How will Belgium react to a French violation of its neutrality in 1914?

[Helmuth48]

Suppose Germany chooses an 'east first' strategy in 1914, i.e. attack in the east and defend in the west. France declares war on Germany, as the alliance with Russia requires. Soon the offensive in Lorraine ends in disaster for the French. The only hope for a quick victory is to flank the Germans through the Ardennes. Belgium obviously does not give the French permission, but France does not care about that. However, when the French march into the Ardennes, the Germans do the same. After the French declaration of war, Germany occupied Luxembourg and therefore has an army ready there. The French and Germans try to flank each other, extending the front further and further north, as far as Liège. The Ourthe valley will form a perfect defense for the Germans.

How will the Belgians react? They will not defend the Ardennes, but will the Belgians defend the fortresses around Namur and Liège against the French and Germans respectively? These are also important railway junctions. There are a number of options:

1. Both are defended. The Belgians will lose this. Liège is turned into a German stronghold and the rest of the country is occupied by France (if the Germans continue to pursue a defensive strategy in the west).
2. Only Namur is defended. The Germans actively support the Belgians, which makes Belgium a German ally. The front will run right through Belgium. Will Britain now declare war on Belgium and Germany and occupy the North Sea ports, to prevent the Germans from using them?
3. Only Namur is defended. The Germans, however, refuse to assist the Belgians and merely say 'thank you' for allowing them to use Liège as a defense against the French. The rest of Belgium is occupied by France.
4. Only Liège is defended. The French actively support the Belgians, which makes Belgium a French ally. Liège becomes a frontline city.
5. Neither are defended. The Germans make Liège a stronghold against the advancing French. The rest of Belgium becomes a de facto passive ally of France.

Option 2 is the worst for Belgium, because it produces the largest war zone. The other option doesn't really matter much in the end. Option 2, on the other hand, is favorable for France, because it offers the best chance of British intervention.

 

[Helmuth48]

A map of the war zone with deployment plans.

 

[raharris1973]

Are you sure you meant to say ‘option 2’ twice above?

 

[Helmuth48]

Are you sure you meant to say ‘option 2’ twice above?

Yes, option 2 gives France the best chance of British intervention. For Belgium, option 2 is the least favorable, because the country will then largely turn into a war zone.

 

[kham_coc]

Yes, option 2 gives France the best chance of British intervention. For Belgium, option 2 is the least favorable, because the country will then largely turn into a war zone.

I'm not so sure that option 2 is as good as you think - In a situation where Belgium chooses Germany, France is (if victorious) liable to want to keep all of Wallonia, thereby ensuring that what remains (I.E the bits the UK care about) is very pro-german in the future, or in a German victory, clearly going to stay allied with the new continental Hegemon it just shed blood with - Then there is also the question of who can Re-inforce or invade faster, I think there is a real risk that there are more availeable compact German formations that can be put on railroads into Belgium than there are first rate French corps that are able to invade Belgium.
Certainly before the UK could magic up some landing capacity to take the ports in question and if Germany holds them and the UK is presently neutral, i think they are more likely align themselves with Belgium.

That being said, I think the UK would be in the war by this point, and the Belgians would be forced to pick a side, and that side would be France's.

 

[DougM]

I disagree, France invading Belgium should (using GB own logic) result in GB going yo war with France as it violated Belgium the same “reason” Gzb used to justify going to war against Germany.
Note I do not for one minute believe GB Will declare war on France over Belgium,

 

[NoMommsen]

....
That being said, I think the UK would be in the war by this point, and the Belgians would be forced to pick a side, and that side would be France's.

Since when in the course of events ITTL and how? (... ye know ... reason for DoW ... changing non-interventinistic attitudes of the own party ... etc.) ... esp. selling to force Belgium to choose (ofc the Entente) side?

I disagree, France invading Belgium should (using GB own logic) result in GB going yo war with France as it violated Belgium the same “reason” Gzb used to justify going to war against Germany.
Note I do not for one minute believe GB Will declare war on France over Belgium,

... but on Germany (at least as sold to the public) ... good ol' "perfidious albion" ...

 

[NoMommsen]

However ...
I've voted for last option in some disagreement with the course of events as described in the OP.

IMHO neither would France got for Namur nor Germany for Liege nor any of the two for both of theses Strongholds.

