Belgium as a Kingdom: History and Modernity

It is small, but its influence on world politics and the economy is hard to overestimate. It is young, but its history spans millennia. It is divided by languages, but at the same time it is a symbol of European unity. Belgium is a kingdom that emerged as a result of a revolution, survived two world wars, became a colonial power, and then transformed into a federal state where the king still plays an important, albeit largely ceremonial, role. How did this small country become one of the symbols of modern Europe? And what does it mean to be a kingdom in the 21st century when monarchies seem like a relic of the past?

The Birth of the Kingdom: 1830 as a Starting Point

The history of Belgium as an independent state began in 1830. Before that, the lands that are now Belgium were part of different empires: first the Spanish Netherlands, then the Austrian, and after the Napoleonic Wars — the United Kingdom of the Netherlands. The southern provinces, inhabited mainly by Catholics and French-speaking Walloons, did not get along with the Protestant north. The conflict had been brewing for years, and eventually a rebellion broke out in Brussels, which quickly escalated into a revolution. In November 1830, the National Congress declared independence, and in 1831, the German prince Leopold of Saxony-Coburg and Gotha was invited to the throne, becoming the first king of the Belgians. Thus, the kingdom was born, which was not a colony or a province of anyone — it became an independent player on the European stage.

Interestingly, Belgium was created as a neutral state, which was supposed to guarantee its safety between the great powers. However, neutrality did not save the country from being invaded during World War I, when Germany violated it to bypass French fortifications. The invasion was brutal, but it also united the Belgians: Flemings and Walloons fought together under the command of King Albert I, who became a national hero. Since then, the royal family has become a symbol of national unity in difficult times.

The King of the Belgians: A Figure That Unites

Unlike absolute monarchies, the Belgian king is a constitutional monarch. He does not rule, but he represents the country. He signs laws, appoints the prime minister, but does so on the recommendation of the government. He is the commander-in-chief of the army, but military decisions are made by the parliament. At first glance, the king seems to be just a cog in a complex political machine. But in Belgium, monarchy has a deep symbolic meaning. The king is a living reminder of the unity of a country that is constantly on the brink of linguistic and political disintegration. He speaks two languages, he travels across the regions, he meets with citizens. His figure is above party lines, and this gives him a unique opportunity to be a moral authority.

For nearly two centuries of the kingdom's existence, seven monarchs have succeeded on the throne. Each of them left their mark. Leopold II is known for his colonial policy in Congo, which was extremely cruel, but the king himself remained in history as a builder and modernizer. Albert I was a soldier-king who personally fought on the front in World War I. Leopold III, his son, caused a crisis with his decision to surrender to the Germans in 1940, which led to a split in society. Baudouin I was a deeply religious and moral man who once even refused to sign a law legalizing abortion, leading to a constitutional crisis. Albert II became king after the death of his brother, and his reign was peaceful, but it was under him that the country finally became a federation. The current king, Philippe, who ascended the throne in 2013, tries to continue the tradition — to be a king for all Belgians.

Languages and Royal Power: The Art of Balancing

One of the most difficult tasks of the Belgian monarchy is to maintain neutrality in the linguistic issue. The country is divided into three linguistic communities: Dutch-speaking in the north (Flanders), French-speaking in the south (Wallonia), and German-speaking in the east. Conflicts between Flemings and Walloons were constant throughout the 20th century. The royal family had to act as a mediator, and this required enormous diplomatic flexibility. The kings learned both languages, tried not to favor either side. In some cases, this worked, in others — not. For example, Leopold III was closer to the Flemings, which caused suspicions among the Walloons. Baudouin, on the other hand, tried to be above the fray, and this earned him respect from both communities.

Today, King Philippe continues this tradition. He regularly visits both Flanders and Wallonia, speaks both languages, and his public speeches are always translated into both languages. This is not just a diplomatic gesture — it is a necessity. In a country where the government can only be formed with the participation of both linguistic groups, the king plays the role of a unifying element.

The Kingdom in the 21st Century: What Has Changed

Throughout the 20th century, Belgium gradually transformed from a unitary state into a federation. This process accelerated in the 1970s, and in 1993, the constitution was officially rewritten, and the country became a federal kingdom. Today, Belgium consists of three regions (Flanders, Wallonia, and Brussels-Capital) and three linguistic communities. Each has its own parliament and government. This is a complex, expensive, and often inefficient system, but it allows for peace to be maintained. Unlike the government, the king remains a symbol of national unity, and his role has not changed. He still signs laws, but now he has to deal with an entire network of institutions.

In 2026, Belgium remains one of the centers of Europe. Here is the headquarters of NATO, here are the institutions of the European Union, and here thousands of international meetings take place. The king receives foreign leaders, participates in ceremonies, but his influence on politics is minimal. However, this does not make his figure unnecessary. In a world that is increasingly fragmented, monarchy offers something that elections cannot provide: continuity, tradition, and an above-party voice.

Of course, there are republicans in Belgium who believe that monarchy is an expensive and outdated institution. However, the majority of Belgians still support the king. According to polls, about 70% of the population has a positive attitude towards the royal family. This is a high figure for modern Europe. And perhaps this is because Belgians see the king as a symbol of their country — a country that has learned to live with differences.

The Royal Family Today: People, Not Icons

In today's world, royal families must be both ideal and human. The Belgian royal family tries to meet this requirement. King Philippe and Queen Mathilde raise four children and often appear in public as an ordinary family. They visit schools, hospitals, sports events. They try to be closer to the people, and it works. Unlike the British royal family, which often seems distant, the Belgian monarchy is more down-to-earth. Perhaps because the country is smaller, or perhaps because Belgians themselves do not like pomposity.

Princess Elisabeth, the elder daughter of the king, has already reached adulthood and is preparing for her future role. She received education in the UK, then in Belgium, completed military training. She speaks several languages. Her image is the image of a modern queen, ready to serve the country. And this is important for the future of the kingdom: for the monarchy to remain relevant, it must change with society. Elisabeth is the embodiment of this change.

Conclusion: A Kingdom That Has Not Stood Still

The Belgian kingdom is not a historical relic, but a living organism. It emerged as a compromise between the great powers, survived two world wars, endured the colonial shame and post-colonial restructuring, adapted to linguistic conflicts and federalization. Today, it remains one of the most stable democracies in the world. And the king, despite his limited power, continues to be an important part of this stability.

Belgium teaches us that monarchy can be not only a symbol of the past but also an instrument of the future. If it knows how to change, if it knows how to listen, if it knows how to be for all — it remains necessary. And in a world that is looking for new forms of coexistence, the Belgian experience can be useful. Because a kingdom is not about power, it is about unity. And unity in a divided world is the most valuable.

Permanent link to this publication: