Plausibility Check: Belgian Dissolution

Belgium is clearly divided into Flanders and Wallonia. However you hardly ever see them separating into independent states in ATLs. Assuming POD no earlier than the Treaty of Versailles and Belgium neither conquered nor puppetized how plausible is it to split into Flanders and Wallonia?
 

HJ Tulp

Donor
Belgium is clearly divided into Flanders and Wallonia. However you hardly ever see them separating into independent states in ATLs. Assuming POD no earlier than the Treaty of Versailles and Belgium neither conquered nor puppetized how plausible is it to split into Flanders and Wallonia?

Immediately after the Second World War there was a crisis over the Monarchy which split across ethnic lines. Could have gone balls up probably.
 
Two very important factors to take into account; the monarchy , which is neither flemish nor wallone; and the region of Brussels , which though nominally in Flanders would be nightmarishly difficult to divide
 
Well, following a period when national governments in Europe appear to be less important due to a period of regional integration, plus immigration on a fair scale of new ethnic and religious communities, you could have a far right party rise to sufficient popular support that forging a coalition without them would be extremely problematical but with them unacceptable...nah, that's just a ridiculous idea. Sorry to have bothered you.:(
 
Well, following a period when national governments in Europe appear to be less important due to a period of regional integration, plus immigration on a fair scale of new ethnic and religious communities, you could have a far right party rise to sufficient popular support that forging a coalition without them would be extremely problematical but with them unacceptable...nah, that's just a ridiculous idea. Sorry to have bothered you.:(

In this ATL the crisis might be precipitated by inconclusive elections leading to months without a government. (Is that too ASB?)
 
In most Belgian splits, Brussels becomes the EU federal capital.

Here, what happens to the French-speaking enclave within the Dutch-speaking region?
 
best POD is 1945
were was a 3 day civilwar because crisis over the Monarchy
the King Leopold III had surrendered to Nazi and stay in Belgium
after WW2 the Wallons consider Leopold III as a traitor

1982/1983 is also good POD
then the littel country wend then almost bankrupt
with 1500 BILION Euros national debts

and a POD for 1995-1997
a serie of scandals in Politic and crime
like Mark Detrou or Socalist Party corruption Affair or the Dioxin contaminated food

there more seperatist Movments
Next to Flanders and Wallonia are

the Brussels who want be independent
but Flanders and Wallonia claime the city as there Capital !

the German-speaking region (around 120000 people)
at east border of Belgium, occupy in 1918 after WWI

and province of Luxemburg
who name says was a part of Duchy of Luxemburg
until it was occupy in 1830 during Belgium war of independent

some hardliner in Flanders also want more
a independent Flanders with Brussels as Capital
but also with French Flanders, occupy during the Thirty Years War !!!, today Nord-Pas de Calais
and if necessary that with force
 
Last edited:
Could happen in the opposite direction - rather than dissolution through fragmentation, it could have 'disolved' via amalgamation.

Becoming 'one' with Holland or rather 'Northern' Netherlands, in an earlier expression of the Benelux. This gives a country a similar ethnic (%) mix to that of Switzerland.
It may of happened after WW2 - but its potential got lost within the Common Market.
But if it had happened after WW1, the effect with its butterflies in all directions would have been much more interesting!!
 
Could happen in the opposite direction - rather than dissolution through fragmentation, it could have 'disolved' via amalgamation.

Becoming 'one' with Holland or rather 'Northern' Netherlands, in an earlier expression of the Benelux. This gives a country a similar ethnic (%) mix to that of Switzerland.
It may of happened after WW2 - but its potential got lost within the Common Market.
But if it had happened after WW1, the effect with its butterflies in all directions would have been much more interesting!!
The Waloons would never go for such a thing, French speakers make up about 43% of the Belgian population but would only make for 17% in a united Netherlands-Belgium.(today's numbers)
 
Could happen in the opposite direction - rather than dissolution through fragmentation, it could have 'disolved' via amalgamation.

Becoming 'one' with Holland or rather 'Northern' Netherlands, in an earlier expression of the Benelux. This gives a country a similar ethnic (%) mix to that of Switzerland.
It may of happened after WW2 - but its potential got lost within the Common Market.
But if it had happened after WW1, the effect with its butterflies in all directions would have been much more interesting!!

that was the reasion of Belgium war of independent in 1830
after 1815 Wallon and Flanders with Luxemburg were Part of Netherlands

so wat wend wrong ?
The french Wallons were forced to talk Dutch
the Wallon and flemish are Roman Catholic and Netherlands Protestant (wat makes a second North Irland...)
and Luxemburg wanted be independent

modern examples
in 1997 Wallons politician propose a peacefully disslution of Belgium
were Wallonia become a Deparment of France
from French foreign office came very agressive negative reply on that.

in 2009 was a survey in Netherlands
with the Question: "in case of Belgian Dissolution, should Netherland take Flemish Region ?"
response was 90% YES
wat lead to agressive negative reply by Flemish Nationalist
 
Belgium is clearly divided into Flanders and Wallonia. However you hardly ever see them separating into independent states in ATLs. Assuming POD no earlier than the Treaty of Versailles and Belgium neither conquered nor puppetized how plausible is it to split into Flanders and Wallonia?

Unlikely, even today in Belgium 80% of the people doesn't want a dissolution and before WWI there was no separatism, only a Flemish Movement that fought for the equality of Dutch and French.
During the war a separatist movement formed by frustrated young marginal politicians, the 'Activists', collaborated and was hated by the entire population (example: the Flemish Movement had a petition to change the French speaking university of Ghent into a Flemish one with 150 000 signatures, the Activists had to make a new petition for the same goal, which only got 5 000 signatures)
The Activists ruined the situation for the Flemish Nationalists after the war, which lead to a radicalization of a fraction, which resulted in collaboration during WWII, they weren't known as the Activists then but as the 'Blacks'.
After the war the people and certainly the resistance demanded a harsh repression and because the Belgian government had no armed police force they had to let them do, but managed to judge every case in or civil or a military court, which slowed things down a bit.
But the blacks were exiled in their own country and formed anti-Belgian groups, that wanted to destroy Belgium and it's institutions, today these people formed parties such as Vlaams Belang and NVA. The first party is slowly dying and NVA is only popular because of Bart de Wever, but the majority of the voters still voted on the traditional parties.
Even now the end of Belgium will be unlikely because Flanders has everything to lose and nothing to win. It has been like that ever since Belgium came into existence as an independent state.
Plus the fact that Flemish and Walloon already form one nation for 5 centuries already and share more culture and mentality then most people think.

PS: what also helps is that there is no ethnic devision in Belgium, but merely a linguistic one.
And the Flemish regional day (11th of July) celebrates a rather curious battle, cities from Brabant and the kingdom of France fought vs a few cities of Flanders and Namur, so it's not a Flemish victory at all.
 
Top