There was a time when Belgium was at Europe's vanguard. It was the second country in the world to industrialize, the founder of art deco and surrealism, and a producer of Nobel scientists who discovered -- among other things -- the God particle.

I was born and bred in this country, but I fear we are now trailblazing a much less positive path for Europe.

Although Islamic State has claimed responsibility for Tuesday's terrorist attacks in Brussels, they were also symptoms of a profoundly Belgian failure. The institutions of a well-policed and efficiently governed state have been evaporating for decades.

Belgium has been torn by the demands of its warring Flemish- and French-speaking communities. At the same time it has been squeezed by an ambitious European project that subsidized and empowered the country's regions at the expense of the state. Belgian institutions were left hollowed out, impotent to address the strains of immigration and incompetent to penetrate a rising extremist threat.

This is at root a story of failed investment in all forms of capital -- physical, human and institutional. For election cycle after election cycle, politicians squandered the wealth of the state to buy their way back to power. Investment became superfluous, vote-buying and social spending the priority. Belgian voters, who allowed this state of affairs to persist, share some of the blame.

When Belgium's ironworks and coal mines were closed, governments preferred to deny the inevitable outcome and borrow to subsidize these loss-making industries. The nation's public debt burden soared to a peak of 140 percent of gross domestic product. Rather than meet debt reduction requirements for joining the new euro currency in the 1990s, Belgium's government chose to fudge budgets, airbrush statistics, sell assets at fire-sale prices and bring critical investment to a standstill. The result was catastrophic.

Public spending on investment fell by more than half, to just above 2 percent of GDP, from 5 percent in 1980. At first, the effects could be ignored, because Belgium was able to rely on past stock, but that cushion disappeared long ago.

David Fuller's view

It may feel too depressing to read more of this article but I encourage you to do so because the lessons are important.

There is a cyclicality in the life of all nations, but I found Jean-Michael Paul’s assessment shocking.  OK, I have not visited Brussels for at least 20 years but I always found the centre of this city to be stunning, confident and prosperous.  Presumably, it still is but sadly the rest of the country appears to be in decline.   

I would not say, as we see above, that Belgium voters “share some of the blame”, although they will have lost confidence.  The trend of deterioration described in the article above has been repeated in too many other EU countries. 

This did not become chronic before the single currency’s launch in 1999 and the unelected Brussels bureaucrats became a bigger influence thereafter.  National governments either felt partly emasculated or at least less responsible.  A ‘pass the buck’ mentality developed in countries with the biggest problems.  It has been a case of let the European Central Bank and EU officials sort it out.  The EU has been the slowest growing region among developed economies over the last sixteen years. 

How can this be an appealing enticement for the ‘Yes’ vote on Thursday 23^rd June that Prime Minister David Cameron is campaigning for?