Let Them Pass

Status
Not open for further replies.
The problem for Belgium in this scenario is, that it hasn't merely allowed German armies to transit its' territory to one they already control, either because it was Gerrman to begin with or occupied by an offensive from German territory, but that those German armies will attack France from within Belgian territory, which is a very different kettle of fish. France would have every right to launch a preemptive strike on those German armies on Belgian territory and Belgium wouldn't be entitled to compensations of any kind from France for collateral damages suffered as a result of it.
 
Last edited:
Eh, from the sound of things, it's already too late for the French to stop the transit. IIRC, the latest update had the Belgian Army redeployed to the Franco-Belgian border after the Germans finished passing through.
 
Would have been better for the Belgian POV to "surrender" to the Germans. If the Germans win the war then they get a favourable deal. If the Germans lose the war then at least their soldiers haven't died in the trenches even if much of their nation will still be a battlefield (unavoidable). And technically they haven't facilitated the Germans just not chosen to fight at insurmountable odds
 

Deleted member 94680

I’m sure I’ve read somewhere that OTL, the peace faction and ‘waverers’ in the British Cabinet thought that a ‘limited’ violation of Belgian territory - either agreed to beforehand or simply not resisted when presented as a fait accomopli - would be acceptable and not a cast iron casus belli. It would be Belgian resistance that launched British intervention, rather than British action outside of Belgian activities.
 
I’m sure I’ve read somewhere that OTL, the peace faction and ‘waverers’ in the British Cabinet thought that a ‘limited’ violation of Belgian territory - either agreed to beforehand or simply not resisted when presented as a fait accomopli - would be acceptable and not a cast iron casus belli. It would be Belgian resistance that launched British intervention, rather than British action outside of Belgian activities.
No I don't think that was what was said.

There are no official cabinet minutes from 1914 (incredible!) but the Belgian Grey Book of diplomatic telegrams records this exchange between the British and the Belgians on 31 July

"In view of existing treaties, I am instructed to inform the Belgian Minister for Foreign Affairs of the above, and to say that Sir Edward Grey presumes that Belgium will do her utmost to maintain her neutrality, and that she desires and expects that the other Powers will respect and maintain it."

I hastened to thank Sir Francis Villiers for this communication, which the Belgian Government particularly appreciate, and I added that Great Britain and the other nations guaranteeing our independence could rest assured that we would neglect no effort to maintain our neutrality, and that we were convinced that the other Powers, in view of the excellent relations of friendship and confidence which had always existed between us, would respect and maintain that neutrality.

So Britain expected Belgium to resist -it didn't say what would happen if they failed to resist.
 
Would have been better for the Belgian POV to "surrender" to the Germans. If the Germans win the war then they get a favourable deal. If the Germans lose the war then at least their soldiers haven't died in the trenches even if much of their nation will still be a battlefield (unavoidable). And technically they haven't facilitated the Germans just not chosen to fight at insurmountable odds
Or they could have chosen to do what Denmark did in 1940, offer some token resistence, protest the violation of their neutrality and then surrender. Surrendering of course has the disadvantage, that you're giving up your country's souvereignty and your country will near certainly get occupied, which would vindicate British fears of the Belgian coast and thus channel ports falling into German hands and provoke a British counter-invasion.
 
Seems like the Belgians had three options
  1. Fight - and see their country destroyed and their army decimated
  2. Acquiesce - and risk France and possibly England declaring war on them. The advantage here is that the Germans will be past Belgium by the time the BEF mobilises and Britain doesn't have another army yet to invade Belgium. And France is too busy fighting the Germans in France
  3. Surrender - and risk France and Britain "liberating" Belgium later
The difficult bit for the Belgians is that armies need supplies and the best railroads go through Belgium. So this isn't a one off "turn and look away" exercise
 
Chapter 5: Teutonic Knight and Gallic Barbarian

Geon

Donor
Chapter 5: The Teutonic Knight and the Gallic Barbarians

August 6, 1914, The Franco-Belgium Border: The advance elements of the German 1st, 2nd, and 3rd armies arrive at the border and begin preparations for the actual push across into France. Albert I has ordered the Belgian army to take up defensive positions at least five miles behind the border as proof of Belgium’s desire to not involve itself in this conflict. General Bulow will be prepared to move into France as of August 8th. Meanwhile advance scouting elements of all three armies begin to make aggressive reconnaissance in force of the border areas. During this time an incident occurs that will have implications for both France and Germany later.

A small village near the Franco/Belgian border: A German patrol enters the town shortly after sunset. After entering the town with no resistance the patrol hears sounds of screams from a nearby house. Approaching the house and carefully looking in the windows they see a terrible sight. Two young teenage girls are being held at gunpoint by four very obviously drunk French soldiers. The four soldiers are preparing for a “night of fun” with the two young ladies (read rape). One soldier speaks drunkenly of “these Belgian sluts want to prostrate themselves before the Boche, let them see what a real man can do!"

