The Curious Case of Belgium; Lack of Options forces pro-ONE agenda?
•
by Shoi12
Oh, Belgium, what a pickle you are in...
As of right now, Belgium is a strictly neutral country. It manages to stay on the map because any attempt to take it over by an alliance will result in Belgium allying itself with the other power. If France pre-takeover had decided to invade Belgium, Poland would be there to quickly protect it and start attacking France through Poland. Likewise, if Poland had been the aggressor, France and Terra/EDEN would quickly step in and save Belgium. However, times have changed.
Now, let's take a look at the map, shall we?
Now, as you can see, northern Europe is controlled by ONE. Poland controls almost all of Germany, and Hungary has northern France under its evil clutches. So what does that mean for Belgium?
After UK's regrettably successful RW against Canada, Belgium has now been completely surrounded by ONE forces. So now, Belgium is essentially a juicy stack of three province-pancakes waiting to be covered with maple syrup and devoured by a ONE state. There are three options for Belgium, and none of them look particularly wonderful.
The first option would be to stay neutral and hope that Hungary is pushed back, restoring balance to the European landscape. With opposing alliances touching Belgium, they would be relatively safe, a Cold War of sorts. But what if France's and US' attacks fail and Hungary wipes France? Belgium will then become a juicy target, and without intervention, there isn't much to hope for other than a quick and painless death.
So maybe staying neutral isn't the best option. What about joining Terra/EDEN? While it would make anti-ONE countries very happy, it would definitely rub ONE nations the wrong way. While they would have a decent chance while backed by Terra/EDEN, it is unlikely, seeing Belgium's geographically disadvantageous position, that too little support will come to save Belgium in time.
Well, with those two options seemingly not looking good, there's only one option: to, regretfully, join ONE. With ONE support, they would be safe from most, if not all assaults, and with Belgium's extra troops and land, it could tip the balance ever-so-slightly in ONE's favor momentarily. But there is one flaw with this plan.
Naturally countries, while wishing the best for their alliances, also desire bonuses for themselves. Look at Canada; while Canadian leaders say to back out of England to support other fronts, many people, including me, dislike the idea because while it would help the alliance, it would harm Canada as a country. Belgium is the same way; while going in ONE direction would protect them, it would also prevent them from expanding and possibly becoming a power in the future. Joining ONE would protect Belgium, yet prevent them from growing, and many players would be disgruntled at their lack of options in Belgium.
Obviously, many options in Belgium, and none of them seem to be the obvious one. All we can do is wait and see what this more-important-than-it-seems country does. Then again, this is why I don't run Belgium! Until next time, take care!
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
I'd always assumed Belgium to be in the pro-ONE camp, I'd always thought that, this day in age, neutral nations existed in name only. I do suppose neutrality would only work if you gain MPPs with major players from each alliance, that way any attempt to launch an attack on the neutral country would come with a consequence (likely loss of one or more MPPs), while citizen's are free to fight in battles for either side.
Belgium is royally screwed.
It would appear as though their attempt at neutrality might work after all, since they've managed to secure MPPs with the UK (ONE), China (EDEN), and Brazil (Terra).
Your observations seem to be what the pro-active players of Belgium are considering, and the relations to eCanada may also be on par, yet we have greater potential to find other options and aren't quite so hemmed in (it will merely take more work with T/EDEN to move ahead)
A quote from former CP and current Congress member of Belgium (from this article) shows that the leaders of Belgium are asking similar questions: http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/a-message-to-all-ebelgians-2039951/1/20
"Recently, however, things have changed in the game, so small neutral countries are increasingly being forced to choose one side or the other. Because of our recent difficulties in getting TEDEN MPPs, I personally voted proONE in the referendum, not because of personal preference, but for pragmatic reasons. However, there was a clear majority for neutrality on that referendum, and I personally feel that we are honor bound to follow that vote."
As usual, the majority want status quo.MPPawayBE!
The way I thought about having alliances on both sides was that it would cause tensions that would eventually force Belgium to choose one or the other, but that's just me. ;_;'
"Evil Clutches", a bit melodramatic, the only territory they have is right there, if we conquer it now they can't have resistance wars.