Which Country Could Next Abolish Their Monarchy?

[Eliza]

I just voted Spain, for it always strike me that the relationship between govt and monach is very weak and the royal family always have to walk a tight rope with the govt and it's people.

 

[politikgirl]

I really doubt the British monarchy will be overthrown/abolished anytime soon. While it will most likely change in the next few decades (i.e. continue to downsize, etc.), I really don't see it being abolished completely. Besides, that would be very, very messy for all of the Commonwealth countries. Although I do suspect that one or two of the Commonwealth states may become republics and therefore sever ties with the British crown - Australia, perhaps, in several decades? Or maybe not. I'm from Canada and I don't see it happening here at all.

 

[rosana]

Maybe in the long term every european country will abolish the monarchy, more and more peoplo believe they are unnecessary. Monaco cannot become a Republic, if the princes don´t give a legitimate heir they would become part of France.

 

[Next Star]

Beening all the scandals that have happened to some of these royal families I would say Great Britain, And Norway can't say Monaco beening that it has already been explained by rosana.

 

[Lox]

I would say Spain. When Juan Carlos dies, people might think that it is time for Spain to become a republic again.

 

[Henri M.]

The No. 1 candidate for republic: Belgium

What I missed in most of the above votes was the analysis of the situation. Some posters think that Spain's monarchy are in fact juancarlistas and others think that Norway will for sure become a republic.

But if there is a country which is the absolute number one for becoming a republic, it is -without any doubt- Belgium. Before a polemic starts, I want to make clear that this is my very own and very personal opinion.

A monarchy is a part of a state-structure. In most monarchies the core structure of the state and the constitution is hardly changing. This is not the case in Belgium.

Since 25 years, the once young, liberal and strong centralistic governed Belgian state is rapidly disintegrating into three regions which are more and more drifting apart: Flanders (the Dutch-speaking part), Wallonia (the French-speaking part) and Brussels (which is an enclave in Flanders but is in reality very Francophone).

The once centralistic system of one King, one Government, one Parliament has rapidly totally fragmentated into: one Belgian government, one Belgian parliament, three regional governments, three regional parliaments, the Dutch-speaking community Executive, the German-speaking community Executive and the German-speaking community Executive.

The once so strong centralistic state (à la France) has totally eroded in not so much more than a federal responsibility for Defense, Foreign Affairs and Finances. The problem is that with this fragmentation not only the importance of the centralistic Government is disappearing: it also counts for the King, who is the head of state of a disintegrating state.

The three regions have gained (and will gain in the coming new round of constitutional reforms) considerable powers. They already appoint their own regional ministers, governors and mayors. Their governments, parliaments and councils already work without any involvement of the King at all. They even do not pledge any oath of allegiance to the King. In buildings from the regional administrations you will not see a portrait of the King. More and more the King becomes an irrelevance, a ceremonial ornament of the Belgian state. But.... that very Belgian state is fading away... In 25 years he will become the 'King of Nothing'. Mark my words.

Note that also the King does not rule over a realm or is a King by his birthright ('by the grace of God'). The kingship of Belgium comes from the people. "King of the Belgians". When a King dies, his apparent successor is not automatically the new King. Government and parliament needs to declare the new successor "out of the name of the people" as their new King.

This is a complete different situation with the neighbouring Netherlands where the Queen has a central role in politics. She is head of state, she is an integral member of the Government, she is president of the Council of State (the highest advisory body and Court of Administration), she has the decisive role in the formation of a new government, she does appoint all the ministers, the governors, the mayors, all the senior officials of state, administration and armed forces, she has her own 'department' (the Queen's Cabinet) and manages her own businesses.

She is not declared Queen 'by the Netherlands People'. She automatically becomes so by her birthright ('by the grace of God'). The Investiture of a new Dutch Sovereign in fact is just a ceremony in which the States-General (=parliament) officially receive the King and brings homage to him. (Litteral text prescribed by Act: "In the name of the People and according to the Constitution and the Statute for the Kingdom, We receive You and We bring homage to You, as KING. We solemnly declare that We will always maintain Your inviolability and all the rights of Your kingship. We do solenmly declare that We will do all what a good, true and loyal States-General ought to do. So truly help Us God almighty!")