... simply because they are way of the area of interest: the Ardennes-Eifel​

The germans - already committed to defense ITTL - would be more than fine behind prepared defenses in highly defensive terrain (Eifel and the Our-valley) not even "needing" a further invasion of Luxemburg aside the south around the city itself against Arlon.
The french ... also don't need Namur as their line of attack is well south of the Meuse. They (Joffre) 'simply' wants to bypass/circumvent the heavily fortified zone of Diedenhofen-Metz. He 'aims at enclosing the germans in that region by meeting of this his two 'wings somewhere at the Moselle (Trier/Merzig aka the Hunsrück mountains.

All the while the belgians might sit at the ropes (the Meuse) having a beverage and watching the show southwards.
... acompanied by some protests, maybe some words-only DoWE against either France and/or Germany and/or both depending on whos troops actually maneuver on their territory (something at least diplomatically 'strong' has to be done to safe face).
Though ... prior to the german invasion IOTL the belgians made it diplomatically quite a stand ... or stunt (?) to reassurre everybody - germans, french and brits - being ready as well as willing to FIGHT whoever might invade them.

 

[Belka DNW]

If the Germans have at least one brain cell working they would offer Belgium support and entry into the Central Powers, and while some skirmishes will occour I believe the British would intervine and demand that both parties leave Belgium immediatly; they don't want German continental domination but I don't think they would fully back the French in this scenario, the domestic situation would quite chaotic with anti-war and pro-german groups point out that Britain is backing an unprovocked invasion of a neutral country who was minding it own business.

 

[Catspoke]

I agree as suggested above, the Belgians will defend both Liege and Namur against all comers who try to take them. But the French won't try to take either fortress, not will the Germans who's heavy artillery is committed against Russian fortresses in the east. The French will use the rail line Montmedy-Luxemourg City for supply (rail map below).

Britain will be in the war before the French do this (assuming British DOW within French DOW after August 10th.). So the Belgians protest, but in practice do nothing more and in practice Belgium is open for commerce, including with Germany directly via the Cologne, Liege rail line. The Germans will demand aggressive Belgian action but won't get it, but the Germans won't do anything about it because they need access to the port of Antwerp and Belgian markets to circumvent the British blockade, and they don't have the forces present (yet) to do anything about it.

The Belgians secretly hope the British and French win because they trust they will eventually leave (the French happy to get Alsace Lorraine back). Because if the Germans win big, they will demand at least permanent occupation of Liege and Namur and the area east of the Meuse and will take Belgian Congo just because they want it.

Likely though the Germans win in the Polish bulge in September 1914, the Austrians rally behind the San successfully, the Austrians can then afford to send reserves to the Serbian front and at least push the Serbians south of Belgrade by the end of the year. If the Germans and Austrians control Poland and the length of the Danube all the way to Bulgaria, they could shift forces west again in 1915 because I could see them wanting to keep their Lorraine artillery mines out of French occupation or artillery fire and to take Longwy and Briery (useful bargaining chip worth more than any crappy colonies the French might have taken like Togo).

 

[raharris1973]

I'm not so sure that option 2 is as good as you think - In a situation where Belgium chooses Germany, France is (if victorious) liable to want to keep all of Wallonia, thereby ensuring that what remains (I.E the bits the UK care about) is very pro-german in the future, or in a German victory, clearly going to stay allied with the new continental Hegemon it just shed blood with - Then there is also the question of who can Re-inforce or invade faster, I think there is a real risk that there are more availeable compact German formations that can be put on railroads into Belgium than there are first rate French corps that are able to invade Belgium.
Certainly before the UK could magic up some landing capacity to take the ports in question and if Germany holds them and the UK is presently neutral, i think they are more likely align themselves with Belgium.

That being said, I think the UK would be in the war by this point, and the Belgians would be forced to pick a side, and that side would be France's.

So does your second one-sentence paragraph simply negate everything in the paragraph you said above it? That's what it seems like.

Or you're undecided on how it would work out in practice?

 

[raharris1973]

If the Germans have at least one brain cell working they would offer Belgium support and entry into the Central Powers,

@Helmuth48 is in vigorous disagreement with your notion, saying that this would be the worst option for Belgium [maximizing the breadth of damage], the best option for France [because most likely to bring Britain to intervene on *France's* side] and that equation of Britain joining the French side attacking in the west logically ends with "=worse for Germany".

