{"id":37393,"date":"2016-05-10T13:29:27","date_gmt":"2016-05-10T11:29:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sites.uclouvain.be\/digithemis\/index.php\/utrecht\/"},"modified":"2022-05-19T16:51:57","modified_gmt":"2022-05-19T14:51:57","slug":"utrecht","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/sites.uclouvain.be\/digithemis\/?page_id=37393","title":{"rendered":"Utrecht"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\n\n
Previous page<\/a><\/td>\nBack to exhibition’s homepage<\/a><\/td>\nNext page<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n
\n

\"drapeau\u00a0<\/strong><\/strong>THE UTRECHT DOCUMENT FORGERY<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

\"Drapeau\u00a0<\/strong>THE FAKE OF UTRECHT<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

\"Drapeau\u00a0<\/strong><\/strong>LE FAUX D'UTRECHT<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
The Utrecht document forgery refers to an operation involving the Belgian Military Security, a service of the 2nd Section of the General Staff, attempts to deceive the German military authorities by distributing fabricated documents.<\/td>\nThe Fake of Utrecht refers to an operation where the Belgian S\u00fbret\u00e9 militaire, a service of the Deuxi\u00e8me Section of the General Staff, tried to mislead the German military authorities by disseminating forged documents.<\/td>\nLe Faux d\u2019Utrecht renvoie \u00e0 une op\u00e9ration dans laquelle la S\u00fbret\u00e9 militaire belge, un service de la Deuxi\u00e8me Section de l\u2019Etat-major g\u00e9n\u00e9ral, a tent\u00e9 de tromper les autorit\u00e9s allemandes en diffusant des documents falsifi\u00e9s.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
In een eerste fase gebeurt de verspreiding via een \u2018stagiair\u2019 van de Militaire Veiligheid, Albert Frank, who had been recruited in April 1928 because of his contacts with the German espionage service. When the Germans insist on being put in possession of documents of strategic importance, Military Security decides to prepare a fabricated text on the mobilization plans of the Belgian Army.<\/td>\nThe first step of the deception was made by an \u201cinternee\u201d of the S\u00fbret\u00e9 militaire, Albert Frank, who had been recruited in April 1928 for his relations with the German intelligence agency. When the Germans insisted on obtaining strategic documents, the S\u00fbret\u00e9 militaire decided to forge a document about the mobilisation projects of the Belgian Army.<\/td>\nTo begin with, la supercherie est confi\u00e9e \u00e0 un \u00ab stagiaire \u00bb de la S\u00fbret\u00e9 militaire, Albert Frank, recrut\u00e9 en avril 1928 pour ses contacts avec le service d\u2019espionnage allemand. Lorsque les Allemands insistent pour obtenir des documents rev\u00eatant une importance strat\u00e9gique, la S\u00fbret\u00e9 militaire d\u00e9cide de r\u00e9diger un faux texte sur les projets de mobilisation de l\u2019arm\u00e9e belge.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Late December 1928 becomes the text in question, with the corps seal of the Chief of the General Staff, sent by Albert Frank to his contact at the German espionage service, named Hauser. Military Security assumes that Hauser will hand over the document to the German military authorities, that it will not publicize this and will therefore adjust its own strategic vision.<\/td>\nAt the end of December 1928, the forged document, affixed with the stamp of the General Staff, was sent by Albert Frank to his contact person in the German intelligence service, which was named Hauser. The S\u00fbret\u00e9 militaire assumed that Hauser would forward the text to the German military authorities, who would not make it public, but would take advantage of the information to modify their strategic vision.<\/td>\nFin d\u00e9cembre 1928, Albert Frank sends the fake, muni du sceau du corps du chef de l\u2019Etat-major g\u00e9n\u00e9ral, \u00e0 son contact aupr\u00e8s des services allemands, nomm\u00e9 Hauser. La S\u00fbret\u00e9 militaire suppose que Hauser transmettra le document aux autorit\u00e9s militaires allemandes, qui ne d\u00e9voileront pas le texte, mais en profiteront pour modifier leur vision strat\u00e9gique.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
The Flemish nationalist Ward Hermans, an acquaintance of Albert Frank, accidentally learns of the existence of this text. He urges Frank to sell him this document and, if possible, discredit the Belgian-French military agreement.<\/td>\nWard Hermans, a Flemish nationalist acquainted with Albert Frank, accidentally learned about the existence of the text. He urged Frank to let him buy the document in order to potentially discredit the Belgian-French military agreement.<\/td>\nFlemish nationalist Ward Hermans, une connaissance d\u2019Albert Frank, apprend par hasard l\u2019existence du document. Il insiste aupr\u00e8s de Frank pour que ce dernier lui vende le texte, afin de tenter de discr\u00e9diter l\u2019accord militaire belgo-fran\u00e7ais.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Military Security then decided to produce a second text based on Belgian-French staff discussions held in 1927, incorporating elements of the Belgian-French military agreement. This text must, on the one hand, obscure the existence of the first text and leave the German military authorities under the impression that they possess the original, and on the other hand, its publication should discredit the Flemish nationalists. Op 28 January 1929 the text is sold to Hermans.<\/td>\nThe S\u00fbret\u00e9 militaire then decided to forge a second document on the basis of Belgian-French staff talks that had taken place in 1927, and included tampered elements of the Belgian-French military agreement. On the one hand, the second text was intended to conceal the existence of the first document and to make the German military authorities believe that they possessed the original document; on the other hand, the publication of the latter aimed at discrediting Flemish nationalists. On 28th January 1929, the document was sold to Hermans.<\/td>\nLa S\u00fbret\u00e9 militaire d\u00e9cide alors de forger un deuxi\u00e8me document sur la base de r\u00e9unions d\u2019Etat-major belgo-fran\u00e7aises tenues en 1927, en y ins\u00e9rant des \u00e9l\u00e9ments tronqu\u00e9s de l\u2019accord militaire belgo-fran\u00e7ais. D\u2019une part, le texte vise \u00e0 dissimuler l\u2019existence du premier document et \u00e0 faire croire aux autorit\u00e9s militaires allemandes qu\u2019elles sont en possession de l\u2019original et, d\u2019autre part, sa publication est cens\u00e9e discr\u00e9diter les nationalistes flamands. The 28 janvier 1929, le texte est vendu \u00e0 Hermans.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
A Dutch publisher acquires both the text that Frank sent to Hauser and the text that he sold to Hermans.<\/td>\nA Dutch publisher obtained both documents: the one sent to Hauser and the one sold to Hermans.<\/td>\nUn \u00e9diteur n\u00e9erlandais acquiert les deux textes : celui transmis \u00e0 Hauser et celui vendu \u00e0 Hermans.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
When on 23 February 1929 elements from both texts appear in it Utrecht Provincial and Municipal Daily<\/em>, the thrill is huge: Belgi\u00eb zou niet enkel zijn neutraliteit opgeven, but also send a Belgian-French force to the Netherlands in case of war, form a front together with the English on the Belgian-German border, enz.<\/td>\nOn 23rd February 1929, the publication of elements from both texts in the Utrecht Provincial and Municipal Daily<\/em> caused great commotion: Belgium would not only give up its neutrality, but in the event of a war, it would also send a Belgian-French force to the Netherlands, form a front with England at the border between Belgium and Germany, etc.<\/td>\nLa publication des passages des deux textes dans l\u2019\u00e9dition du 23 f\u00e9vrier 1929 de l\u2019Utrecht Provincial and Municipal Daily<\/em> fait l\u2019effet d\u2019une bombe : la Belgique ne renoncerait pas uniquement \u00e0 sa neutralit\u00e9 ; in case of war, elle enverrait \u00e9galement une force belgo-fran\u00e7aise aux Pays-Bas, s\u2019allierait aux Anglais pour former un front \u00e0 la fronti\u00e8re belgo-allemande, etc.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\"Utrecht\"<\/a>\n