If there is one monarchy to collapse, it will undoubtedly be Belgium.

 

[Nad25]

I dont think that Britian will ever become a republic, as a brit im proud of our Queen and im pretty sure Prince Charles will make a great king one day

 

[Royal Fan]

I Think Monaco is "on the brink" just MHO

 

[princess olga]

What I missed in most of the above votes was the analysis of the situation. Some posters think that Spain's monarchy are in fact juancarlistas and others think that Norway will for sure become a republic.

But if there is a country which is the absolute number one for becoming a republic, it is -without any doubt- Belgium. Before a polemic starts, I want to make clear that this is my very own and very personal opinion.

A monarchy is a part of a state-structure. In most monarchies the core structure of the state and the constitution is hardly changing. This is not the case in Belgium.

Since 25 years, the once young, liberal and strong centralistic governed Belgian state is rapidly disintegrating into three regions which are more and more drifting apart: Flanders (the Dutch-speaking part), Wallonia (the French-speaking part) and Brussels (which is an enclave in Flanders but is in reality very Francophone).

The once centralistic system of one King, one Government, one Parliament has rapidly totally fragmentated into: one Belgian government, one Belgian parliament, three regional governments, three regional parliaments, the Dutch-speaking community Executive, the German-speaking community Executive and the German-speaking community Executive.

The once so strong centralistic state (à la France) has totally eroded in not so much more than a federal responsibility for Defense, Foreign Affairs and Finances. The problem is that with this fragmentation not only the importance of the centralistic Government is disappearing: it also counts for the King, who is the head of state of a disintegrating state.

The three regions have gained (and will gain in the coming new round of constitutional reforms) considerable powers. They already appoint their own regional ministers, governors and mayors. Their governments, parliaments and councils already work without any involvement of the King at all. They even do not pledge any oath of allegiance to the King. In buildings from the regional administrations you will not see a portrait of the King. More and more the King becomes an irrelevance, a ceremonial ornament of the Belgian state. But.... that very Belgian state is fading away... In 25 years he will become the 'King of Nothing'. Mark my words.

Note that also the King does not rule over a realm or is a King by his birthright ('by the grace of God'). The kingship of Belgium comes from the people. "King of the Belgians". When a King dies, his apparent successor is not automatically the new King. Government and parliament needs to declare the new successor "out of the name of the people" as their new King.

This is a complete different situation with the neighbouring Netherlands where the Queen has a central role in politics. She is head of state, she is an integral member of the Government, she is president of the Council of State (the highest advisory body and Court of Administration), she has the decisive role in the formation of a new government, she does appoint all the ministers, the governors, the mayors, all the senior officials of state, administration and armed forces, she has her own 'department' (the Queen's Cabinet) and manages her own businesses.

She is not declared Queen 'by the Netherlands People'. She automatically becomes so by her birthright ('by the grace of God'). The Investiture of a new Dutch Sovereign in fact is just a ceremony in which the States-General (=parliament) officially receive the King and brings homage to him. (Litteral text prescribed by Act: "In the name of the People and according to the Constitution and the Statute for the Kingdom, We receive You and We bring homage to You, as KING. We solemnly declare that We will always maintain Your inviolability and all the rights of Your kingship. We do solenmly declare that We will do all what a good, true and loyal States-General ought to do. So truly help Us God almighty!")

If there is one monarchy to collapse, it will undoubtedly be Belgium.

Wow, that's a very interesting observation, Henri M. And you may well be quite right. The Flemish and Wallonian parts of that country have so many differences, in language, culture, not to mention that the economic prosperity of one part is the opposite of the other.
You have a point that Phillippe is in a difficult spot. But don't you think the Belgians overall like the low-key royals they have become accustomed to? I for one like the BRF very much because they seem so down to earth. May just be my perception of course..

