null set

A question for all you Badiou scholars

I’m working my way through Being and Event and I’m confused by a seeming aporia concerning Badiou’s understanding of inclusion and belonging.  In Meditation Seven, he writes ‘inclusion can be defined on the basis of belonging alone’ (83)  Later, in his discussion of the void-set, he writes that while it is true that Ø is included in Ø, it is not true that Ø belongs to Ø (87).  I understand, more or less, the arguments that flow from this latter statement, but I don’t understand who it can be true given that inclusion can be defined on the basis of belonging alone.

I may be missing something really simple here, but if anyone has any insight, I would be grateful.