Congratulations to Queen Elizabeth II

For achieving sixty years on the British throne (and her others) Belgium sends congratulations to her friend and relative Queen Elizabeth II!

Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip with King Leopold III and Princess Lilian in 1966

Queen Paola and Queen Elizabeth II

Queen Paola, King Baudouin, Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Philip, Queen Fabiola and King Albert II

Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Philip, Queen Fabiola, King Baudouin and Princess Margaret

Queen Elizabeth II and King Baudouin

The Emperor of Japan, Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip at the state funeral of King Baudouin, I think the only foreign funeral the Queen has ever attended, a show of her great friendship with the King.

British-Belgian Friendship

King Albert I and Queen Elisabeth meet British Admiral Beatty

King George V and King Albert I meet early in the war

King Albert I and King George V review Belgian troops

British General Allenby and King Albert I at the front

King Albert and British General Haig

Allied Sovereigns

Belgium, Britain and Monarchy

It is not good, I know, to compare one country with another, but sometimes I cannot resist it. Especially this is so for the countries of the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Belgium. The two are very different and also have very much in common. It is also my confession that I think of this more probably because I hear now so much criticism from British politicians directed toward the existence of Belgium as a “proper country”, which they say it is not. And yet, look at the similarities of these two countries. Both are constitutional monarchies, both even have the same family of royalty. Both are also diverse countries, not like all countries in Europe are diverse now, but the mixture of Flemish and Walloon in Belgium and the mixture of Celtic and Anglo-Saxon and Norman in Great Britain. Both have also been close allies since the British intervened in the First World War in reaction to the invasion of Belgium and for that the Belgians have never missed being grateful and honoring that sacrifice on our behalf. And yet, some British politicians still denigrate my country and publicly cheer for Belgium to be broken up and destroyed.

What inspired me to think of a new comparison was that some of these political figures, in their own country and policies relating to that, are quite correct. Time to name a name: Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party. I cannot be anything but opposed to this man because he constantly insults my country, my people and wishes for us to be broken up and destroyed. He is also very much against the European Union, which does not bother me so much as his being very much against the Kingdom of Belgium. Yet, I have at least one friend (who is pro-Belgian of course) who greatly likes Nigel Farage and has pointed out to me that Farage is a proud British monarchist who wants the UK and the Commonwealth countries to preserve their monarchy. That is good for them and I have no problem with that, I support that also, and if he would only keep his words about his own country and not mine I would maybe be able to like Farage also. But, he does not and so I cannot like him and must be opposed to him. But this made me think to compare the attitudes toward the British and the Belgian monarchies in each country.

My perspective may not be correct but anyone can leave a comment to tell me so. I never used to watch much news coverage from Britain. I did not watch much news at all when I was very small (I was watching cartoons!) but now I am in education exile I see occasionally the BBC while still trying to stay up to date with news from home. One thing I have noticed is that the British news does not seem to mention their Queen very much at all. Unless there is some major social event she is connected with, they do not, as I have seen, pay much attention at all to the Queen or the others royals of the family. This surprised me because, since the British monarchy is so grand and famous around the world, because of their past empire (and everyone must agree it is the most grand) I thought the BBC would have always some news about the Queen. But I have seen very little and that what I did see was always in reference to some occasion social. Not like Belgium at all. From my perspective, the news in Belgium mentions the King quite regularly and in terms political and governmental not social only. Even though in Belgium we are being a popular monarchy and have no grand ceremonies with the King wearing ermine robes and wearing a crown and surrounded by servants in antique costumes, it seems the monarchie in Belgium is more central while the monarchy in Britain the serious media (not the gossip mags) just more often ignore their Queen and royals.

Is my perception incorrect? I know British friends read this (they are my number three source of readers after the USA and Belgium) so they can tell me if my view is incomplete. Thinking about this, I thought it was logical because the monarchy is for Britain now very separated from politics and all political problems and solutions. In Belgium this might also be the case except that the divisions in the political parties* means that the King must have a more central role as keeping peace between the two sides and forcing him to be the “adult in the room” (and the politicians do often behave like children it looks like). This does not happen in the United Kingdom. I heard nothing about the Queen being involved when, after last elections, a power-sharing government had to be negotiated between the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrat Party. I know in Britain there is also now regional governments in North Ireland, Scotland and maybe Wales (I am uncertain of that one, I thought they had an assembly their own but also I thought they were always a part of England so, I am not certain of that situation). Maybe this worked better for United Kingdom than Belgium, I do not know, since I never hear of the Queen must settle disputes between English, Irish and Scottish people. However, in Belgium, the monarchy may not be so grand but is very important because the King is the one person with no regional agenda.