\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n
Despite certain erroneous data, the text of the article is considered reliable and thus promoted to world news. This threatens to jeopardize the position of both the Belgian government and the General Staff.<\/td>\nDespite some incorrect elements, the text of the article was deemed reliable and the news therefore spread like wild fire. As a result, the position of the Belgian government and the General Staff threatened to be tarnished.<\/td>\nMalgr\u00e9 quelques faits erron\u00e9s, on consid\u00e8re que le texte de l\u2019article est fiable et la nouvelle se r\u00e9pand comme une tra\u00een\u00e9e de poudre. La position du gouvernement belge et de l\u2019Etat-major g\u00e9n\u00e9ral risque donc d\u2019\u00eatre compromise.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
To deny government and military leadership involvement, everything is attributed to an unauthorized initiative of the Military Security. Op 16 March 1929 Military Security is abolished and the personnel involved, five people and a number of casual employees, transferred to Public Security.<\/td>\nIn order to deny the involvement of the civilian and military authorities, the whole scandal was attributed to an unpermitted initiative of the S\u00fbret\u00e9 militaire. On 16th March 1929, the S\u00fbret\u00e9 militaire was dissolved, and the responsible personnel \u2013 five persons and some casual employees \u2013 were moved to the S\u00fbret\u00e9 publique.<\/td>\nPour d\u00e9mentir l\u2019implication des autorit\u00e9s civiles et militaires, toute l\u2019affaire est attribu\u00e9e \u00e0 la S\u00fbret\u00e9 militaire, who would have gone it alone. The 16 march 1929, la S\u00fbret\u00e9 militaire est dissoute et le personnel impliqu\u00e9, cinq personnes ainsi qu\u2019une poign\u00e9e de collaborateurs occasionnels, est transf\u00e9r\u00e9 \u00e0 la S\u00fbret\u00e9 publique.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n
Previous page<\/a><\/td>\nBack to exhibition’s homepage<\/a><\/td>\nNext page<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Previous page Back to exhibition’s homepage Next page \u00a0DE UTRECHTSE DOCUMENTENVERVALSING \u00a0THE FAKE OF UTRECHT \u00a0LE FAUX D’UTRECHT De Utrechtse … <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":33,"featured_media":0,"parent":37353,"menu_order":2,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-37393","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.uclouvain.be\/digithemis\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/37393","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.uclouvain.be\/digithemis\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.uclouvain.be\/digithemis\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.uclouvain.be\/digithemis\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/33"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.uclouvain.be\/digithemis\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=37393"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/sites.uclouvain.be\/digithemis\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/37393\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":59703,"href":"https:\/\/sites.uclouvain.be\/digithemis\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/37393\/revisions\/59703"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.uclouvain.be\/digithemis\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/37353"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.uclouvain.be\/digithemis\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=37393"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}