Before your post I thought Spain was the most likely candidate but indeed you're changing my mind.

 

[Henri M.]

The (un)popularity of a Heir(ess)

You have a point that Phillippe is in a difficult spot. But don't you think the Belgians overall like the low-key royals they have become accustomed to? I for one like the BRF very much because they seem so down to earth. May just be my perception of course..

Before your post I thought Spain was the most likely candidate but indeed you're changing my mind.

The (un)popularity of a Heir(ess) is no any problem because the fundaments of a state are not build on popularity.

A most unpopular Heir(ess) will become the new Sovereign when his/her successor abdicates or passes away. That is the fundament and so are the workings of the state. And popularity or dislike do not change that simple core fact. Most posters voted with their heart in this poll. They like or dislike future royal couples of Norway, Spain or the United Kingdom, etc. But that is really of no any relevance.

I would like to point to Princess Beatrix, who was widely seen as aloof, distant, cold and arrogant. Not that she was that bad, but in a comparison with her warm and human mother Queen Juliana, the perfectionistic Princess Beatrix simply always lost in catching the people's hearts.

Still in these days, Queen Beatrix is seen as a formidable and powerful monarch. A lady with iron fists hidden in velvet gloves. A lady who knows perfectly what she wants and a lady who manages the Household and her affairs of state with a firm hand. Most Dutch appreciate that in her and they know that one raised eyebrow by the Sovereign is a not-to-be-ignored sign of deep majestic unpleasure and eventually the Queen's legendaric wrath is to be feared.

Is she popular? Hmm. No.
Has she made the monarchy stronger? Undoubtedly! She is one of the very, very few contemporary Sovereigns who managed it to increase the power and influence of the Sovereign. She is able to pass a stronger position to Prince Willem-Alexander than she herself started with in 1980.

King Albert II of the Belgians at the other hand is an easygoing, goodnatured and simple bourgondic guy. Most likely his popularity is much bigger than that of Queen Beatrix. But his throne is standing on a swamp while the Dutch throne seems fixed on a mega-concrete structure. This is the proof that personal popularity says nothing about the stability of a throne.

Candidate numero uno for republic: Belgium (which will end) split into the republic Flanders and the republic Wallonia. Conform the 'velvet separation' of Czechoslovakia into the Czech Republic and in Slovakia.

 

[rosana]

I Think Monaco is "on the brink" just MHO

If you would hear the monegasques you would change your mind, they adore their princely family, they have a high living standard and most important:the Grimaldi´s are the owners of half the principality,the prince is a very important part of the government.

 

[Laviollette]

Whether or not certain monarchies survive this century seems to depend on the attachment their subjects have to the institution, not necessarily the people in it. Norway might be in trouble because of the seeming indifference of the Norwegian people to their RF even though Haakon is a great guy and will make a great king, imo. King Harald and Queen Sonja are lovely people and they have not subjected the country to scandal and sleaze. It won't become a republic before CP Haakon ascends the throne. In fact, we might see King Haakon before we see King Frederik, King Felipe or King Charles.

The Brits on the other hand are total monarchists. After all the scandals, divorces, etc., the BRF will not be going anywhere because the British, and especially the English, have a strong connection to the monarchy that seems to be in their souls. Still, I prefer King William V as the next monarch, which I think would make the monarchy in Britain invincible.

The Spanish Royal Family as well are good, bright and down-to-earth people who work hard for their country and King Juan Carlos is like a regal, conquering, medieval, mythical legend even though he's still alive. But the Spanish people in their hearts are not monarchists. I do think that CP Felipe will ascend to the throne because of the goodwill towards his father. I just don't know if Felipe's children will sit on the throne. Spain could surprise us, though.

I wouldn't be surprised if Monaco became part of France, which is a republic, but I believe that Prince Rainier changed the constitution so that that would become more difficult.

Belgium doesn't look good, imo. King Albert II is popular but his nephew, Prince Philippe, is not. He's not much of a communicator but who knows what might happen if he is forced to rise to the occasion. If Belgium breaks up, one of the regions might decide to keep their king.

