Belgian armed resistance was a mast stuck in the wheels of the German war machine in 1914, the discovery that the Belgians would fight back scared the Germany's diplomatic staff, enough to get them to lie about French attacks, and try bribing Belgium with French territory.

I recently found myself thinking, would the Schlieffen plan have had a chance for success, given one of the following?
  • The King of Belgium dies some time before the war in a ski accident; he is replaced by someone else who is more passive and pro-german; when the German ultimatum arrives, he persuades the Belgian Government it's in their interest to allow Germany through peacefully; (nationwide character assassination, probably)
  • Germany does not take Belgian complacency for granted and prepares a plan B in case the worst should happen; such plan allows the Germans to either crush Belgium or scare them into rapidly surrendering (possibly by heavy use of heavy long range artillery), instead of getting bogged down in sieges and having to deal with the Belgians flooding their own country to disrupt German manouvers (somewhat more likely? Though I can't picture the Germans questioning their own plans)
 
- Who would be this king? I doubt he could convince the government to fold to the German ultimatum, but it could stall the decision making process long enough that the Germans catch them even more unprepared.
- I doubt the Belgians could be scared to surrender, they know Britain has their backs.
 
Back in the 1970s I gamed this 'Belgian Compliance' scenario twice. It seemed to help tactically, but did not deliver a decisive stratigic result. One problem is it warns the French earlier there is a serious threat in the north. Hence the 4th & 5th Armies deploy north a few days earlier.
 
I think the big possibility for greater success would be if Belgian compliance with German demands meant that German troop trains could travel into Belgium. This could nean German later arriving German divisions could get off trains in Belgium, possibly well into western Belgium, saving days of marching. These fresh troops could both outflank the allied armies and deny the British the opportunity to guard the channel ports by landing the Royal Marine brigade.

Another positive would be no requirement to provide troops for seiges in Belgium. Perhaps the best known being the 4 divisions sent to east Prussia from the siege of Namur but also the 4 divisions besieging Antwerp in September.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 94680

  • The King of Belgium dies some time before the war in a ski accident; he is replaced by someone else who is more passive and pro-german

Well, if Albert I dies pre-War then his heir Leopold III would be at most 12 years old. He would therefore need a Regent to rule in his stead until he reaches his majority. It seems (although I may be wrong) that there would be no older male relatives to take the role. The Queen Mother, Elisabeth of Bavaria, would be the obvious candidate, but I'm not sure on the Belgian attitude towards a female Monarch. This, presumably, opens up the possibility of a Regency Council.
 
Top