Flahaut partition plan for Belgium
The Flahaut partition plan for Belgium was a proposal developed in 1830 at the London Conference of 1830 by the French diplomat Charles de Flahaut, to partition Belgium. The proposal was immediately rejected by the French Foreign Ministry upon Charles Maurice de Talleyrand's insistence.[1][2]
According to some sources, the French insistence on partitioning Belgium might have been invented by Talleyrand himself to show himself as a skilled statesman by maintaining Belgian independence.[3][4]
Background
[edit]Despite increasing popular demands for independence, major European powers were divided over the future of Belgium; stalling the negotiations at the London Conference of 1830.[5] In early November 1830, the National Congress of Belgium voted to adopt a monarchy. Prince Louis, Duke of Nemours, the son of Louis Philippe I of France emerged as a popular candidate for the throne, however Louis Philippe rejected the candidacy after being urged to do so by Charles Maurice de Talleyrand. While placing the duke on the Belgian throne would have benefited France, Talleyrand argued that such a decision would offend the British and displace the balance of power in Europe.[6][7]
Plan
[edit]The Belgians outright refused to consider a candidate from the Dutch House of Nassau. In lieu of the stalemate, French diplomat Charles de Flahaut (a son of Talleyrand) proposed partitioning Belgium. Belgium was to be split between the Netherlands, France and Prussia; with the largest part going to France. Britain on the other hand was to receive the city of Antwerp along with its port:[6] Britain was seen as likely to accept receiving this seemingly small possession as Antwerp was the largest port located close to the British isles in the continent which made it an ideal staging point for any power planning an invasion of Britain (Calais on France was even closer but it was smaller in size, although the British had already in the past sought the demilitarization of Calais by the French).[8]
Aftermath
[edit]Talleyrand was briefly tempted by the prospect of partitioning Belgium,[9] a proposal he had briefly toyed with before;[10] however, he quickly changed his mind and rejected the Flahaut plan as absurd, exclaiming that "he would rather cut off his arm than sign the document". Talleyrand argued that providing Britain with a base on the continent after France fought numerous wars to prevent such an event was unacceptable. The creation of a direct border with the Kingdom of Prussia was likewise seen as problematic. Talleyrand ordered Flahaut to carry a letter outlining his objections to the proposal to the French Foreign Minister Sébastiani. Sébastiani heeded Talleyrand's warnings and did not pursue the implementation of the plan.[11] It should be noted though, that it has been argued that Britain would have been likely to reject such a partition of Belgium mostly for the same reasons as having to defend a new land border of such a small size and so exposed sandwiched between two adversaries (France and Germany) would have been too expensive and problematic and it would have been much cheaper to just keep a powerful navy to prevent landings on the British isles.[8][12]
The Belgian Congress set 28 January as the final date for the election of the new king. The popularity of Auguste, Duke of Leuchtenberg a Bonapartist candidate prompted Flahaut to resurrect his plan. Flahaut argued that in the case of the election of Leuchtenberg or any other candidate deemed unacceptable by France, partition would be the only available option. Talleyrand once again rebuffed Flahaut by repeating his previous arguments in a new letter to Sebastiani. On 3 February, the Belgians offered the crown to the Duke of Nemours. On 7 February, the powers issued an official statement refusing to recognize any election that would grant Leuchtenberg the throne. On 17 February, Louis Philippe formally renounced his dynasty's claim to the Belgian throne. Having secured the exclusion of the two leading candidates from the election process, Talleyrand continued to vigorously campaign behind the scenes for the election of Leopold of Saxe-Coburg. On 4 June, the Belgian Congress elected Leopold of Saxe-Coburg as the King of the Belgians with the support of the conference.[13][1]
A minority on the Belgian political spectrum continue to support the partition of Belgium to this day, with the proportion of separatists in the country remaining stable throughout the years.[14][15]
Footnotes
[edit]- ^ a b Schmidt, Daniel Paul (1 August 1976). "IV. France's second intervention in Belgium: An intervention designed to resolve the Belgian problem" (PDF). The foreign policy of Louis Philippe 1830-32: A study in interventionist policy (PDF). Marquette University Faculty of the Graduate School (PhD (Doctor of Philosophy)). ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States of America: Marquette University. p. 93-130. Retrieved 23 September 2021 – via ProQuest.
- ^ Dard, Émile (15 July 1939). Chaumeix, André (ed.). "Trois générations: Tayllerand, Flahaut, Morny. I." Revue des Deux Mondes (in French). 46 (2). Paris, Ile de France, France: Société de la Revue des Deux Mondes: 341–365. ISSN 0035-1962. JSTOR 44850143. OCLC 476419311.
- ^ Smit, C. (1949). "VIII. Franse annexatie- en verdelingsplannen België's neutraliteit". In Brill, E.J. (ed.). De conferentie van Londen: Het vredesverdrag tussen Nederland en Belgié van 19 April 1839 (in Dutch). Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands: Brill Archive. p. 83. Retrieved 23 September 2021 – via Google Books.