 

[Royal Fan]

Prince Philippe is Albert II son not Nephew.

 

[JessRulz]

After reading all the different bits of info posted in this thread, I have to say that I think either Norway or Spain will be the first to become a republic, and I hate to say it, but I think out of those two, it would most likely be Norway. It seems to be the least strong of the three Scandinavian countries, and while I don't think that anything will happen to any of these countries in the next few decades, I think that in the coming generations, Norway will become a republic.

I think the countries that are the safest from becoming a republic are Great Britain, Denmark and the Netherlands. The RFs of these countries have very high popularity, and a lot of the people in each country (mainly GB and Denmark) wish to keep things as they are, and they like their histories with their respective RFs.

Someone earlier in the thread posted that while they didn't think Britain would become a republic, they said they thought a few of the Commonwealth nations would break apart from the UK, the main one being Australia. I think that whether Australia becomes a republic or not depends on the future Kings. I have a theory, and many of my family/friends agree with it: if Charles becomes King after the Queen dies, Australia has a higher chance of becoming a republic. But if something, god forbid, happens to Charles or he abdicates or steps down from the throne, and William becomes King after the Queen dies, the chance of Australia becoming a repbulic will remain the same as it is with the current Queen. I also think that it will depend on the PM at the time. I highly doubt Australia will become a republic while John Howard is our PM, he appears to love the Queen!

 

[Madame Royale]

After reading all the different bits of info posted in this thread, I have to say that I think either Norway or Spain will be the first to become a republic, and I hate to say it, but I think out of those two, it would most likely be Norway. It seems to be the least strong of the three Scandinavian countries, and while I don't think that anything will happen to any of these countries in the next few decades, I think that in the coming generations, Norway will become a republic.

I think the countries that are the safest from becoming a republic are Great Britain, Denmark and the Netherlands. The RFs of these countries have very high popularity, and a lot of the people in each country (mainly GB and Denmark) wish to keep things as they are, and they like their histories with their respective RFs.

Someone earlier in the thread posted that while they didn't think Britain would become a republic, they said they thought a few of the Commonwealth nations would break apart from the UK, the main one being Australia. I think that whether Australia becomes a republic or not depends on the future Kings. I have a theory, and many of my family/friends agree with it: if Charles becomes King after the Queen dies, Australia has a higher chance of becoming a republic. But if something, god forbid, happens to Charles or he abdicates or steps down from the throne, and William becomes King after the Queen dies, the chance of Australia becoming a repbulic will remain the same as it is with the current Queen. I also think that it will depend on the PM at the time. I highly doubt Australia will become a republic while John Howard is our PM, he appears to love the Queen!

Yes, the PM is a monarchist and proud of it.

I'm not so certain that our sovereign indapendancy relies on who or who is not King, but rather Australia's 'progressing' identity within Asia which is perfectly normal and to be expected. We do afterall cover a large area of Australasia and it makes sense (to me) that in due course Australia shall become a federal republic.

In saying this, I am sure it shall not happen for quite some years yet and there is very little likeliness that it shall happen during the Queen's reign. Though a distant and somewhat 'pointless' figurehead for many (certainly not me), Australian's on the whole do respect the Queen for her conviction and dedication.

The republican issue isn't so much about the person as it is the relevance of the office

As for prospective European republic's...I'm not sure and hope that none shall come about.

 

[Henri M.]

No worries at all for Spain and Norway

Once again I would state: please, do not attach too much attention to (un)popularity of members of a royal family. A monarchy is vested in a rock, called the Constitution. And changing a Constitution is a lengthy and difficult affair, inculding two readings in two different consecutive parliaments before and after elections, with a qualified (2/3) majority.

So, that will not happen. Don't worry.

The only nation which is really changing its constitution and whose core existence is at stake is Belgium. The Belgian monarchy will not disappear because the Belgians will vote them away or dislike them. The Belgian monarchy will disappear because Belgium itself will become extinct in the coming decades.

