The Neutrality Of Belgium

( Originally Published 1915 )

WHEN the delegates from the United Kingdom, France, Austria-Hungary, Prussia, and Russia assembled in London, in December, 183o, to consider the conditions under which the Belgian provinces might be constituted an independent State, they put their heads together in order to inquire into " the new arrangements best adapted to combine the independence of Belgium with the interest of the security of the other Powers and the preservation of the European balance."

Their labours bore fruit, on the 20th of January, 1831, in the shape of a draft treaty, which stated, in Article 5, that Belgium " should form an independent and perpetually neutral State," and that "the five (contracting) Powers would guarantee this perpetual neutrality as well as the integrity and inviolability of its territory."

The' treaty now known as the " Treaty of the XVIII Articles," which ratified this arrangement, recognised Belgium's " right to defend herself against all foreign aggression."

A later treaty, known as the " Treaty of the XXIV Articles," which, being finally accepted by Holland, became, in April, 1839, the definitive international statute of Belgium, proclaims, in no less definite terms, the principle of Belgian neutrality.

Their Majesties the Queen of Great Britain and Ireland, the Emperor of Austria and King of Hungary and Bohemia, the King of France, the King of Prussia, and the Emperor of All the Russias declare, in Article I of this treaty, that the articles appended to the text of the treaty concluded between their Majesties the King of the Belgians and the King of the Netherlands, Grand Duke of Luxemburg, are regarded as having the same force and validity as though they were inserted in the treaty itself, and that they are thus placed under the guarantee of their afore-said Majesties. And Article VII of an appendix to the treaty stipulates that :

" Belgium, within the limits indicated by Articles I, II, and IV (of the appendix), shall form an independent and perpetually neutral State,"

And that:

" Belgium shall be required to observe this same neutrality in respect of all other States."

Belgium could not, therefore, in the case of any conflict whatsoever, dispose of herself to her own liking, declaring herself neutral or participating in the conflict. Neutrality was imposed upon her perpetually, and this neutrality was guaranteed by England, Austria-Hungary, France, Prussia, and Russia.

Before the present war there were only two other European States which were by treaty declared " perpetually neutral." These were Switzerland and the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg. But there were distinctions in the character of these so-called " perpetual " neutralities. Switzerland had been bound to neutrality since 1815 only by her own will ; while Luxemburg and Belgium were compelled to accept neutrality by the express will of the Powers.

" Belgian neutrality," says Colonel F. Feyler, the eminent editor of the Revue militaire suisse, " is a creation of the Powers, among them the German Empire, which succeeded to the obligations of Prussia. Belgium is not, properly speaking, a neutral State; she is a neutralised State; but she is also an armed State, with the reservation that she is armed exclusively in order to defend herself in case of attack.

" As for the neutrality of Luxemburg, it dates from 1867, the year in which the Grand Duchy was in danger of kindling the war which three years later broke out between France and Germany.

" The King of Holland was Grand Duke of Luxemburg. Napoleon III arranged that he should sell the Grand Duchy to France. This was a menace to the Prussian frontier, and Prussia prepared for war. The areopagus of the five European Powers intervened, as in 183o, in respect of Belgium. A treaty was signed in London, on the 11th of May, 1807.

" ` The Grand Duchy of Luxemburg,' says this treaty, ` will henceforth form a perpetually neutral State. It will be required to observe this neutrality toward all States. The high contracting parties undertake to respect the privilege of neutrality stipulated by the present Article.'

" And the treaty adds: ` Luxemburg being neutralised, the maintenance of fortresses upon its territory becomes unnecessary and objectless.'

" Consequently the fortress of Luxemburg was demolished.

" To sum up : The Swiss Confederation is a deliberately neutral State, armed as much in defence of this neutrality as in case circumstances independent of its desires and its will should make a change of policy a matter of obligation. Its sovereignty is complete.

"The Kingdom of Belgium is a neutralised State; that is, its neutrality is a condition of sovereignty, and it is armed in de-fence of this neutrality.

The Grand Duchy of Luxemburg is a neutralised State; it is also disarmed, the Powers having undertaken to watch over its security themselves." 1

Article II of the Treaty of the 11th of May, 1867, declares:

" This principle (of the neutrality of the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg) is and remains under the collective guarantee of the Powers signatory to the present treaty, with the exception of Belgium, which is itself a neutral State."

Thus, incidentally, after the lapse of thirty years, the Treaty of the XXIV Articles was ratified.

Three years later, it was confirmed and ratified anew, and this time in far more serious circumstances. The Franco-Prussian War had just broken out. Great Britain considered that the time had come to determine, for this particular case, the executive details of the Treaty of 1839. Further treaties were concluded on the 9th of August, 1870, between Great Britain and France on the one hand, and between Great Britain and Prussia on the other, with the " firm intention of maintaining the neutrality of Belgium, as it was established by Article VII of the treaty signed in London on the 19th of April, 1839." The term of the validity of these new treaties was fixed at twelve months after the ratification of the treaty of peace, and it was expressly stipulated that after the expiration of this term " the independence and neutrality of Belgium would continue as before to be based upon Article I of the five-fold treaty of the 19th of April, 1839 "—that is, upon the guarantee of the same five Powers.