Although under orders to avoid confrontation with the enemy at present, the captain leading the unit cannot stomach any more. Even as the French soldiers begin stripping the clothes from one of the young ladies the patrol bursts through the front door – passing the bodies of the parents of the two girls apparently shot dead by the French soldiers as they forced entry. Entering the bedroom, they shoot two of the would-be rapists dead and capture the other two. After ascertaining both girls are all right, they march the two French soldiers to the edge of town. There after a quick drumhead trial they hang both French soldiers from a tree with signs draped over their bodies reading “murderer” and “rapist” in French and German. Fearful for the young ladies’ safety the patrol escort them back to the border.

The incident is witnessed by several of the citizens in the town with varying degrees of sympathy both for the girls and the soldiers.

Within the day news of this incident will begin to filter out into the wider world. And as it does it will begin to grow in the telling of the tale. It wasn’t just four drunk French soldiers, it was a dozen, it was a platoon. It wasn’t just a family; it was every Belgian family who had a daughter in the town. Unwittingly four drunk French soldiers out for revenge and a night-on-the town have sown the seeds of the Gallic Barbarian which will be heralded in many a newspaper around the world.

London: Winston Churchill is closeted with Prime Minister Asquith. He is showing him a preliminary plan for Operation Gravelines. Churchill believes with four British divisions a naval force sailing up the River Schledt would be able to take Antwerp and force Bulow’s first army to double back to deal with a threat to the German left flank.

Asquith has not yet committed to war, but Churchill points out that German hegemony in Europe would mean disaster for Britain. Further, Britain cannot, go back on her treaty obligations to the French. A commitment must be made and soon.

Asquith brings up the fact that Albert I’s actions are those “of a man who above all else desires to save his country.” Would it not be better to let this matter play out between the French and Germans? Churchill again reminds him of England’s treaty obligations with France. “If we do not honor our treaty with our allies now, what nation will want to make any sort of agreement with us later knowing that our word is not worth more then the paper that agreement was written on?”

Determined to not give in Asquith points out that the River Schledt runs through neutral Netherlands. Would they not object to British forces sailing through their territory. It is then that Churchill makes what he will confess in his autobiography later to be, “One of the greatest mistakes I could have made in my time as First Lord of the Admirality.” Churchill says, “The Dutch are certainly not going to risk themselves nor involve their nation simply because we choose to sail through their territory. If Albert I would allow the German Army to march through his certainly the Dutch would have no objections to us sailing through theirs.

Asquith is still uncertain and wants to maintain a wait-and-see policy. But Churchill is pushing along with the hawks for a formal declaration of war. And he is gaining ground in the Cabinet.
 
Last edited:
2. Acquiesce - and risk France and possibly England declaring war on them. The advantage here is that the Germans will be past Belgium by the time the BEF mobilises and Britain doesn't have another army yet to invade Belgium. And France is too busy fighting the Germans in France
The disadvantage is, that France is going to occupy the Belgian Congo and keep it post war, even if it loses against Germany.
 

Deleted member 94680

Asquith has not yet committed to war, but Churchill points out that German hegemony in Europe would mean disaster for Britain. Further, Britain cannot, go back on her treaty obligations to the French. A commitment must be made and soon.

Churchill again reminds him of England’s treaty obligations with France.

What treaty obligations? Agreements regarding Newfoundland, Morocco or Siam? There was nothing in the Entente Cordiale about military or defence.

in my time as First Lord of the Navy.
It’s First Lord of the Admiralty, not First Lord of the Navy.
 
How the hell did Churchill even become First Lord of the Admiralty? I only know the most basic of navigating ships, and I know the only way a Royal Navy force is passing through the Scheldt Estuary is with Dutch pilots guiding them through its sandbars and other hazards, and that's without the Dutch (and the Belgians) simply and literally floating mines out with the tide. And that's before facing the guns of the Antwerp Forts.

EDIT: Oh, and what's stopping the Germans from sending the First Scouting Group to Rotterdam once war breaks out, and cutting off the British line of retreat from the Scheldt?
 
Last edited:

Geon

Donor
The thing to remember about Churchill is that he frequently had "bursts of genius" sometimes they worked and sometimes they didn't.
 
*pinches nose*

Well, the repercussions of such a ploy are fairly predictable. Gallipoli up to 11, Belgian and Dutch entry into the war on the CP side, certain CP navies (Kaiserliche Marine, Koninklijke Marine, and the Belgian Navy) able to conduct a close blockade of Southern England, and the ANZACs (maybe even the Japanese) bogged down in a protracted campaign in the Dutch East Indies. I wouldn't be surprised if von Spee stays put, or simply relocates to Batavia, before raising merry hell in SE Asia.
 

Coulsdon Eagle

Monthly Donor
*pinches nose*

Well, the repercussions of such a ploy are fairly predictable. Gallipoli up to 11, Belgian and Dutch entry into the war on the CP side, certain CP navies (Kaiserliche Marine, Koninklijke Marine, and the Belgian Navy) able to conduct a close blockade of Southern England, and the ANZACs (maybe even the Japanese) bogged down in a protracted campaign in the Dutch East Indies. I wouldn't be surprised if von Spee stays put, or simply relocates to Batavia, before raising merry hell in SE Asia.

