Dutch-Belgian War

Okay, let's say that a POD a little before 1914 means no real WW1, but instead a political tension between the two power blocs comparable but not analogous to OTL Cold War. For some reason or another, the Low countries blow the fuse and the British baced-Belgium goes against Germany-backed Netherlands in a war. What would the result be, and could anyone think of a reason for it?
 
"Our Flemish Brothers and Sisters have long suffered under the oppresive reign of a Waloon minority. The Kingdom of the Netherlands sees itself provoked into liberating our of the Flemish. We shall stand shoulder to shoulder with our friends and not rest untill they have been liberated from the Walonian opression. Long live the her majesty queen Wilhelmina."

It could be a reason, but I think that the Dutch would not be foolish enough to start a war against a country backed by Great-Britain, even if backed by the Kaiser. There just isn't enough iin it for all sides involved. However, maybe if King Albert treated the Flemish as he did the people of the Belgian Kongo?
 

Susano

Banned
It could be a reason, but I think that the Dutch would not be foolish enough to start a war against a country backed by Great-Britain, even if backed by the Kaiser. There just isn't enough iin it for all sides involved. However, maybe if King Albert treated the Flemish as he did the people of the Belgian Kongo?

Now thats ASB.
However, during the Boer Wars Queen Wilhelmina stated the Netherlands were ready to go to war with GB if only one great power backed them. Now, of course, the anti-boer agression was seen as something much worse than the treatment of Flemes in Belgium, but still, IMO the Netherlands could very well also attack a GB-backed country. Espeically as it would be a land war, and in such an one Id rather have Germany behind me than GB anyways!
 
If I'm not mistaken, the Belgian Army had detailed plans for occupying Dutch Limburg. I can't find a copy at the moment, but I've seen something to do with them before.
 

Susano

Banned
Going to war with a Belgium backed GB would likely result in the loss of some colonies. I don't think the Dutch navy, could stand up to the RN.

Uh, I took "Backed" as "delievers weapons, provides diplomatic support" etc. After all, if backed in this scenario meant "Takes part in the war", it wouldnt be a Dutch-Belgian War as per the topic title, but an Anglo-German War with both sides having secondary allies.
 
If I'm not mistaken, the Belgian Army had detailed plans for occupying Dutch Limburg. I can't find a copy at the moment, but I've seen something to do with them before.

This is true; IIRC shortly after WWI, the Belgian government had plans to occupy Dutch Limburg and Zeeuws Vlaanderen.
 
Going to war with a Belgium backed GB would likely result in the loss of some colonies. I don't think the Dutch navy, could stand up to the RN.

Never mind the fact that the Netherlands is a country of canals. If they went to war with GB, how easy would it be for the RN to send warships right up the Netherlands coastline and bombard Dutch cities and military positions at their leisure? I'm not incredibly familiar with Dutch topography, but IIRC it wouldn't be that hard for the RN to do something like that.
 
Let's say, for purposes of simplification, that neither GB nor Germany actually get involved, they just support their respective ally.
 

MrP

Banned
Let's say, for purposes of simplification, that neither GB nor Germany actually get involved, they just support their respective ally.

I believe Belgian deployment was based around the threat of invasion by Germany. There are six infantry divisions and one of cavalry, plus assorted fortress troops and what have you. An infantry division covers Liege, another covers Namur, both supported by second-line troops. In the Great War the Cavalry Division and three more infantry divisions formed up in the Tirlemont-Perwez-Louvain triangle. I'm not sure, but I believe the final infantry division was up at Antwerp, stiffening a load more second-line troops. This is '14 and follows a re-organisation of the Belgian Army a few years before, so this isn't wholly right for a Boer War era fight, but it's the best I can do. I'm not sure what the Dutch had about. I'll go see if I can find out. I recall they had a peacetime (infantry?) division stationed at Breda, but that's all that's coming to mind at the moment.

EDIT: Checked the old Encyc Brit, which gives no locations, but did give me the number 450,000 for the Dutch Army in '14. By way of comparison, the Belgians mobilised 177,000 for WWI initially, of whom 35% were fortress troops, and 267,000 in total (The WWI Databook). One presumes they could've managed more if the country were unoccupied, but I'd not care to be the Belgian general tasked with devising a plan to defeat the Dutch!
 
Last edited:
Let's say, for purposes of simplification, that neither GB nor Germany actually get involved, they just support their respective ally.

My bad. The Dutch could cut of Belgium's most important harbor, Antwerp, with a blockade. I agree the Belgians would be were more concerned with a German invasion. (they saw that one comming) I think that public perception in England would be most important. Also the Dutch had one of the more advanced aircraft industries in the world, how they would use it is interesting to explore.

Thinking about it, France remains the key here. There was a wide clamoring for 'La Revanche'. I doubt it France would allow a German-backed Netherlands invasion of Belgium to succeed. At worst, it could result in a broader 'von Schlieffen', at best, losing another valuable buffer between france and Germany (and more border to secure).

@MrP: Would you be so kind as to where you find those numbers? I would love to have a look at them.
 