- ^ Sked, Alan (15 October 2006). McKercher, B.J.C.; Goldstein, Erik; Maurer, John; Otte, Thomas; Colman, Jonathan; Trenta, Luca (eds.). "Talleyrand and England, 1792–1838: A Reinterpretation". Diplomacy & Statecraft. 17 (4). Abingdon-on-Thames, England, United Kingdom of Great Britain: Routledge (Taylor & Francis): 647–664. doi:10.1080/09592290600942793. ISSN 0959-2296. OCLC 22548326. S2CID 159845695. Retrieved 23 September 2021.
- ^ Gavin, Catherine Irvine (31 May 1931). "V. The Entente Cordiale" (PDF). Louis philippe, king of the french, 1830-1848. Aberdeen Postgraduate Research School (PhD (Doctor of Philosophy)). ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. Aberdeen, Scotland, United Kingdom of Great Britain: University of Aberdeen. OCLC 921229907. Retrieved 23 September 2021 – via ProQuest.
- ^ a b Bernard 1973, p. 550-551, Part Six: The London Embassy (1830-1834).
- ^ Dhondt, Frederik (1 January 2018). Piret, Bérengère; Bousmar, Éric; de Broux, Pierre-Olivier; Desmette, Philippe; Ruelle, Annette; Tousignant, Nathalie; Ngongo, Enika (eds.). "La neutralité permanente de la Belgique et l'histoire du droit international: Quelques jalons pour la recherche" (PDF). Cahiers: Centre de Recherches en Histoire du Droit et des Institutions (in French). 41 (1). Brussels, Belgium: Centre de Recherches en Histoire du Droit, des Institutions et de la Société (Université Saint-Louis – Bruxelles). doi:10.25518/1370-2262.614. hdl:1854/LU-8584501. ISSN 1370-2262. S2CID 246604339. Retrieved 23 September 2021.
- ^ a b Pine, Alan Stanley (1 June 1972). "IV. The Whigs, Palmerston, and the London Conference". The motivations and conduct of British foreign policy in the Belgian crisis, 1830-1839 (PDF). NYU Department of History of the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences (PhD (Doctor of Philosophy)). ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. New York City, New York, United States of America: New York University (NYU). pp. 63–89. Retrieved 23 September 2021 – via ProQuest.
- ^ Kelly 2017, p. 63, 7. French Troops in Belgium!.
- ^ Kelly 2017, p. 64, 7. French Troops in Belgium!.
- ^ Bernard 1973, p. 551-552, Part Six: The London Embassy (1830-1834).
- ^ Sked, Alan (13 September 2013) [2008]. "3. Talleyrand and England, 1792-1838: A Reinterpretation". In Stone, Glyn; Otte, Thomas G. (eds.). Anglo-French Relations since the Late Eighteenth Century (3rd ed.). Abingdon-on-Thames, England, United Kingdom of Great Britain: Routledge (Taylor & Francis). pp. 13–30. ISBN 978-0-415-39578-6 – via Google Books.
- ^ Bernard 1973, p. 562-565, Part Six: The London Embassy (1830-1834).
- ^ Dy, B. (8 January 2020). Delvaux, Béatrice (ed.). "Seuls 16% des électeurs flamands veulent la scission du pays". Le Soir (in French). Brussels, Belgium: Rossel & Cie. S.A. Archived from the original on 9 January 2020.
- ^ De Standaard editorial staff (9 November 2007). Verhoeven, Karel (ed.). "België moet blijven, maar niet zoals nu". De Standaard (in Dutch). Brussels, Belgium: Mediahuis. ISSN 0779-3847. OCLC 900938528. Archived from the original on 21 January 2016. Retrieved 23 September 2021.
References
[edit]- Bernard, Jack F. (1973). Tayllerand: A Biography. New York City, New York, United States of America: Putnam. ISBN 9780399110221. LCCN 72085242. OCLC 622019 – via Internet Archive.
Further reading
[edit]- Fishman, J.S. van Gelder, H.A. Enno; van Deursen, A. Th.; De Jongste, J.A.F.; van de Kieft, C.; Prevenier, W.; Schöffer, I.; Scholliers, E.; De Schryver, R.; Stolte, B.H.; Van Tikn, Th. (eds.). "The London Conference of 1830". Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis (in Dutch). 84 (3). Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands: Wolters-Noordhoff NV: 418–428. ISSN 0040-7518 – via Huygens ING (Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen).
- Kelly, Linda (31 May 2017). Talleyrand in London: The Master Diplomat's Last Mission (1st ed.). London, England, United Kingdom of Great Britain: I.B. Tauris & Co. Ltd. ISBN 9781784537814. OCLC 978626385. Retrieved 23 September 2021 – via Google Books.