Would you like to table a list of all Dutch & Belgian warships present in home waters, and then compare to the Channel Fleet (not even the Grand Fleet)? You may find a certain disparity between the two. Hint: it isn't in the CP favour.

I doubt they would be able to mount any sort of blockade without HSF support, and the Germans are not going to let their dreadnoughts be based where they can be cut-off from their home ports.
 
Would you like to table a list of all Dutch & Belgian warships present in home waters, and then compare to the Channel Fleet (not even the Grand Fleet)? You may find a certain disparity between the two. Hint: it isn't in the CP favour.

I doubt they would be able to mount any sort of blockade without HSF support, and the Germans are not going to let their dreadnoughts be based where they can be cut-off from their home ports.
The Channel fleet isn't getting to Antwerp with no buoy marking and no lights. From the Belgian Grey Book again https://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/The_Belgian_Grey_Book

Baron Fallon, Belgian Minister at The Hague, to M. Davignon, Belgian Minister for Foreign Affairs.
The Hague, August 4, 1914.

Sir,
The Minister for Foreign Affairs told me yesterday evening that the Netherlands Government would perhaps be obliged, owing to the gravity of the present situation, to institute war buoying upon the Scheldt.

M.. Loudon read me the draft of the note which would announce this decision to me.

I have the honour to transmit to you herewith a copy of the note in question which was communicated to me yesterday evening.

As you will observe, the Scheldt will only be closed at night. By day navigation will be possible, but only with Dutch pilots who have been furnished with the necessary nautical instructions. In this way both Dutch interests in the defence of their territory, and Belgian interests in the navigation of Antwerp will be safeguarded.

You will note that the Netherlands Government further ask that in the event of the war buoying being carried out, we should cause the lightships "Wielingen" and "Wandelaar" to be withdrawn in order to facilitate the maintenance of the neutrality of Dutch territory.

I would point out that the phrase used in this note, "sailing up the Scheldt," is not sufficiently explicit; sailing down would be permitted under the same conditions. The Minister has, however, given me this assurance.

As soon as the Netherlands Government have decided upon this exceptional measure I shall be informed of it.

About six hours are necessaIy to carry out war buoying.

I will at once telegraph to you.

This happened on the 6 August IOTL
 
Last edited:
Would you like to table a list of all Dutch & Belgian warships present in home waters, and then compare to the Channel Fleet (not even the Grand Fleet)? You may find a certain disparity between the two. Hint: it isn't in the CP favour.

I doubt they would be able to mount any sort of blockade without HSF support, and the Germans are not going to let their dreadnoughts be based where they can be cut-off from their home ports.

The Grand Fleet sailing south would allow the High Seas Fleet to sortie freely to the north, maybe even let von Ingenohl/von Pohl/Scheer have the opportunity to trap isolated elements of the Grand Fleet and send them to the bottom of the sea. Sure, it wouldn't mean much in terms of hard numbers, but it'd be huge propaganda for the Germans. Sure, the Germans aren't winning at sea, but they aren't losing either, as it shows they can actually fight back and hurt the British.

And the First Scouting Group alone being able to operate from the Flanders Coast, screened and supported by Belgian and Dutch ships would raise merry hell. Add to that u-boats conducting offensive minelaying and hitting targets of opportunity, and the CP, while not able to make a waterproof blockade, could still make cross-channel shipping a hellish affair, and put shipping towns in Southern England under constant threat of von Hipper's ships appearing and shelling them out of the blue. Hell, even with limited access to the Flanders Coast IOTL, von Hipper hit Scarborough in late 1914, and in 1916, Boedicker hit Yarmouth and Lowestoft. How much more ITTL, with the Flanders Coast fully accessible and with plenty of green and brown water support from the Belgian and Dutch navies?
 

Deleted member 94680

Why do any of these spitballed scenarios immediately assume British incompetence? How, by aligning with the CP, does the early 20th century Dutch navy suddenly gain the ability to terrorise the Royal Navy in what is essentially their home waters? A close blockade of Britain? Seriously?
 

Geon

Donor
On the matter of Operation Gravelines nothing has been decided by the author yet. I want to hear from both sides before I commit to a final decision here!
 
Whether von Hipper and his battlecruisers being able to operate directly from the Flanders Coast supported by the Belgian and Dutch Navies could effect a close blockade of Southern England is admittedly arguable. However, I would argue it is virtually impossible for the British to pull off an amphibious operation to capture Antwerp at this time. There's no way in hell the Dutch would cooperate, and while transit is one thing, outright occupation is something else, and so the Belgians would never cooperate as well. And without Dutch cooperation, there is absolutely no way the British are going to get ships in any real numbers up the Scheldt to Antwerp.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top