Belgium, is relatively a small country in Europe, covering an area of 30,528 square kilometers, with a population about 11 million people, yet it is the most difficult country in the world to be ruled.

298 days after the general election in June last year, Belgium is still without a government, making it the only country without a leader for such long period, after Iraq. One may like to know the reason such a small country can't find peace to elect a stable government for themselves.

As a country with two main linguistic groups, the Dutch-speakers (Flemish) and the French-speakers (Walloons), agreement in power-sharing to rule Belgium hasn't been easy, as the country experiences rapid changes of government than any country in Europe.

For example, the Flemish nationalists want more autonomy, even to create an independent state. This is not what any of the political parties such as the Liberals and Christian Democrats want. At the same time, even the socialists who reject cuts and demand for higher taxes, do not want a government without the Flemish Nationalists.

In my opinion, I don't see the reason a small country like Belgium should be divided by autonomous government. The idea of the Nationalists creating an independent state is a plan they should suspend. Dividing Belgium by self-governing would create more problems than the happiness the Flemish Nationalists are looking for.

Who would like the situation in Belgium to be chronic without a solution like that of the Israelis and the Palestinians? At the moment, Belgium's financial situation isn't good. The country reduced its debt level from 130% of the gross domestic product in the 1990s down to the current level of 96%, but this is still high.

It is a big task to form a stable government in Belgium, yet it is the responsibility of all the political leaders, such as Bart De Weaver, Elio Di Rupo, Philip De Winter and past leaders, such as Yves Leterme, Herman van Rompuy etc, to find a lasting solution for this great country.