Last edited:
Thinking about it, France remains the key here. There was a wide clamoring for 'La Revanche'. I doubt it France would allow a German-backed Netherlands invasion of Belgium to succeed. At worst, it could result in a broader 'von Schlieffen', at best, losing another valuable buffer between france and Germany (and more border to secure).

I think that you have a good point there. A German-French proxie war could be more interesting than a German-British proxie war. Although such a war could end up in the divission of Belgium by France and the Netherlands (with Germany getting Luxembourg).

Anyway in a war between Belgium and the Netherlands I think up until the WWII Belgium probably was the stronger of the two nations. The Netherlands was more or less a backward nation. Some Frenchman whose name I can't remember once said that if the world was going to end he would have liked to live in the Netherlands, everything happened 50 years later there.
 
Actually there were plans - on both sides!

First of all some misconceptions posted previously.

The plans for war accumulated only on the end of WWI! Belgium was rather disappointed about their share of the war booty: they got Ruanda, Burundi and a small strip of mountenous land on the border from Germany. This was felt not enough by the Belgium General Command.

Belgium was at the end of WWI actually in a rather strong position. It had a battle hardened army full with the latest up to date weapons, supplied by their western allies. Also in southern Netherlands (Brabant, Limburg) was some support for annexation to Belgium (based on religious and culture grounds). Finally Holland was tired of the war. This might sound strange as it did not actually participated but the Allied blockade left The Netherlands hungry. This resulted in riots in Amsterdam. There were even mutenies in the army! Troelstra - the leader of the social democrats even proclaimed the Republic, but he never got enough support.

So The Netherlands had an army without modern weaponary, poor leadership and poor moral.

Belgium could use the fact that Germans were able to cross Limburg during WW1 and the fact that the German Kaiser got exile in Holland as a pretence to attack Holland.

I don't think they would get much support from their allies. So a quick attack was in order. After WW1 Belgium had about three battle hardened divisions. A quick attack in three collums to the Rhine, cut off Maastricht and occupying Zeeuws-Vlaanderen and Holland would, in the state they were in and without modern weaponary /general staff would not be able to resist and probl sue for peace.

In fact about ten years ago ''old'' military plans from the Dutch army came alight wich suggested and attack to Antwerp and a march to Brussels to pre-empt a possible Belgium attack. That would force the allies to support Belgium even more and Holland would probably loose all their colonies.

Thank Goodness the Belgiums didn't press on!
 
First of all some misconceptions posted previously.

The plans for war accumulated only on the end of WWI! Belgium was rather disappointed about their share of the war booty: they got Ruanda, Burundi and a small strip of mountenous land on the border from Germany. This was felt not enough by the Belgium General Command.

Belgium was at the end of WWI actually in a rather strong position. It had a battle hardened army full with the latest up to date weapons, supplied by their western allies. Also in southern Netherlands (Brabant, Limburg) was some support for annexation to Belgium (based on religious and culture grounds). Finally Holland was tired of the war. This might sound strange as it did not actually participated but the Allied blockade left The Netherlands hungry. This resulted in riots in Amsterdam. There were even mutenies in the army! Troelstra - the leader of the social democrats even proclaimed the Republic, but he never got enough support.

So The Netherlands had an army without modern weaponary, poor leadership and poor moral.

Belgium could use the fact that Germans were able to cross Limburg during WW1 and the fact that the German Kaiser got exile in Holland as a pretence to attack Holland.

I don't think they would get much support from their allies. So a quick attack was in order. After WW1 Belgium had about three battle hardened divisions. A quick attack in three collums to the Rhine, cut off Maastricht and occupying Zeeuws-Vlaanderen and Holland would, in the state they were in and without modern weaponary /general staff would not be able to resist and probl sue for peace.

In fact about ten years ago ''old'' military plans from the Dutch army came alight wich suggested and attack to Antwerp and a march to Brussels to pre-empt a possible Belgium attack. That would force the allies to support Belgium even more and Holland would probably loose all their colonies.

Thank Goodness the Belgiums didn't press on!

Actually that could have ended disasterously for the Belgians. Sure their army could probably easily defeat the Dutch army, but I suspect the Belgian population was very warwary and wouldn't like to start a war. Certainly not an unprovoked war against a neutral country like the Netherlands, which helped a lot of Belgian refugees during the war. Especially the Flamish nationalist wouldn't like it and they might even be hoping that collaborating with the Dutch might get rid of their Walloon overlords. Also the population of Limburg and Zeeuws-Vlaanderen did not want to become Belgian, a large majority wanted to stay Dutch. I realy doubt that Great Britain and France would suport such an act by Belgium. They were glad the war ended and didn't want to start a new because of some small nation who was unhappy with what they got. It would end in Belgium alone fighting against the Netherlands, while a large part of the Belgian population would be very unhappy with the war. In the Netherlands on the otherhand most people would support the war, nothing is such a unifying experience as fighting a defensive war (those mutinies where IIRC a result of a mobilized army wich had nothing to do). In the end it wouldn't surprise me if the Dutch won the war gaining parts (maybe, but probably not all) of Flanders.
 
Top