 

[Madame Royale]

I wouldn't be surprised if Monaco became part of France, which is a republic, but I believe that Prince Rainier changed the constitution so that that would become more difficult.

If not near impossible

 

[ricarda]

I am unsure between Belgium and Spain because of their difficult political situations.
But on the other hand it might be the memory of the Franco days that will help to keep the Spanish monarchy.
So I would vote for Belgium if the poll wasn't closed already.

Regarding the popularity/unpopularity of the royal houses I must say
that I personally know more Spanish, Swedish and Dutch people who do not care for their monarchs than Norwegian people.
In fact most Norwegians I met when I lived there seemed to be very fond of the CP couple
(which was in 2001/2002, so I admit that things might have changed, but I'm very sceptical about those polls).

Regarding Britain and Monaco: After all the scandals which happened in those RFs
and which apparently could not change the people's affection I would say nothing will destroy those monarchies.
In fact they are too important for their countries' image/tourism/industry.

 

[Lox]

Candidate numero uno for republic: Belgium (which will end) split into the republic Flanders and the republic Wallonia.

I think you're right. If Belgium splits into Flanders and Wallonia, those new states will certainly become republics. But is a split possible, with regards to the European Union?

When I visited Belgium a couple of years ago, I was told that basically the only things that unite the Belgians was the King and the national football team. Besides that, there wasn't really any nationalistic feelings for the state of Belgium.

 

[Oppie]

Regarding Norway. I don't think that they have a strong monarchy, but I think they have the type of monarchy that they want. It is a lot more like a herditary Governor General post or cermonial presidency then some of the other monarchies (espically when you compare to say Britian) They seem to keep it to King Queen and heir (and heir wife). Sverre will be expected to get a job as will any other children they have. I doubt very much the cost is a big issue. If the Royal Family is staying that small most of the costs they have would be close to a presidency. I think Norway is safer then mpost people think because they adopted very well.

think that whether Australia becomes a republic or not depends on the future Kings. I have a theory, and many of my family/friends agree with it: if Charles becomes King after the Queen dies, Australia has a higher chance of becoming a republic.

On one hand I agree with you, I think that might be the trend in a lot of Commonwealth countries (Jamica also has a strong republican movement). But I think in reality it is going to happen so fast. Charles becomes king the moment the Queen dies, I don't think that will give countries a lot of time to come up with a new system unless they have one ready. In that case Charles has some time, and that is going to be one of the many challenges he faces. If he can pull it off, I think a lot of people in the commonwealth will give him a chance or want to wait for William.

I think the countries that are the safest from becoming a republic are Great Britain, Denmark and the Netherlands.

This is the second time I have seen these three countries listed as the safest and again I will point out that these are the three ruled by women. Intersting eh ?

 

[UserDane]

This is the second time I have seen these three countries listed as the safest and again I will point out that these are the three ruled by women. Intersting eh ?

Let's hope some of the grey men in charge at the Japanese royal household reads this

 

[Laviollette]

Prince Philippe is Albert II son not Nephew.

Right, I meant his son.

 

[Henri M.]

This is the second time I have seen these three countries listed as the safest and again I will point out that these are the three ruled by women. Intersting eh ?

The Netherlands are even ruled by four consecutive Queens:

Adelheid Emma Wilhelmina Theresia Princess von Waldeck und Pyrmont (1858-1934)
Regentess of the Kingdom (1890-1898)

Wilhelmina Helena Pauline Maria Princess of the Netherlands, Princess of Orange-Nassau (1880-1962)
Queen of the Netherlands (1890-1948)

Juliana Louise Emma Marie Wilhelmina Princess of the Netherlands, Princess of Orange-Nassau, Duchess of Mecklenburg (1909-2004)
Queen of the Netherlands (1948-1980)

Beatrix Wilhelmina Armgard Princess of the Netherlands, Princess of Orange-Nassau, Princess of Lippe-Biesterfeld (1938)
Queen of the Netherlands (1980)

