DBWI: WI the Nordic Union was never formed

So today is November 10th, the 64th anniversary of the signing of the Nordic Coalition Treaty between Sweden, Norway, Denmark & Iceland, which eventually led to the formation of the Nordic Union on March 25th eleven years later. This year it's also a pretty special day since President Stoltenberg just signed the document which will make Åland into a fully fledged member of the Union, not just an autonomous province of Finland. Granted the islands were a bit of an issue when Finland joined, but since a little more than half of the Finnish parliamentary delegation voted for it (and the Finnish parliament approved it with a comfortable majority), I'd say that the topic isn't as controversial anymore.

Anyway, I was just thinking, what if all those things hadn't happened? I mean today we're in the G20, we have one of strongest economies in Europe, and we've weathered the economic crisis very well compared to other countries. I can't help but wonder if we'd still be where we are today without the Union happening.

The NU was going to be a reality sooner or later, with Sweden at the helm during the 20s with Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the young country of Finland coming together both economically, politically and militarily even back then.
Although Denmark was occupied during WW2 I think a major part of Norway remaining free was the Swedish threat to the Nazis to offer military support and more importantly cut off access to Swedish Iron. The soviets certinally didn't attack Finland due to support from the other Northern states.

The NU's remarkable economic strenght in the post war period was definately boosted by the discovery of natural gas and the construction of viable offshore drilling platforms.

I'm guessing that without the NU or its precursor in the Nordic Defence Community (NDC), the Nordic states couldn't have remained neutral during the Cold War. While they tacitly supported the West and NATO, I'm guessing that all of them, except maybe Finland, would have joined NATO in order to defend themselves. In our time, they had enough collective resources to defend themselves. With a NATO North, the Soviets might have reacted very differently and felt more threatened. The Baltic might not be as bustling with trade and industry as it is today. Constant peace and neutrality really helped the Nordic countries develop economically.

Armed neutrality would be a good way of describing it. I don't know how close the Norwegians and Swede's came to getting involved in WW2. I'm trying to find that link to the picture taken from the Blucher of three Swedish battleships following what might well have been an invasion convoy. When the Swede's sailed into Norwegian waters still shadowing the germans it sent a very clear message.

Iceland probably feels like it could of done better, always feeling like the poor sibling who doesn't quite get the investment or attention it deserves.

Devvy said:

Iceland probably feels like it could of done better, always feeling like the poor sibling who doesn't quite get the investment or attention it deserves.

Click to expand...

Well, they kind of are, they don't have much in terms of resources up there. They get a lot of subsidies from the central government, they are very over-represented in terms of population in the NU Parliament. I heard that they might try to diversify their mostly fishing and naval-centric economy with tourism or something. I don't know how they'll compete with other countries though; Iwo Jima has the same beautiful black beaches, and is much warmer. I went to Iwo Jima, the resorts there are wonderful and the war memorials are extremely moving.

Devvy said:

Iceland probably feels like it could of done better, always feeling like the poor sibling who doesn't quite get the investment or attention it deserves.

Click to expand...

azander12 said:

Well, they kind of are, they don't have much in terms of resources up there. They get a lot of subsidies from the central government, they are very over-represented in terms of population in the NU Parliament. I heard that they might try to diversify their mostly fishing and naval-centric economy with tourism or something. I don't know how they'll compete with other countries though; Iwo Jima has the same beautiful black beaches, and is much warmer. I went to Iwo Jima, the resorts there are wonderful and the war memorials are extremely moving.

Click to expand...

True, thought that's only in the upper house ('Landsrådet'), in the lower house ('Folkrådet') it's all completely proportional. But I doubt that they'd do any better without the union, because despite the small number of investement which have been directed Iceland in the past, it's still more than they would've had if it just would've been them alone. Well they have actually started some projects which are aiming to diversify their economy. Y'know, like all those server farm projects for example, which Iceland with all its cold, is definitely perfect for. Their government is also attempting to woo Saab over so they'll build a car manufacturing plant in Reykjavik since the company's two other plants are running at full capacity. This got me thinking too. Without the strong economic position of the Nordic Union, would the Nordic (well, Swedish) carmakers Volvo and Saab be as successful? I'm thinking probably not.

regarding saab and volvo it's rather amazing to see how they've taken off in the USA. I hear Volvo is exporting to the Soviets too now.

sharlin said:

regarding saab and volvo it's rather amazing to see how they've taken off in the USA. I hear Volvo is exporting to the Soviets too now.

