and voting more and more towards the (extreme) right side of the political spectrum. So that's reality, and something that isn't easily solved.
Could confederalism be a solution? Don't know really now for certain. I would dare to say in theory yes but there are a lot of questions to be asked. Main thing being Brussels, I would say. What do you do with that? You can't "give" it to either the Dutch people or the French people. I'm also not that keen on splitting an already small country into even smaller bits (splitting is not really the correct term I know).
The thing about confederalism (which is hard to define as parochial said) is that it already de facto "exists" through the mechanism of seperate electoral districts in the regions, that are themselves legally on equal standing to the federation. So unlike in Spain and the UK the regional parliaments cannot be suspended, and indeed are the most powerful organs due to their fixed parliaments. If the country still runs without a federal government its also because a lot of competences are already regional.
N-VA probably hide behind "Confederalism" like the Quebec Seperatists hid behind "A new Economic and Political Partnership", while in reality they want a fully fledged independent State with nothing more than normal State to State relations with Wallonia.
Hmmm, I genuinely think some of the more soft-line nationalists (including potentially De Wever, who is a realist and a Burkean conservative above a chest-pumping nationalist) see the lack of integration of EU competences like Foreign Policy, and especially Defence, as a sign that the Belgian state still has its usefulness, so confederalism would allow them for example to not have to re-organise the military or our UN representation, and of course, EU membership and the considerable normative clout Belgium has a a small country. They wanted the EU to come in and cover those areas of competence but that looks dead in the water.
(Not to mention the Belgian national team and football league, but I imagine the BeNeLeague would be formed by then.)