I am not saying I agree with @Helmuth48's notion, but would you say to disabuse him and others reading of his argument?

 

[raharris1973]

I agree as suggested above, the Belgians will defend both Liege and Namur against all comers who try to take them. But the French won't try to take either fortress, not will the Germans who's heavy artillery is committed against Russian fortresses in the east. The French will use the rail line Montmedy-Luxemourg City for supply (rail map below).

Britain will be in the war before the French do this (assuming British DOW within French DOW after August 10th.). So the Belgians protest, but in practice do nothing more and in practice Belgium is open for commerce, including with Germany directly via the Cologne, Liege rail line. The Germans will demand aggressive Belgian action but won't get it, but the Germans won't do anything about it because they need access to the port of Antwerp and Belgian markets to circumvent the British blockade, and they don't have the forces present (yet) to do anything about it.

The Belgians secretly hope the British and French win because they trust they will eventually leave (the French happy to get Alsace Lorraine back). Because if the Germans win big, they will demand at least permanent occupation of Liege and Namur and the area east of the Meuse and will take Belgian Congo just because they want it.

Likely though the Germans win in the Polish bulge in September 1914, the Austrians rally behind the San successfully, the Austrians can then afford to send reserves to the Serbian front and at least push the Serbians south of Belgrade by the end of the year. If the Germans and Austrians control Poland and the length of the Danube all the way to Bulgaria, they could shift forces west again in 1915 because I could see them wanting to keep their Lorraine artillery mines out of French occupation or artillery fire and to take Longwy and Briery (useful bargaining chip worth more than any crappy colonies the French might have taken like Togo).

What is the German strategic and operational approach for winter 1914-1915 and the 1915 campaigns in such a situation?

Seek to play 'King of the mountain' standing on buffers of occupied French and Russian occupied ground, conducting defensive and counter-offensive strokes, without major offensives except for the completion of Serbia, and calling for negotiation of a (favorable) settlement using their their high-value territorial and tactical position as an advantage?

Or do they commit reserves either east or west to achieve a more decisive result against Russia or French or Franco-British forces?
The disadvantage of a Russian focus is their endless depth. The disadvantage of a French focus is the growth and toughness of their forces, which will be greater than OTL, despite all their 1914 losses.

If they aim an offensive on the Russians for 1915 would it be territorially 'agnostic', just going after the armies, or territorially focused on St. Petersburg. If the latter, could it succeed, and ironically possibly help the Russian dodge some hazards of Petrograd by forcing them to relocate the capital to Moscow? Or might it be territorially focused on grabbing Ukraine, for agricultural loot (at least in theory?

I imagine the Germans would try to get some neutrals onside. They've already tempted the Bulgarians with the share of Serbia. They are likely working the Ottomans too, especially against Russia. They would try to work the Swedes, but they would be hard to convince. They would try to work the Italians, but the Austrians wouldn't pay the dues demanded and I think even that aside the odds would not look sure enough for the Italians to commit to CP by that point.

If focusing on the west, I guess their operational approach would be FAFO ('eff around anf find out): press along the line from the Meuse to the Swiss border probing for weakness or a flank and try to press there. A successful break out to free range to the French interior or Paris just doesn't seem like it would happen.

 

[kham_coc]

So does your second one-sentence paragraph simply negate everything in the paragraph you said above it? That's what it seems like.

Or you're undecided on how it would work out in practice?

The question began with the presumption of UK neutrality, i don't belive they would be, but if they are, I think that the first paragraph would be relevant, in case the UK is already in the war, they would presumably perceive it as extremely important to ensure that Belgium joins the Entente, and as for Belgium i would presume it would do the math it did OTL (and not side with Germany).

 

[Belka DNW]

@Helmuth48 is in vigorous disagreement with your notion, saying that this would be the worst option for Belgium [maximizing the breadth of damage], the best option for France [because most likely to bring Britain to intervene on *France's* side] and that equation of Britain joining the French side attacking in the west logically ends with "=worse for Germany".

I am not saying I agree with @Helmuth48's notion, but would you say to disabuse him and others reading of his argument?

Did you read the part where I pointed out the political consequences of backing the French, which in this scenario are the ones who broke Belgian neutrality, over demanding both sides to leave Belgium? There's no Rape of Belgium ITTL, the British government can't use "protect little Belgium against the Hun's hordes" as a causus belli to rally its people.

