To many, Belgium seems an unlikely state.
It's become a byword for deep-seated division and dysfunctional government.
So much so that people often wonder how, what now seems such an artificial state, ever came into existence.
In this video, I'm going to take a look at how it became independent.
As I'll show, the country's origins point to a very different situation to the one we know today.
At the same time, its emergence, through a process of recognition now rarely used,
also owes a lot to great power support
- a factor that remains a key element of state creation to this very day.
[MUSIC]
Hello. My name is James Ker-Lindsay.
Welcome to 'Independent Thinking'.
A channel dedicated to international relations, statehood, independence and the origins of countries.
If you were asked to name some countries that appeared to teeter on the verge of breaking up,
there's a good chance that one of the ones you would choose from Europe would be Belgium.
This divided, and seemingly dysfunctional, state inevitably ends up on any list of endangered countries.
The difference between its two main linguistic groups seems to be steadily pushing the country apart.
This naturally begs the question as to how and why such a seemingly divided country ever came into existence.
So, how did Belgium become independent?
The story really begins in 1794 when revolutionary France seized the Southern Netherlands from Austria;
thus ending several centuries of Habsburg rule over the territory.
In 1815, following the end of the Napoleonic Wars, the major European powers,
meeting at the Congress of Vienna, decided that the territory shouldn't remain in French hands.
Instead, in an effort to create a buffer against any future French expansion, it was granted to the newly
created Kingdom of the Netherlands.
Although this technically marked the reunification of the Netherlands,
which had lost the southern territories several centuries beforehand,
from the very start it was an unhappy pairing.
There were considerable differences between the two parts of the country.
First of all, they were divided by religion.
Whereas the North was predominantly Protestant, the South was Catholic.
They were also divided by language - and not only in the obvious way.
The decision to make standard Dutch the official language of the state not only alienated
the French speakers in the south, it also antagonized the Flemings, who saw this version of Dutch
as different from their own variant of the language.
These religious and linguistic issues were further compounded by political and economic resentment.
While the South represented two thirds of the population
it was underrepresented in the country's government and administration.
Likewise, the wealthier South argued that it was not only subsidizing the North,
but its economic and financial interests were also being ignored by the central government.
To add to all this, there was widespread hostility towards the Dutch king, William I.
His autocratic behavior, coupled with his efforts to interfere with religious expression in the South,
united various parts of Southern society to the cause of Belgian nationalism
- a term derived from the Roman name for the area: Gallia Belgica.
By the late 1820s, the levels of resentment had grown significantly.
And, on 24 August 1830, rioting broke out in Brussels.
A decision to send in troops to quell the rebellion only served to galvanize the revolutionaries.
On 4 October 1830, they declared independence.
As King William prepared to stage a full-scale military action against the territory, the five European powers
- Austria, Britain, France, Prussia and Russia - stepped in.
On 4 November 1830, an international conference opened in London
and immediately called an armistice between the sides pending a decision on the situation.
From the outset, it was clear that France and Britain were willing to accept independence for Belgium.
For its part, France supported the secession;
seeing an opportunity to claim French-speaking parts of the country.
However, its proposal for the territory to be partitioned between several countries, itself included,
was subsequently rejected by the others.
Meanwhile, Britain took a pragmatic view of the situation.
As the people of Belgium had effectively asserted their statehood, this should be accepted.
However, there were nevertheless strong reservations by the others.
First of all, there were concerns about the implications of endorsing a revolutionary uprising;
especially at a time of growing Republican sentiment in Europe.
Such fears were, however, eased by the decision of the Belgian leaders to make the new country
a constitutional monarchy.
In fact, the following year, 1831, Leopold Saxe-Coburg - curiously, a Protestant -
became the first King of the Belgians.
The second, and greater, concern centered on the wider geopolitical ramifications of Belgian independence.
As noted, under the Congress of Vienna, the territory had been ceded to the Netherlands
in an attempt to limit French expansionism.
The fear, therefore, was that any attempt to remove the province from Dutch control
would open the way for French influence over Belgium.
In January 1831, the European Powers decided that the new Belgian state should be recognised
as an independent entity.
However, in order to allay fears that the country would be aligned to France,
they also agreed that the country would be neutral in its foreign affairs.
Although Belgium had now been accepted by the European Powers,
and now existed as an independent state,
this wasn't quite the end of the story.
Unwilling to accept the humiliation of losing Belgium,
William ordered his troops into the country in August 1831.
The Dutch forces immediately made significant gains.
In response, the European Powers agreed to let France intervene to secure Belgian independence.
Faced with the 70,000-strong French army, the Netherlands was forced to accept a ceasefire.
Even with some new territorial concessions, however, William still refused to accept the Belgian state.
However, over the following years, the Dutch king came to accept the reality of the situation.
In 1838, a new conference was convened - again in London - to resolve the matter.
On 19 April 1839, the Treaty of London was signed by the European Powers, Belgium and the Netherlands.
Under Article 7 of the agreement, it was agreed that:
'Belgium, within the limits specified in Articles I, II & IV shall form an independent and perpetually neutral state.
It shall be bound to observe such neutrality towards all other states.'
Belgium's independence had finally been fully accepted.
While Belgium may now be thought of as a divided and dysfunctional state,
it's history points to a very different situation.
The problems of today mask the fact that, at one stage, the peoples of the country were united.
They shared a resentment of Dutch rule,
and were united in their disdain for the autocratic behavior of a Dutch king.
However, there were several other aspects of the story that are particularly interesting.
In a previous video, I discussed the different forms of state recognition.
This was one of the most high-profile examples of what we know as 'collective recognition'.
However, it's far from the only one.
Both Greece and Albania also came about as a result of decisions by major powers in similar circumstances.
I plan to look at these fascinating cases in future videos.
In a wider sense, Belgium's independence is also fascinating example of how statehood
has so often been shaped by the positions of great powers.
This is a trend that continues to this day.
For example, I recently examined how Bangladesh became a state
with the support of members of the Security Council despite opposition from its parent state.
In that case, Pakistan.
Indeed, if there's one factor that stands out in state creation, even in the contemporary era,
it's that the fortunes of any prospective country are so very often dependent
on the will of the major powers of the day.
If they are in agreement, then almost any territory aspiring to independence
would seem destined to become a sovereign state on the world stage.
I hope you found that useful.
If so, here are some other videos explaining the fascinating stories behind the origins of other countries.
And don't forget to 'Like', 'Share' and 'Subscribe' as this all helps the channel to grow.
Thanks so much for watching and see you in the next video.