In 1917 could the CPs get Belgium in peace deal?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

Is there a realistic situation with a war lasting into 1917 that has Germany end up controlling Belgium?
I'm thinking that if the US doesn't enter the war in 1917, which causes the Entente to run out of foreign exchange/raw materials and Germany threatening to launch more offensives in the West would force the Entente to abandon Belgium to German control post war.
Potentially I could even see Germany getting back some colonies too to avoid the Germans taking even more in Europe.
What does everyone else think?
 
No, I don't think so. First of all a free Belgium is a great way to make peace with Britain. Humiliate France and Russia all you want, but with a free Belgium Britain can claim they actualy won the war, even if they actualy lost it. They officially entered the war to protect Belgium, so if after the war Belgium is still a independent country, Britain did what Britain promised to do.

Besides that it is far more likely that Germany would create a puppet state out of Belgium, like they did in the east with Finland, Poland etc. Or maybe two puppet states, Wallonia and Flanders (and minor border corrections, maybe annex Belgian Luxemburg).
 

Deleted member 1487

No, I don't think so. First of all a free Belgium is a great way to make peace with Britain. Humiliate France and Russia all you want, but with a free Belgium Britain can claim they actualy won the war, even if they actualy lost it. They officially entered the war to protect Belgium, so if after the war Belgium is still a independent country, Britain did what Britain promised to do.

Besides that it is far more likely that Germany would create a puppet state out of Belgium, like they did in the east with Finland, Poland etc. Or maybe two puppet states, Wallonia and Flanders (and minor border corrections, maybe annex Belgian Luxemburg).


Isn't puppet Belgium still German controlled Belgium as per the OP?
Still, controlling the Belgian coast is critical to German post war plans and having it would seriously threaten Britain, which of course is why Britain wouldn't accept it unless compelled to. Seeing as Germany held Belgium in 1917 and Britain without France or Russia had no hope of taking it back; without US support and France and Russia asking for an armistice, how can Britain continue fighting? Wouldn't they be compelled to bargain en blocke with the rest of the Entente to not be forced to negotiate on her own and be forced to flee the continent, leaving behind huge amounts of equipment and supplies, when France exits the war?
 

Deleted member 1487

Eh, Germany would rather trade Belgium for Belgian Congo.

If Germany were in a power position she can have both, but you need to consider that the German military, who was largely in control over any peace deal at that point, was very keen on having military bases in Belgium for the next war that they were expecting with Britain. IIRC several generals referred to the Great War as their Second Punic War and the final one would come later at Britain's direction; Belgium would give Germany air, naval, and army bases closer to France and Britain, which would be critical for a mobilization improvement for the next round if indeed there was to be one.
 
Top