WWI did not start because of Belgium. Austria-Hungary, Serbia, Russia, Germany and France were already at war when the Germans invaded Belgium. That was just the pretext for the British to enter (they most likely would have found some other one).
Could the United Netherlands have survived 1830? What impact might it have had on Europe?
- Thread starter rfmcdonald
- Start date
WWI did not start because of Belgium. Austria-Hungary, Serbia, Russia, Germany and France were already at war when the Germans invaded Belgium. That was just the pretext for the British to enter (they most likely would have found some other one).
The UKN is a very industrialised country with a vast colonial empire. It has much better options than being a tax haven.
The neutrality of the Benelux was a product of their relative weakness, lack of irridentinism and historical circumstances.
Let’s us start with the small things:
Brussel is unlikely to be French speaking by modern, while it was already French speaking, here it will more likely be be a industrial city and the rural population moving in would shift the language to Dutch (I believe the same happened to Antwerp).
Luxembourg will likely use Dutch as their writing standard, it will likely result in Dutch vocabulary being adopted.
We will likely see significant Dutch/German minorities in industrial cities of Wallonia as they migrate to the booming industries.
Belgium will be even more industrialized Belgium with it having access to the captured markets of the Dutch East Indies.
The Dutch will have a bigger colonial empire.
Benelux won’t be neutral, it will likely be a Prussian/German ally.
Brussel is unlikely to be French speaking by modern, while it was already French speaking, here it will more likely be be a industrial city and the rural population moving in would shift the language to Dutch (I believe the same happened to Antwerp).
Luxembourg will likely use Dutch as their writing standard, it will likely result in Dutch vocabulary being adopted.
We will likely see significant Dutch/German minorities in industrial cities of Wallonia as they migrate to the booming industries.
Belgium will be even more industrialized Belgium with it having access to the captured markets of the Dutch East Indies.
The Dutch will have a bigger colonial empire.
Benelux won’t be neutral, it will likely be a Prussian/German ally.
Thomas1195
Banned
1848 would have been far more like in UKN ITTL. Belgium would have been continued to run by the autocratic William I instead of the more liberal Leopold I, so expect greater dissent among Southern Netherlands folks, not to mention the liberals in the North. So, the Belgian immigrants from France could have made a greater impact when they returned from France in 1848 to stage a revolution. The House of Orange would not be popular by 1848, unlike Leopold I in Belgium IOTL.
Playing the cards right then the UK (and/or France in revolutionaries win scenario) could win over the Dutch - either by helping the House of Orange to put down the revolution (unlike the UK, Prussians at the time would have been busy putting down revolutions in Germany), or quickly recognize and guarantee the Second Dutch Republic if the revolutionaries win completely and depose the House of Orange (which Prussia would have been incredibly unlikely to do in any TL).
Well several things would need to happen:
more representation in the Assembly
Willem doesn't need to antagonize the Catholics by placing education completely under the State by
the institutions of state need to be more spread out than in OTL, removing the dominance of the Dutch
more Belgians should be allowed into the officer corps, giving the many southern soldiers their own officers instead of the Dutch/French/English officers they had
tariffs need to be placed on the cheap British products which were undercutting the Belgian products
Don't make Dutch the official language in the south, do it slowly by making both French and Flemish the official languages in the region
and open up the Scheldt, don't levy a toll for any ship passing through, allowing the strategic port of Antwerp to slowly regain its position of power as a major harbor.
The United Kingdom of the Netherlands would be the greatest of middle powers in Europe, a great economical powerhouse just below Great Britain in power due to the ports of Amsterdam, Antwerp and Rotterdam.
In the present time it would probably be just behind Germany in economic power and a member of the G7
more representation in the Assembly
Willem doesn't need to antagonize the Catholics by placing education completely under the State by
the institutions of state need to be more spread out than in OTL, removing the dominance of the Dutch
more Belgians should be allowed into the officer corps, giving the many southern soldiers their own officers instead of the Dutch/French/English officers they had
tariffs need to be placed on the cheap British products which were undercutting the Belgian products
Don't make Dutch the official language in the south, do it slowly by making both French and Flemish the official languages in the region
and open up the Scheldt, don't levy a toll for any ship passing through, allowing the strategic port of Antwerp to slowly regain its position of power as a major harbor.