What was the import of these new treaties? Baron Anethan, the Belgian Minister of Foreign Affairs, defined it, on the 16th of August, 187o, before the Chamber of Representatives: " The separate and identical treaties concluded by England with the two Powers at war neither establish nor modify the obligations resulting from the Treaty of 1839; they determine, for a given case, the practical method of executing these obligations; they by no means invalidate the engagements of the other guarantee Powers, and, as their text testifies, they leave untouched as regards the future, the obligatory character of the previous treaty, with all its consequences." .

Whatever might be the nature of these private agreements between those of the Powers which guaranteed her neutrality, Belgium, being also fully determined to honour her engagements, remained mobilised throughout the entire duration of hostilities.

With very few exceptions our statesmen, even until the last few years, have been intimately convinced that our neutrality would never be violated.

One of them, M. Beernaert, who played a remarkable part in the deliberations of The Hague Conferences, even remarked, in the course of a debate upon the rules conditioning the occupation of invaded territory : " As for Belgium, her position is peculiar. Belgium is neutral, and this neutrality is guaranteed notably by our powerful neighbours. Consequently we cannot be invaded." (First Conference, session of the 6th of June, 1899.)

It is true that of late years some did on occasion venture to suspect the intentions of Germany. But on each of these occasions the leaders of German politics gave Belgium directly or indirectly the most definite assurances that her neutrality would be respected.

In 1911, in the course of the controversy excited by the pro-motion of the Dutch proposals concerning the fortifications of Flushing, certain newspapers asserted that in case of a Franco-German war the neutrality of Belgium would be violated by Germany. The Belgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs then suggested that a declaration made in the German Parliament, on the occasion of a debate on foreign policy, would be calculated to appease public opinion, and to allay public suspicion, which was greatly to be regretted from the . point of view of the relations between the two countries. Herr Bethmann-Hollweg, who was sounded upon this subject, replied that Germany had no intention of violating Belgian neutrality, but that he was of opinion that by making a public declaration to this effect he would en-feeble the military situation of the Empire in respect to France, who, being reassured as to her northern frontier, would concentrate all her forces upon the east.

On the 29th of April, 1913, there was a debate in the Reichstag, in the course of a session of the Commission for the Budget, on the subject of Belgian neutrality. According to the officially inspired Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, Baron Beyens,1 the Belgian Minister in Berlin, gave the following account of the debate :

" A member of the Social Democratic Party remarked : ` In Belgium the approach of a Franco-German war is regarded with apprehension, for it is feared that Germany will not respect the neutrality of Belgium.' Herr von Jagow, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, replied: ' The neutrality of Belgium is determined by international conventions, and Germany is determined to respect these conventions.'

" This declaration failed to satisfy another member of the Social Democratic Party. Herr von Jagow observed that he had nothing to add to the plain statement which he had made respecting the relations between Germany and Belgium.

" To renewed interrogations of a member of the Social Democratic Party, Herr von Heeringen, Minister of War, replied: ` Belgium has no part in the vindication of the German scheme of military reorganisation; the latter is vindicated by the situation in the East. Germany will not lose sight of the fact that Belgian neutrality is guaranteed by international treaties.'

" A member of the Progressive Party having also spoken of Belgium, Herr von Jagow remarked once more that his declaration in respect of Belgium was sufficiently definite."

At the same time, in certain quarters anxiety was felt as to the possible attitude of England. Vague rumours had been circulated of a possible landing of British troops in Belgium, to forestall, if need should arise, the passage of German troops.

Now here, in this connection, are extracts, from a letter ad-dressed by the head of the Foreign Office to the British Minister in Brussels: a letter dated the 7th of April, 1913, which describes a conversation which Sir Edward Grey had had with the Belgian Minister in London:

I told him," writes Sir Edward Grey, " that he might with certainty assert that the present Government would never be the first to violate Belgian neutrality, and that I (lid not believe that any British Government would take such a step, that public opinion would never approve of it. . . . What we had considered and the question was rather embarrassing was, what it would be desirable and necessary that we ''should do, as one of the guarantors of Belgian neutrality, if this neutrality should be violated by any other Power. . . What we desired, for Belgium as for any other neutral country, was that her neutrality should be respected, and so long as it was not violated by any other Power, we certainly should not ourselves send troops across Belgian territory."

Not only was our neutrality guaranteed by the five Great Powers which were signatories of the Treaties of 1831 and 1839 it was also guaranteed, morally at least, by all the other States which adhered to the second Peace Conference at The Hague in 1907. The Convention relating to the rights and duties of neutral Powers, which bears the signatures of the delegates of the forty-four States represented at the Conference, states, in its first Article :