Click to expand...

Yep, which is good since the Soviet Union is a giant untapped market. I'm glad that they've start to liberalize a bit on the economic front by allowing some foreign companies to operate in the country as long as they have a Soviet partner. I wish China would do the same, but they're still as closed off as ever.

EvilSpaceAlien said:

True, thought that's only in the upper house ('Landsrådet'), in the lower house ('Folkrådet') it's all completely proportional. But I doubt that they'd do any better without the union, because despite the small number of investement which have been directed Iceland in the past, it's still more than they would've had if it just would've been them alone. Well they have actually started some projects which are aiming to diversify their economy. Y'know, like all those server farm projects for example, which Iceland with all its cold, is definitely perfect for. Their government is also attempting to woo Saab over so they'll build a car manufacturing plant in Reykjavik since the company's two other plants are running at full capacity. This got me thinking too. Without the strong economic position of the Nordic Union, would the Nordic (well, Swedish) carmakers Volvo and Saab be as successful? I'm thinking probably not.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I know, they need the union for subsidies and military protection; I doubt Iceland's 500 000-odd people could seriously defend themselves against an opponent.

But yes, I have high hopes for Iceland's economy. Now if only Greenland Territory could get the same kind of love from the government, in terms of tax waivers and subsidies. With Rasmussen in charge though, I doubt it. He's in the pocket of his nativist NPP coalition partners, he won't be able to push a bill through that actually helps the Inuit of the Nordic Union.

azander12 said:

Yeah, I know, they need the union for subsidies and military protection; I doubt Iceland's 500 000-odd people could seriously defend themselves against an opponent.

But yes, I have high hopes for Iceland's economy. Now if only Greenland Territory could get the same kind of love from the government, in terms of tax waivers and subsidies. With Rasmussen in charge though, I doubt it. He's in the pocket of his nativist NPP coalition partners, he won't be able to push a bill through that actually helps the Inuit of the Nordic Union.

Click to expand...

Yeah same here. Well there have been a bill giving them more autonomy in the works for years now, but the rightwingers are always blocking it. Probably because they realize that if they support it, they'll lose the support of the Nordic People's Party. Hopefully, with Stoltenberg in charge we could make some progess on that front.

OOC: I already established Stoltenberg as being in power in the OP.

It's not all happiness and sunshine though.

The Swedish decision to go ahead with their nuclear weapons program did undoubtedly boost the credibility of NDC in Cold War world and helped to secure Nordic neutrality, but one can only wonder how much this decision contributed to the proliferation of nuclear weapons on a global scale in 1970s.

Without the NDC example, I doubt Switzerland would have gone ahead with their program, and the example of European minors did much to push Brazil and Argentine to develop theirs. The genie is out of the bottle on this one, and although South Africa and Brazil did the right thing by dismantling their weapon programs, I doubt Sweden will ever do the same, no matter how good the relations between Union and USSR currently are

The current Swedish missiles are all TEL launched aint they? I think they decomissioned the 6 silos they made instead of a tracked offroad TEL. Short ranged but against a likely opponent you won't need an ICBM.

I think the Swiss nuke was nothing more than a showcase, I don't think the two warheads they had ever even deployable.

Karelian said:

It's not all happiness and sunshine though.

The Swedish decision to go ahead with their nuclear weapons program did undoubtedly boost the credibility of NDC in Cold War world and helped to secure Nordic neutrality, but one can only wonder how much this decision contributed to the proliferation of nuclear weapons on a global scale in 1970s.

