Melvin Loh said:
The only potentially feasible POD i could see here which leads to Belgian-Dutch war is if the Walloons start significantly cracking down on Flemish civil and linguistic rights in Belgium, and an extreme nationalist govt in the Netherlands, seeking to protect its co-linguists over the border who share a Germanic tongue, decide to invade. This scenario IMHO would be better in a 1990s context, since in the 1980s both countries would still be largely allied to each other by Cold War-necessitated NATO-centred thinking.
but your last opportunity to get a war like this was in the late 60s.
by the mid 70s the likelyness of a language war starts to decrease rapidly, since this is where the rewriting of the constitution starts.
Currently, Flanders, Wallonia and Brussels are partially independant of eachother.
Unless you POD the rewrites from history, the 90s are impossible to get a war like this.
Now, in 1968, there were the "Leuven Vlaams" protests.
"Leuven" here, referes to the number 1 university of the country. This university is completely inside Flemish lands, yet classes were in French.
The Leuven Vlaams protests changed this.
WI, you remove the mostly bilingual prime minister via some accident and replace him with a Francophone prime minister.
This new PM comes down hard on the protestors, sending in the national guard (in Belgium, at the time, the national guard was a militarised branch of the police).
The protests turn into riots, the riots turn into a revolution.
Army units from Arlon (ie, Francophone) get sent in to dislodge the protestors/rioters/rebels from some city they've seized.
Footage appears on Dutch TV (which Belgians watched quite a lot at the time).
Dutch-speaking army units rebel at the sight of unarmed Dutch-speaking civilians being mowed down by Francophone opperated machines guns.
Now, in this time frame, the vast majority or tank crews, fighter pilots and upper level officers were all still Francophone.
The Flemish have the numbers, but not the equipment.
The French-speakers (Walloons and Bruxelois) can draft foot soldiers but the Flemings can't draft trained officers.
Luxembourg wants no part of the mess.
German, Brittish and Dutch mediation attempts fail on the grounds that they're all "Germanic countries" and thus biased.
France doesn't care enough about "les petits Belges" to get involved.
After a few weeks it's basically just Antwerp and Ghent holding out.
Footage of Dutch-speakers getting beaten, even killed appears on Dutch TV daily.
After a few more weeks, the Dutch have had enough, they invade in support of their Dutch-speaking brethern (with the silent approval of the UN and the NATO allies).
There is a second scenario ...
WI in 1985 the coup d'etat in Belgium succeeded.
(much of what follows is pieced together by the media over the past 2 decades)
The forces behind the coup were army and national guards generals.
The reason was a perceived shift to the left that needed reversing.
The plan was:
1.sabotage any investigation into violent crimes (as luck would have it ... there just happened to be a communist terrorist cell active in Belgium at this time)
2.orchestrate additional violent crimes (this took the form of extremely bloody raids on supermarkets)
3.repeat 1 and 2 until the public takes to the streets
4.present one of the generals as the solution
5.deliberatly botch any talks between the government and the general
6.shift blame of the failed talks on the 'leftist' government
7.keep repeating 1 and 2 until riots break out or militias are formed
8.in a quick move use rebel army units to detain loyal army and national guards units, use rebel national guards units to seize key cities (Antwerp, Liege, Brussels, Namur, Ghent). arrest the government, kick out the royals.
They almost got as far as point 3.
Suppose the coup succeeded.
You now have an extreme right dictatorship in Belgium.
Germany isn't allowed by it's own constitution to do anything about it. Luxembourg is to small, France is not really a part of NATO (enough so that they can go "not our problem")
That leaves the Dutch to sort things out, invade and restore democracy.
Or, the generals stay in charge, but as the years go by the people grow angrier and angrier. The generals, in the end (1989, when everyone is looking east) try to pull a Falklands.
Invading Luxembourg isn't enough of a distraction, so an invasion of the Netherlands is planned.
(and we've pretty much moved into ASB-land here)
As for the wars themselves.
In scenario 1, the best the Dutch can do is perform a quick strike at Liege. With any luck, they can seize it on the first day. From there, they can follow the Meuse valley and take Namur and Charleroi. Or they can head for Brussels after securing Liege.
In any event, the Francophones loose 50% of their population.
The whole thing could be over in 2 weeks.
in scenario 2, a show of force will most likely be enough to sort things out. Antwerp, Ghent, Brugge, Hasselt and Liege quickly welcome the Dutch.
The generals may make a stand in Brussels but it'll never last long.
scenario 3 is an absolute nightmare. To defeat the Netherlands, you need to seize both Amsterdam and Rotterdam ... and they're far pretty far to the north, acoss two major and dozens of minor rivers with wide open flat lands in between. To the Dutch airforce, it'll be like shooting fish in a barrel.
Plus, the Dutch can do amphib landings whereever and whenever they choose.
aftermath 1: Belgium ends in a divorce.
Flanders most likely joins the Netherlands, Wallonia stays independant and Brussels comes under Dutch-administered UN trusteeship for a couple of years.
aftermath 2: The generals are rounded up, the COs of the rebel units are rounded up. The previous government is reinstalled. Elections are held (under Dutch supervision). A whole lot of people end up in front of a fireing squad.
aftermath 3: much the same as 2, only this time the Dutch administer the country until elections can be held.
thoughts? ideas?