2023-11-19 08:00:00
The former ULB professor has written a scientific work supported by around a hundred sources (“I only assert what I can prove.”). We met him.
In your opinion, Leopold III fits into the thinking of the 1930s.
When Leopold III came to the throne in February 1934, parliamentary democracy was a field of ruins in central, southern and eastern Europe. On February 6, the French Republic almost faltered in the face of riots launched towards the Chamber of Deputies. In Belgium too, anti-parliamentary discourse is flourishing. For example, at the end of August 1934, Robert Poulet wrote a hymn to the “authoritarian monarchy”; Hendrik de Man, the creator of the Belgian Workers’ Party, develops theses which seem to respond to the King’s vision of his role: he speaks of a “strong State, of an authoritarian democracy in favor of an efficient State unfettered by the powers of parties, financial powers and the press. Hendrik de Man will become a privileged interlocutor of the King.
What will happen in the face of the rise of Hitler?
As Leopold III was sensitive to the neutrality of Belgium, he wanted an exclusively Belgian foreign policy; at the risk of isolation, he distances himself from the Paris-London axis. He remains and will remain between Hitler/Mussolini and the future allies, according to him, to guarantee the unity of the country.
At the same time, “creeping pacifism” is spreading almost everywhere. “Must we die for Danzig?” Marcel Déat, de Man’s friend, wrote in early May 1939.
And the war comes…
After the invasion and the ceasefire, Leopold III, to the point of neutrality, refused to return to London despite the insistence of the ministers who had left to join Churchill and the allies.
Could he have been a Belgian Pétain?
He expressed the wish, but fortunately for him, Hitler refused to allow him to carry out the slightest political act! But the example of Pétain and Vichy tormented him: “Are there not some provinces of the country which might be removed from military rule and where I would reign?” he confided to his advisor Robert Capelle. He was thinking in particular of Limburg.
And the “blindness” continues?
In August 1940, his advisor Robert Capelle wrote that Belgium was no longer at war with Germany and that the ministers who continued the war were acting contrary to Belgian interests. The Palace’s slogan is “Those who leave are traitors.”
Even in early 1944, the King never doubted Germany’s victory. At that moment, as if the Allied and resistance actions, the Battle of Britain, the Soviet victory at Stalingrad, the overthrow of Mussolini did not count, he wrote his “Testament”; he will demand an apology from the Belgian ministers who left for London to whom I dedicate my book because they saved the honor of the country and its credibility abroad (Hubert Pierlot, Paul-Henri Spaak, Camille Gutt, Albert De Vleesschauwer) ; he also threatens to call into question the agreements made by them. The remarks seemed so excessive that Churchill initially thought it was a fake!
Why dedicate your last sentence to Queen Elizabeth?
She was a great lady, intelligent, open, free and visionary. In 1914, she pulled an iron shutter on her country of origin, Germany, and chose Belgium.
I also remind you that following the First World War, Albert and Elizabeth changed their German surname “Saxe-Coburg and Gotha” to “of Belgium”, while Leopold III took it back upon his marriage.
A rigorous book but in a modern style
The rigor of the method in no way hinders the stylistic fluidity of the book, woven with short, crafted and rhythmic sentences like a thriller.
Without forgetting the mockery of Hervé Hasquin who preserved the smile of the mischievous student: “Today, whatever the content of your statement, it is imperative to write a short book with simple sentences if you want to be read by people under 40.”
“Leopold III, the king of blindness (1934-1945)”, Editions du CEP, Mons, 2023, 166 p.
1700388566
#Leopold #III #Belgian #Pétain #minister #Hervé #Hasquin #examined #kings #actions #1930s