Without the NDC example, I doubt Switzerland would have gone ahead with their program, and the example of European minors did much to push Brazil and Argentine to develop theirs. The genie is out of the bottle on this one, and although South Africa and Brazil did the right thing by dismantling their weapon programs, I doubt Sweden will ever do the same, no matter how good the relations between Union and USSR currently are

Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Two thirds of our stockpile have been dismantled in the past two decades, so I could see the nuclear stockpile being gone in the future, but not as long as the Soviets continue their military posturing. Remember that "exercise" they held just a few kilometers from the Nordic/Finnish border last year?
Besides, despite that the weapons were developed in Sweden, doesn't mean they're just Swedish. Defense issues are always decided on by the Nordic Parliament so the nuclear weapons program was started and is run by the NU Government in Gothenburg, not the Swedish one in Stockholm.

EvilSpaceAlien said:

Yeah same here. Well there have been a bill giving them more autonomy in the works for years now, but the rightwingers are always blocking it. Probably because they realize that if they support it, they'll lose the support of the Nordic People's Party. Hopefully, with Stoltenberg in charge we could make some progess on that front.

OOC: I already established Stoltenberg as being in power in the OP.

Click to expand...

OOC: I know, I was thinking that Rasmussen was Prime Minister, what with him being a legislator and all.

azander12 said:

OOC: I know, I was thinking that Rasmussen was Prime Minister, what with him being a legislator and all.

Click to expand...

OOC: Well may orginal though for the position of President would be that he is elected by the parliament so that makes him both the a head of government as well as the head of state. Though I could change the title to Prime Minister in order to avoid further confusion.

BTW, this is a list of Nordic Presidents/Prime Ministers/whatever, which I've written down. The real Nordic Union was formed in the early 60s, before that it was more of an EU-like organization.

1961-1969: Dag Hammarskjöld, Social Democratic Labour (Sweden)
1969-1975: Urho Kekkonen, Liberal-Conservative Alliance (Finland)
1975-1981: Poul Hartling, LCA (Denmark)
1981-1985: Thorvald Stoltenberg, SDL (Norway)
1985-1989: Poul Schlüter, LCA (Denmark)
1989-1992: Olof Palme, SDL (Sweden)
1992-1997: Svend Auken, SDL (Denmark)
1997-2001: Geir Haarde, LCA-Nordic People's Party (Iceland)
2001-2005: Anna Lindh, SDL (Sweden)
2005-2009: Geir Haarde, LCA-NPP (Iceland)
2009-present: Jens Stoltenberg, SDL-Green (Norway)

EvilSpaceAlien said:

Their government is also attempting to woo Saab over so they'll build a car manufacturing plant in Reykjavik since the company's two other plants are running at full capacity.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that isn't likely to happen. Apparently to meet demand, Saab has been looking at expanding the GAZ-Saab-Scania plant in Kaunas (Currently only producing cars for the Soviet market, in contrast to the plants in Svendborg and Trollhättan) and moving some of the 9-1 production there, but are unsure the build quality is up to the standards of the Danish/Swedish built cars yet, and really don't want another fiasco like the plant in Mechelen (It's said their market share in Mechelen is STILL well below their average in Belgium). Any Soviet members know how good the Lithuanian built Saabs are?. They are also looking at sites in the US, since a lot of their sales are there. Not the most reliable source I know, but an online friend of mine in Maryland said he heard Saab guys were scouting out land in Hagerstown.

On the other hand, the Icelandic government is really pushing high tech, clean energy, et cetera, and the cheap geothermal and hydroelectric power is attracting aluminum processors to open plants, so there are some advantages to a Reykjavik plant, especially if they do a very clean "Glass factory" technical showcase thing, like the Volvo plant that opened a few years ago in Finland.

I've seen pics of that factory, very impressive, cutting edge stuff. Must have cost a fortune but if it works and is as clean as they say then who are we to nay say it.

I'm pretty certain it's as clean as they say it is, but that's really only because there isn't an engine foundry or anything on site, it's just assembly. The plants that feed into it still have smokestacks spewing soot. Although from the articles I've read, Nordic heavy industry firms have done a pretty impressive job of cutting down on emissions after the government started taxing CO2 output, especially considering they've only had a few years to do so thus far.

All the more reason for the NU to try and promote Iceland as an manufacturing place especially for companies who have green quotas to meet. Cheap and clean energy, and a lot of space, and with Rekeyavik port being expanded, who knows eh?