 

[Catspoke]

What is the German strategic and operational approach for winter 1914-1915 and the 1915 campaigns in such a situation?

Seek to play 'King of the mountain' standing on buffers of occupied French and Russian occupied ground, conducting defensive and counter-offensive strokes, without major offensives except for the completion of Serbia, and calling for negotiation of a (favorable) settlement using their their high-value territorial and tactical position as an advantage?

Or do they commit reserves either east or west to achieve a more decisive result against Russia or French or Franco-British forces?
The disadvantage of a Russian focus is their endless depth. The disadvantage of a French focus is the growth and toughness of their forces, which will be greater than OTL, despite all their 1914 losses.

If they aim an offensive on the Russians for 1915 would it be territorially 'agnostic', just going after the armies, or territorially focused on St. Petersburg. If the latter, could it succeed, and ironically possibly help the Russian dodge some hazards of Petrograd by forcing them to relocate the capital to Moscow? Or might it be territorially focused on grabbing Ukraine, for agricultural loot (at least in theory?

I imagine the Germans would try to get some neutrals onside. They've already tempted the Bulgarians with the share of Serbia. They are likely working the Ottomans too, especially against Russia. They would try to work the Swedes, but they would be hard to convince. They would try to work the Italians, but the Austrians wouldn't pay the dues demanded and I think even that aside the odds would not look sure enough for the Italians to commit to CP by that point.

If focusing on the west, I guess their operational approach would be FAFO ('eff around anf find out): press along the line from the Meuse to the Swiss border probing for weakness or a flank and try to press there. A successful break out to free range to the French interior or Paris just doesn't seem like it would happen.

I think it is the largely king of the mountain approach, seeking a favorable economic political situation leading to a favorable compromise peace. I think after securing Warsaw (and taking a fair amount of Russian industry and rolling stock production) and the securing the Courland bulge (for Baltic naval reasons, and maybe because they just want it) there isn't a whole lot of reason to keep driving east then.

Once northern Serbia is controlled including the whole of the Danube to Bulgaria, keeping the Ottomans supplied is a whole lot easier (the Bulgarians being more willing to allow transit of war materiel). There isn't a whole lot of reason to occupy the southern part of Serbia, if the Bulgarians come in early then they can.

There may be some German nervousness about the length of the war. Here the Germans might not have access to the stash of nitrates discovered in Antwerp when they occupied it in OTL. And their iron mines may be occupied in the west or at least unworkable because they under fire, so they may not be able to sustain the kind of offensive operations they want. (or maybe Belgium being mostly neutral is another blockade hole, and there would have been some advantages to have the British delay their DOW a week in war prep, i.e. getting some merchant's home, setting up networks in neutral countries, or they might have captured stuff in Warsaw in this TL).

But regardless I can see some desire to push the French out of Lorraine they may occupy and take Briery and Longwy if they can as bargaining chips, or to defend against a reinforced and refocused French and British effort and to better able to mount counterattacks.

If for whatever reason, perhaps they smell Russian weakness, or the Russian shell shortage shows up earlier, or perhaps the French effort has been a real fiasco and they have already secured the French border areas, they go east to Ukraine to secure supplies, and to better support the Ottomans, and to intimidate the Romanians, I think even by Winter 14-15 the Germans are going to realize their supply issues, that they don't want to take large populated cities like Petrograd.

 

[Catspoke]

I think the danger for Belgium is that 1915 rolls along in a favorable situation for the Central Powers, a real easy German favorable compromise peace is Germany you take the Belgian Congo Liege and Luxembourg, Austria you keep Nothern Serbia under occupation and well call it settled.

 

[Helmuth48]

That's quite a lot of responses! I'll answer a few:

I disagree, France invading Belgium should (using GB own logic) result in GB going yo war with France as it violated Belgium the same “reason” Gzb used to justify going to war against Germany.

Indeed, but I'm afraid the only thing the British really care about is 'No German naval base on the Belgian coast!'

The germans - already committed to defense ITTL - would be more than fine behind prepared defenses in highly defensive terrain (Eifel and the Our-valley) not even "needing" a further invasion of Luxemburg aside the south around the city itself against Arlon.

Luxembourg is so small that the difference between occupying only the city or 'the whole country' does not really exist in practice. This only produces a weird curve in the front line. The Our is then not the most logical line of defense, rather a valley more to the west (Ourthe?).

