Après la guerre Sino-Japonaise de 1895, les puissances occidentales ont commencé à s’imposer de manière plus agressive qu’avant dans l’empire semi-colonial Qing. Cette concurrence inter-impériale n’a certainement pas constitué un obstacle à la coopération et à l’échange continu de pratiques impériales. Les puissances se sont retrouvées entre autres dans l'imposition d’un discours commun de modernité.
À l’apogée de l’alliance transatlantique entre la Belgique et les États-Unis, le ministère belge des Affaires étrangères a construit une nouvelle chancellerie – la section des bureaux d'une ambassade – à Washington D.C. Les chercheurs en histoire de l’architecture diplomatique se sont principalement concentrés sur la politique de construction des (anciennes) grandes puissances comme les États-Unis, la Grande-Bretagne, la France et la Russie.
In 1936, the Australian War Memorial acquired two stone lions that once guarded the Menin Gate entrance to the Belgian town of Ypres. The Memorial’s director, John Treloar, felt the Memorial had scored a “great scoop” because of their “historical value”. However, when the lions arrived in Canberra, it was apparent the damage they sustained during the war meant they would need to undergo some form of restoration. Unfortunately, little progress was made in this endeavour for several decades and the lions did not end up going on permanent display until 1991.
This article addresses the relations between Belgium and Zaire during the time of Mobutu Sese Seko’s rule of Congo/Zaire between 1965 and 1997. Several authors have focussed on the importance of the Cold War, or the existence of Zaire’s dependency relationship with Belgium. This study, however, argues that the Cold War was not the singular decisive factor. Through his foreign policy, Mobutu approached his African neighbours, Eastern European countries, China and North Korea, in order to actively shape his own policy whereby he sometimes acted against the interests of his Western allies.
This article investigates the attitude of Belgian diplomats in the debate about the creation of a stronger army in the decades before the First World War. Closely reading the writings of three members of the diplomatic corps and comparing their discourse with the words of their colleagues, it argues that the current historiographical narrative on the diplomats’ stance towards militarization is in need of revision.