The United Kingdom of the Netherlands would be the greatest of middle powers in Europe, a great economical powerhouse just below Great Britain in power due to the ports of Amsterdam, Antwerp and Rotterdam.
In the present time it would probably be just behind Germany in economic power and a member of the G7
Thomas1195
Banned
You would need a completely different William I. However, the OTL Belgian Revolution could have been suppressed outright had someone else other than the future William II commanded the army.
The Dutch and German/Prussians are natural allies, the Frenchon the other hand is a natural enemy of Benelux. United Netherlands will always end in orbit of a united Germany. The lack of border strife and the trade network ensures that.
Thomas1195
Banned
I mostly mean the UK. Britain and the Dutch were also often allies in previous centuries (generally from 1688 until the Dutch Patriots tried to support the American Revolutionaries), and Britain and France were not exactly friends in the 19th century. A neutral-friendly Dutch nation was also of Britain's best interest, especially when it holds Antwerp ITTL. Also, a 1848-sque regime change could substantially change the Dutch's international relations overnight.
Last edited:
There’s no natural alliance between UK and Netherlands, their relationship is pragmatic anti-French nothing more.
This all depends on how the UKN survives 1830. What is the POD? Prince William dies at Waterloo leads to a different 1848 than a Russian intervention crushing the Belgian Revolution.
Thomas1195
Banned
It also depends on how Germany/Prussia treats the Netherlands and Netherlands' developments. Note France and Dutch Republic were allies until they did not, thanks to France's expansionist policies. For example, in a 1848 Dutch regime change, which is likely ITTL, Prussia/Austria/Russia could end up being hostile to Netherlands. Or, in terms of economics, Germany's protectionist policies in the 1880s-1890s would have pissed off Netherlands, which ITTL would have been a more significant player in the world economy and would have preferred and benefited from free trade, which Britain already offered.
Maybe, or maybe not. Because in either scenario, the Dutch monarchy as an institution and the House of Orange by 1848 would have been way more unpopular in Netherlands - a place with strong republic tradition - than IOTL. An easy crushing of the Belgian Revolution would have emboldened William I's autocratic policies more not less.
I have to disagree. Yes, if the Czar helps Willem I crush the Belgian Revolution (or simply causes the French to cancel their own intervention) 1848 could very well have turned violent in the UKN as well, very possibly leading to the end of the Kingdom. In that case the country falls apart anyway. The whole idea of the Waterloo PoD has usually been that Frederick Willem (now next in line for the monarchy) has a moderating effect on his father and the Belgian Revolution either never happens in the first place or is resolved in quick fashion. In that case there is no reason for the monarchy to be more unpopular than OTL 1848. Willem I had left his son - not very popular in the first place - with huge debts, a lost war and married a Belgian and Catholic baroness. The monarchy was not very popular.
I would not count on either.
The trade policy of a lasting UKN would resemble the Belgian trade policy more than it would resemble the Dutch trade policy.
And said Belgian trade policy was more protectionist than the trade policy of the Dutch...
- Trade cooperation before 1914
- The good reputation of late XIX century protectionism: manufacture versus total protection in the European tariff growth debate
...and included trade cooperation with the German Empire.
Thomas1195
Banned
Still, Dutch/Belgium tariff policies were lower than any other countries but the UK. The tariffs of UKN would be lower than that of Belgium to accommodate for the commercial North, while still higher than OTL Dutch.
Honestly, I don't think it would be all that much bigger than it was IOTL. At best, they might not sell the Dutch Gold Coast to Britain, and maybe secure a protectorate over the Ashanti.
There was a misunderstanding. I meant to ask how does WWI unfold if Belgium is not an independent country. The question as already answered satisfactorily anyway so there's that.
I think it’s not so much a question about how much bigger it get, but also how a stronger Netherlands deal with what they have.
Even in a Germany with its protectionist policies will still be the most important trading partner of Netherlands. More important France will be the enemy of the simple reason that it will keep trying to get a Rhine border. It would demand a complete rearrangement of the power dynamics of Europe for France not being the biggest threat to Netherlands.