The King of the Belgians must work very hard, especially when there is disagreement and discord (as we have seen very clearly in this extended time with no government) and although British and Belgians both have people that like to mock and make comedy ridicule of their monarchs, in Belgium, even those who are not supportive of the monarchy must accept that it is important and they cannot ignore it because it is the central, unifying institution of the country. The former Prime Minister was ridiculed by some for saying all that kept Belgium together was football, beer and the King. If that is so, the King is even more important than anyone thought because beer and football cannot take any action to bring about political compromise and encourage national unity. The King may not be every day in the news, but he cannot also be ignored and it cannot be denied his crucial part in the political process of the country.

*Another problem I have is Farage saying there are no national parties in Belgium. This is not true! Votez B.U.B.!

Flemish Queen of England

The Mad Monarchist profiles Queen Mathildis van Vlaanderen, wife of William the Conqueror who took over England for the Normans in 1066.

English Support for Belgium

Some in England certainly don't like Belgium. Nigel Farage, UKIP leader, recently spoke in Ghent, further pressing his denial of the right of Belgium to exist and giving his support for a Flemish republic -and so the destruction of the Kingdom of Belgium. I never had strong opinions of EU before but recently have become more opposed to it. But it makes a problem that the anti-EU people like Farage are also anti-Belgium and while many think that being outside the EU is keeping Flemish nationalists from reaching total support for their goal of division of the country. So, in a way, EU is a sort of uncomfortable ally for me. The views of Farage are not universal of course and I found today these two articles from a blog called The English Mail-Coach which denounce the tactics of Farage and give support to the history and identity of Belgium. That is good to see. UKIP vs Belgium Part 1 and also UKIP vs Belgium Part 2.

I will repeat again that, though tirades against my country make me tempted, I have nothing but the desire to be a friend of Great Britain, I admire the British and their great historic accomplishments. I also appreciate the British forces who came to defend Belgian independence in 1914. But it is all of that which also makes me more upset at those who speak anti-Belgian anger. It also seems to me dangerous. I don't want Belgium to divide and I don't want Britain to divide either and there are more historic differences on Britain between Scotland, England, Wales and Ireland than between the regions in Belgium. Supporting those who thrive on ethnic rivalry does not seem very wise to me for the British to do. I want to see both countries continue and both countries be close friends as in the past has a long time been the case.

Philippe and Mathilde at London Wedding

Crown Prince and Princess Philippe and Mathilde were at the front for the Will & Kate wedding in London. As you see from the picture, it was quite a royal gathering.

Anglo-Belgian Royal Relations

The British and Belgian Royal Families have been related since the birth of the modern Kingdom of Belgium and the reign of Queen Victoria in Britain when she married Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. Queen Victoria was the niece of King Leopold I of the Belgians (Prince Albert was his nephew also) and the countries have been aligned (not formal allies exactly because of neutrality for many years) and today King Albert II and Queen Elizabeth II are third cousins. The Belgian royal house will be represented at the wedding of Prince William and Kate and certainly the Belgian family royal wishes their British cousins a very happy marriage together and join in happiness for them on that special day.

King George V and King Albert I in World War I

 King George VI and King Leopold III between the wars.

Queen Elizabeth II and King Baudouin watching victory day celebrations at Buckingham Palace

Truth Revealed of King Leopold III

Thanks to Daniel for pointing out this information of a recent book by British Lord Keyes showing the truth of how Winston Churchill (started by France) made King Leopold III the scapegoat for the British defeat at Dunkirk and how he was betrayed at the time of his return to Belgium. Listen to the interview with Lord Keyes about his book here.

Britain and Belgium

Last week I was having especially an unpleasant exchange of words with a Briton who was hurling the usual insults against Belgium, 'not a real country', 'base of the EU', 'hypocrits' and sooner Belgium dissolved to nothing the better for him. This really makes me very angry, both because I am not 100% behind EU and it makes no sense to me for those who agree on this to cut each other down and also because I expect the British would be better than that, to insult and wish the demise of the Belgians. Truthfully, there have been tensions between the British and Belgians for a long time but in general the two countries have, in their modern history, always been friends. From the choosing of King Leopold I the kingdoms of Belgium and Great Britain have had the same Royal Family (Saxe-Coburg-Gotha before they changed in the war to "of Belgium" and "Windsor") and during the Great War the British, claimed at least, to be getting involved in order to defend against the invasion of Belgium, a noble way of standing up for the rights of small countries against the aggression of the more powerful countries.