 

[Laviollette]

New Poll: Spaniards content with their monarchy

AngusReid Global Monitor
October 14, 2006

- Many adults in Spain believe it is not necessary for their country to become a republic, according to a poll by Instituto Opina released by Cadena Ser. 65 per cent of respondents support the continuation of the monarchy.

article: http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/13464

 

[Saturn]

The main problem in Spain is that young people think it's not necessary a monarchy, and now another problem is the referendum to change the constitution in order that women can be heirs to the throne.
Many people say that if a referendum is held for, at the same time they could vote for or against the monarchy.
It's for that reason that the royal family are afraid of the referendum, and tries to postpone it as much as possible, saying that there are more than enough time, because the heir to the throne is Felipe and not Leonor.

 

[Furienna]

I don't think either Spain or Norway will get rid of their monarchies. Felipe and Haakon can sure become kings without anything to worry about. Our Swedish monarchy is safe too. Our king has been criticised for some things he has said, but our royal house far from the scandalous royal houses of UK and Monaco. Victoria will get a thrown without anything to worry about too. I actually don't think any royal house will be overthrown, just because of the fact, that having a monarch is more special today than what it used to be. Having a monarch instead of a president will give a country something special, something traditional. So I actually don't think any royal family has to worry.

 

[Ygraine]

All of them it is an inevitable progression

 

[Madame Royale]

All of them it is an inevitable progression

I respectfully disagree

Monarchies aren't just governmental institutions, but cultural one's aswell and if any current day Kingdom decides to adopt a republican administration as its own, it would have to be a reflection of the royal family's worth, and not because its deemed by some as inevitable when actually, that is not so.

Its about staying relevant and true to the social, cultural, economic and governmental factions of that society and if they are able to maintain that relevance then there is no need for change.

Progressing forward in no way means the republican alternative and while it works well for the United States (respectively) amongst many, this does not make it the right alternative for all countries

 

[princess olga]

If you would hear the monegasques you would change your mind, they adore their princely family, they have a high living standard and most important:the Grimaldi´s are the owners of half the principality,the prince is a very important part of the government.

Not to mention that unlike the other royal houses we're discussing here, Monaco is a de facto dictatorship. Albert is the boss, literally. He <owns> that tiny country. Monaco, for those who may not know, is NOT a democracy like, say, Spain is or Belgium or France or..etc. Monaco is a one-family band. Therefore, Monaco might be the last country to overthrow its sovereign, but as it's so 'big brother' with spies everywhere noting inhabitant's every move, they simply wouldn't dare!

 

[princess olga]

The (un)popularity of a Heir(ess) is no any problem because the fundaments of a state are not build on popularity.

[..]
King Albert II of the Belgians at the other hand is an easygoing, goodnatured and simple bourgondic guy. Most likely his popularity is much bigger than that of Queen Beatrix. But his throne is standing on a swamp while the Dutch throne seems fixed on a mega-concrete structure. This is the proof that personal popularity says nothing about the stability of a throne.

Candidate numero uno for republic: Belgium (which will end) split into the republic Flanders and the republic Wallonia. Conform the 'velvet separation' of Czechoslovakia into the Czech Republic and in Slovakia.

Very intriguing observation again! Must say I completely agree with your theory, unfortunately for Albert of the Belgians. Should we get worried and dream up a plan B for his son, prince Philippe to occupy his days with once he's kicked off that throne? What does his resume look like? Could he hold down a job and if so, what would it be?!

Mathilde supposedly is a logopedist, someone who helps you pronounce words better basically. But my oh my, I love the gal but the way she speaks Dutch, a language she should have mastered a looooong time ago but doesnt, the way she manages to butcher the Dutch language, it seems she'd need professional help in that department herself! In other words, she and Philippe seem, well, pretty unemployable if it came down to it--no skills whatsoever really, bar a pilot's license perhaps?
Hopefully one of our members here might either prove me wrong on this one or recommend a nice profession for soon-to-b-unemployed?? prince Philippe & Spouse.