The french ... also don't need Namur as their line of attack is well south of the Meuse. They (Joffre) 'simply' wants to bypass/circumvent the heavily fortified zone of Diedenhofen-Metz. He 'aims at enclosing the germans in that region by meeting of this his two 'wings somewhere at the Moselle (Trier/Merzig aka the Hunsrück mountains.

At first, yes, but I suppose this attempt fails. After this, the front line will 'grow' to the north, up to the Dutch border. The French army will then need the railway junctions of Namur and Liège to supply the front.

Though ... prior to the german invasion IOTL the belgians made it diplomatically quite a stand ... or stunt (?) to reassurre everybody - germans, french and brits - being ready as well as willing to FIGHT whoever might invade them.

This is why I chose option 1: Defend against both France and Germany.

If the Germans have at least one brain cell working they would offer Belgium support and entry into the Central Powers, and while some skirmishes will occour I believe the British would intervine and demand that both parties leave Belgium immediatly; they don't want German continental domination but I don't think they would fully back the French in this scenario, the domestic situation would quite chaotic with anti-war and pro-german groups point out that Britain is backing an unprovocked invasion of a neutral country who was minding it own business.

This situation is sure to create an 'interesting' discussion in British politics (assuming they are still neutral). But if Belgium is faced with the fait accompli of a French invasion... Belgium wants to avoid turning itself into a big battlefield. A short front line with Germany, through sparsely populated areas such as the Ardennes, is then preferable to a long front line somewhere across the country.

 

[Michel Van]

King Leopold II and Albert I were strict in matter BELGIUM IS NEUTRAL
under protection of British Empire, by Treaty of London in 1849 who consolidated the Kingdom.

under scenario that German Attack East and defend West.
And France invade Belgium
it could let to paradoxical situation that French Forces face BEF in Belgium
And two front war is what France can't allow in this moment !
They will try with Swiss and also Italy to Bypass german Frontier...
I think France could persuade Italy to give up neutrality and move troops to north Italy in hope to invade Austria-Hungary...

However on Long term Things looks different
While Germany fight Russia, keep the French at their Border, not Invade Belgium, Britain will stay neutral in Conflict.
This is favourable for Central Powers since they fight only France (Italy?) and Russia
(If Italy joins France it could end for Italy in same way as OTL)
But once Russia is defeated, is France to be invaded and hier could German Army march through Belgium.
In this case Britain has to fight the Germans invaders what let to two front war is what Germany can't allow in this moment !

 

[Helmuth48]

Personally, I do not think that France will violate Belgian neutrality. At least, not without British permission. IMO, Britain will not give that permission because 'public opinion' will be against it.

But suppose France ignores Britain... and Joffre invades Belgium and Luxembourg as shown in the map below. When Germany opts for 'east first', it takes this scenario into account. The 5th Army is therefore deployed along the Luxembourg border with the following instructions (from Deployment Directives 1912, Aufmarsch II, West):

Fifth Army (5 army corps, 1 Senior Cavalry Commander, 2 cavalry divisions, 3 combined Landwehr brigades) will march between Burg-Reuland and Mettlach–Perl, with Senior Cavalry Commander west of Diedenhofen.

The High Command of the Western Army will command the operations against France at its own discretion. In the event of a head start in mobilization, a rapid offensive into France must be considered despite the superiority of the enemy. Germany’s situation does not permit the violation of the neutrality of other states without pressing military reasons, as long as France observes such neutrality. The neutrality of Switzerland must not be violated unless that country takes hostile action against us. Entering Luxembourg territory is allowed. VIII Army Corps is tasked with occupying the bridges leading across the Moselle, Sauer, and Our into Luxembourg.

My interpretation is that Germany will occupy Luxembourg as soon as France declares war, in order to prevent the French army from bypassing the fortresses of Diedenhofen. A 'clash' with the French army will then probably take place along the Belgian-Luxembourg border. In any case, I think it likely that Joffre's attempt to bypass Diedenhofen will fail.

I can imagine that after this the front line will grow to the north, in a kind of 'race to Liège'. The question now is, how will Belgium react to this? Liège is a strategic location, as it blocks a potential French invasion route. AFAIK, even Bismarck was in favor of fortifying Liège and Namur for this reason. Germany will therefore want to prevent Liège from falling into French hands...

A Google Earth kml file with the Belgian fortresses is available in this post.