How different it is today from that time when so many in Britain considered it a matter of honor to defend and support Belgium now to have so many cheering on the possible death of the kingdom across the water. It seems also that the British could look at their own situation and know better than to triumph in the misfortune of Belgium because they seem in so many ways to be going down the same destructive path that has Belgium. Consider the sitution: They Belgium is not a "proper country" because the people are divided and speak different languages. But people in Britain used to speak different languages before English was forced on everyone just as French used to be the one official language for Belgium. In fact they had more much than two with some speaks English, Cornish, Welsh, Scots Gaelic and then in Ireland. Today there are more efforts to revive these regional languages so that is making Britain less a proper country? Maybe they dismiss language and say it is about the divisions political. But again they really have more than one government in Britain today. Most of Ireland broke away and is a republic now. The part that did not is "autonomous" with his own government. Scotland now has a parliament of its own and even Wales has its own local government though they have been part of England since hundreds of years.

Just today another Englishman tells me that I must not have understanding of the British government because English still have lots of power in Scotland. Maybe so, but they claimed at least they had no knowledge or control of the Scotland law courts from releasing a convicted terrorist back to Libya and no matter what powers these assemblies have it is obvious, is it not, that the trend lately in Britain, just like it was in Belgium decades past, is being towards division and disunity rather than greater unity. Just like Flemish nationalists want to end Belgium by having independent Flanders the British also have the Scottish National Party that wants to end United Kingdom by having an independent Scotland. It is obvious the situation is not so serious as in Belgium but everything points to the same direction and I would think anyone could see this and Britons who love their United Kingdom would be somewhat concerned for this and not exulting in the problems of the Belgians knowing that there is no reason the same cannot happen to them. Already the British Empire is fallen away and the country has turned more to Europe, more to EU and depend for themselves on allies rather than acting independently in matters economic and military.

I am not total supporter of EU and I do not want to see Great Britain breaking up into pieces either but I am sometimes angered into saying things I later regret because some of them do want that for my country. And why? How did Belgium offend? We did not invent EU and we had no more greater voice in building it or running it than any other country. I hope Britons will stop the insults and consider that they could someday be in the same position and rather than start fights with the Belgians be accepting of any sympathetic to the situation and wanting both countries to survive and prosper.

The British and Leopold III

The Cross of Laeken relates an article defending the heroic actions of King Leopold III in the Second World War. I am glad to see the truth being told about King Leopold III who is very often attacked in the most despicable ways when he was probably the greatest monarch of the World War II period. This is a reason why I am sometimes troubled being nice with the British in particular but the French in some ways also. They seemed to often use Belgium and then blame Belgium. They used us to get into World War I (because I do not think it was purely to uphold the treaty of Belgian neutrality that drove the British government) and in World War II they used the Belgians as canon fodder while they were retreating from the continent and then blame the Belgians and the King of the Belgians for being forced to surrender after fighting with tough resistance for 18 days against the Germans. I know this was the government, not the people and I know there are those who are the opposite and who have been telling the truth and I am very glad for that and I also have alot of admiration for the British for the British Empire and all of their great success around the world in the past but it also does not help my opinion when it is so often British voices I hear today saying that Belgium is "not a proper country" and act gleeful at the idea of Belgium being destroyed. They also led the smear campaign against King Leopold II over the Congo which was, I will say carefully, slightly hypocritical for the largest colonial power in the world.

Is usually to cover up your own sin yes? Why else would a scape-goat be made of King Leopold III who was the most valiant leader of the war, the greatest monarch, taking responsibility for his country in the great crisis of invasion, leading his brother soldiers in the hopelss fight, doing all in his power and then accepting to join in the suffering of his people in occupation when forced to surrender so not to see his troops massacred? King Leopold III did everything the right way but he is blamed for everything. He is blamed for dropping the alliance with France and going back to neutrality. But France already had abandoned Belgium! The built their walls and left Belgium to face the Germans alone and every time Germany had made an aggressive move the French and British had looked the other way. How could anyone concerned of their people put trust in such governments? Then when their own policies lead to war and the occupation of western Europe, total defeat by the Germans, they blame King Leopold III for making peace just as they blamed his father as a "traitor" for trying to make peace in the first war. All covering up their own unspeakable actions.

King Leopold III, unlike the other national leaders, knew what war was like. He had been a real soldier in the first war, he had fought in the trenches with no special treatment or favors. He knew the misery, the suffering and the constant hovering death over you. He also knew from this how precious the national territorial integrity was and he would fight for it but he would not send men to certain death when the French and British were both giving up and running home. He did not abandon his people, he did not abandon his soldiers. He endured the war with them and he would endure the occupation with them. He was a great king, one of the greatest of modern times and all the slanders against him are being either ignorant or deceptive. He was a brave, thoughtful, noble and considerate king who would make the difficult decisions, not run away or make someone else responsible or blame others. His character was of a real King!